Re: [44net] Hamnet over 70cm : NPR (New Packet Radio)

Mark, I don't mean to bore all our non US friends with our silly and out dated regulations here in the US, so I'll try and keep this brief. The simple rule modification that Ron points out would solve the problem for this application. (Anyone feel free to log into the FCC and create the petition.) I have bigger dreams of regulatory reform, though maybe that isn't the way to get anywhere... I have fundamental problems that we have to classify our emissions by how we use them rather than purely technical technical parameters. This is why while there is a data portion to all D-Star radios (not just the 1.2 GHz), they are mostly used for voice (even though it's "digital" voice. So it's classified a "phone". Just like DMR, and the like are "phone?" And digital ATV (for the few that even use ATV these days), while obviously transported as data is classified as "Image" Spread Spectrum, Phone, Image Data.. which is it? Depending on which it is, certain rules apply. And obviously "data" has a bandwidth and symbol rate restriction, where as Image and Spread Spectrum do not. So if you have problems with the bandwidth restriction for data, you ask yourself what could I do to classify this as some other emission type. And while you are pondering that, ponder why this foolishness still exists.. Then fire off some emails to Connecticut. Honestly I expect more comprehensive petitions from the League than what they proposed in 2013. I have no problem with Individuals creating narrow scoped petitions that focus on their own uses/applications etc. But as an organization that is supposed to represent the hobby as a whole, that 2013 League petition was obviously focused on Pactor and was unacceptable to me. On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 2:11 PM Mark Phillips <g7ltt(a)g7ltt.com> wrote: