24 Apr
2014
24 Apr
'14
11:52 a.m.
I don't believe the 'network' should try to police local regulations
at all. 44net is for Amateur Radio <full stop>
Local regulations must be dealt with locally and its the gateway
operator's responsibility to be compliant with local requirements.
IARU could propose things at WRC, but we are talking years of
discussion in technologies that can adapt and evolve in nano-seconds.
:)
________________________________
John D. Hays
K7VE
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Jann Traschewski <jann(a)gmx.de> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On 24.04.2014 17:13, Tom Hayward wrote:
I suspect the difference of opinion here comes
from the local rules we
are bound to.
That might be. What would be your ideal set of rules?
We have a lot of wishes pending for the next big change of local rules.
Smaller changes are even possible in shorter time periods.
Maybe we should think about how an ideal amateur radio world should look
like in terms of interconnecting networks.
I wonder whether the amateur radio community could agree on a common set
of rules so that we can talk to our regulators and look for solutions
how to implement...
Maybe the first step is harder than the second...
73,
Jann
DG8NGN
--
Jann Traschewski, Faber-Castell-Str. 9, D-90522 Oberasbach, Germany
Tel.: +49-911-696971, Mobile: +49-170-1045937, E-Mail: jann(a)gmx.de
Ham: DG8NGN / DB0VOX, http://www.qsl.net/dg8ngn
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net