On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Geoff Joy <geoff(a)windowmeister.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 22:34:21 -0700, K7VE - John <k7ve(a)k7ve.org> wrote:
There were a couple of them at DCC Atlanta last
year and they chewed up
the
70cm band. US regulations limit to 56kbaud per
carrier within 100 khz
channel on 70cm. 97.307:
[snipped]
97.307 doesn't apply to FHSS or DSSS. The applicable section is
97.311.
Spread spectrum is ideal for band sharing but FCC requires records be
kept.
97.311(c)(3):
Maintain a record, convertible to the original information (voice,
text, image, etc.) of all spread spectrum communications transmitted.
97.311(d):
The transmitter power must not exceed 100 W under any circumstances.
If more than 1 W is used, automatic transmitter control shall limit
output power to that which is required for the communication. This
shall be determined by the use of the ratio, measured at the receiver,
of the received energy per user data bit (Eb) to the sum of the
received power spectral densities of noise (N0) and co-channel
interference (I0). Average transmitter power over 1 W shall be
automatically adjusted to maintain an Eb/ (N0 + I0) ratio of no more
than 23 dB at the intended receiver.
SS is allowed on all UHF bands for the entire band. The greatest
impediment to development of SS in the U.S. ham community is the
record keeping requirement.
--
Geoff Joy - ke6qh -
AmprNet IP Address Coordinator for San Bernardino & Riverside Counties.
geoff(a)windomeister.com
What kind of records need be kept though? It would seem to me that for
802.11 type
stuff the needed records would be minimal such as the KEY and
SSID. Note intent is a major piece here as some would argue that using a
key is cryptography and cryptography is not allowed. The difference here
is one of intent. If you offer to make the key available on a need to know
basis (i.e. The FCC to be rules compliant, and the amateur community that
wants to connect) I could even go as far as agreeing that cryptography is
being used but it's being used for authentication not obfuscation which is
what the FCC is concerned about. In our case Authentication is a good
thing as we would not want just any non amateur with WiFi gear hopping on
our network. I do not think we need to log all the actual traffic, only
have records enough to turn the recieved bitstream into something usable
for monitoring and enforcement.
Eric
AF6EP