Bill,
I am strongly opposed to enforcing the License trustee as the POC for 44net matters. For example, in my club, our president is also our trustee, but does not have the interest or technical knowledge to handle 44net matters. In the past and present, I have been the POC for 44net matters, as I lead the development of our infrastructure and networks. Many other platforms enforce that our trustee must be the POC, which causes me tons of headaches and unnecessary delays, and inconveniences the trustee.
At the very most, using QRZ as an example since ARDC has a track record of using them for verification, I would suggest sending an email to the QRZ email address asking to verify that the named person is authorized to act on behalf of the club with respect to 44net. From that point on, the named person should become the POC for the club. In my case, our club email address is a shared mailbox between all of the officers, so handling such a verification measure would be easy.
I appreciate any other input.
Eric AE0JE
Thanks Dan,
You've expressed my concern extremely well. I suspect there are many
clubs, and will be many more that will desire a 44net allocation /
callsign.ampr.org subdomain. Once suggestion, since club callsigns are
managed by a club trustee, should that be the designated POC for these
relationships?
73
Bill Buhler - AF7SJ
On 6/13/2024 2:40 PM, Dan Cross via 44net wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 4:31 PM Rosy Schechter - KJ7RYV via 44net
> <44net@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> * We are in fact coming out with a policy re: subdomains, and it will
>> likely be as described in the email sent out earlier this week.
> In this case, I'd like to reiterate my request that this policy
> formally take into account non-individual organizations such as
> amateur radio clubs. These organizations can be, and often are,
> assigned call signs by various licensing authorities (for example, the
> Boston Amateur Radio Club, BARC, has been assigned W1BOS in the US by
> the FCC: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=781017).
> And while certain individuals may be designated by those organizations
> to liaise with e.g. ARDC for requesting IP address allocations an so
> on, the organizations themselves are not individuals, and right now
> there's a gap in the policy and infrastructure spaces for how such
> things are handled. I know this was not an envisioned use case, but it
> _is_ something that is going to come up.
>
> - Dan C.
> _______________________________________________
> 44net mailing list -- 44net@mailman.ampr.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to 44net-leave@mailman.ampr.org
_______________________________________________
44net mailing list -- 44net@mailman.ampr.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 44net-leave@mailman.ampr.org