| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 05.05.07 08:00l 253 Lines 8919 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 10102-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: [APRSSIG] Vol 34 #24, 3/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<HB9EAS<DB0FSG<DB0PV<OE5XBL<OE6XPE<IW2OHX<I0TVL<
DK0WUE<F4BWT<IW2OAZ<IS0HHA<CX2SA<SV1CMG<ZL2BAU
Sent: 070505/0543Z @:ZL2BAU.#79.NZL.OC #:46291 [Waimate] $:10102-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL2BAU.#79.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Message: 16
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:40:54 -0500
From: "John Habbinga" <kc5zrq_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
>Please explain the violation (and please cite Part 97).
Sec. 97.219 Message forwarding system
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Any amateur station may participate in a message forwarding system,
subject to the privileges of the class of operator license held.
(b) For stations participating in a message forwarding system, the control
operator of the station originating a message is primarily accountable for
any violation of the rules in this part contained in the message.
(c) Except as noted in (d) of this section, for stations participating in a
message forwarding system, the control operators of forwarding stations that
retransmit inadvertently communications that violate the rules in this part
are not accountable for the violative communications. They are, however,
responsible for discontinuing such communications once they become aware of
their presence.
(d) For stations participating in a message forwarding system, the control
operator of the first forwarding station must:
(1) Authenticate the identity of the station from which it accepts
communications on behalf of the system; or
(2) Accept accountability for any violation of the rules in this part
contained in messages it retransmits to the system.
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:43:23 +0200
From: "Jan T. Pharo" <la2bba_at_jpharo.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Voice Alert (was: PL 100 on a base station)
"Wes Johnston, AI4PX" <wes_at_kd4rdb.com>, Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:48:47
-0400:
>1st harmonic of 50hz power in europe.
Yes, I thought as much. However, I haven't heard of any trouble with land
lines interfering with 100 Hz subtones (which our club has to open our
UHF/VHF xband repeater). So the problem might not be there in real life.
(and I was curious if there might be another reason.)
--
73 de Jan, LA2BBA
Hvaler, Norway
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:45:04 +0200
From: "Jan T. Pharo" <la2bba_at_jpharo.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Voice Alert
"Stephen H. Smith" <wa8lmf2_at_aol.com>, Mon, 23 Apr 2007 09:01:18 -0700:
>Supposedly the second harmonic of 50 hz AC power in Europe (power supply
>ripple) might cause false decodes with 100 Hz CTCSS. (North American
>power is all 60 Hz.)
OK. See follow-up to another reply.
--
73 de Jan, LA2BBA
Hvaler, Norway
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:57:28 -0500
From: "Matt Werner" <kb0kqa_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
I shortened the part you quoted. I'm assuming that is the particular
piece you are referring to.
Saying that the station needs to be authenticated by the first forwarding
station doesn't mean that the callsign needs to appear in the header. This
section doesn't specify that an amateur callsign must appear in the "from"
area of the AX.25 header. Under this section, I (as a digi operator) can
digipeat tactical callsigns so long as I know that they are originated by
an amateur. It doesn't say that I can't digipeat tactical calls, only that
I need to authenticate them or take responsibility for their content.
On 4/23/07, John Habbinga <kc5zrq_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>(d) For stations participating in a message forwarding system, the control
>operator of the first forwarding station must:
>
>(1) Authenticate the identity of the station from which it accepts
>communications on behalf of the system; or
>
>(2) Accept accountability for any violation of the rules in this part
>contained in messages it retransmits to the system.
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:11:08 -0500
From: "John Habbinga" <kc5zrq_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
I was responding to the use of CW for use as an ID when using a digipeater.
Since CW will not translate through a digipeater, then you can't use it as
an ID when using a digipeater. Your callsign needs to be contained in the
UI frame. Where in the UI frame probably doesn't matter, as long as it is
somewhere that the digipeater will not strip it out.
>It doesn't say
>that I can't digipeat tactical calls, only that I need to authenticate
>them or take responsibility for their content.
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:20:13 -0400
From: Eric Christensen <eric_at_christensenplace.us>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
The digipeater ID does not need to be propagated through the network.
All the digipeater has to do is identify its' transmission. So if the
digipeater sends its' callsign every 10 minutes then it has met the
requirements for identifying.
Eric W4OTN
John Habbinga wrote:
>I was responding to the use of CW for use as an ID when using a
>digipeater. Since CW will not translate through a digipeater, then you
>can't use it as an ID when using a digipeater. Your callsign needs to
>be contained in the UI frame. Where in the UI frame probably doesn't
>matter, as long as it is somewhere that the digipeater will not strip it
>out.
>
>>It doesn't say
>>that I can't digipeat tactical calls, only that I need to authenticate
>>them or take responsibility for their content.
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:35:03 -0500
From: "John Habbinga" <kc5zrq_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
I think you are missing something in this conversation. This discussion has
nothing to do with the identification of a digipeater.
The radio operator of the originating message cannot use CW to ID the
transmission if he has set the path so that it will go through a digipeater.
Transmitting a message through a digipeater is not the same thing as 3rd
party traffic.
>The digipeater ID does not need to be propagated through the network.
>All the digipeater has to do is identify its' transmission. So if the
>digipeater sends its' callsign every 10 minutes then it has met the
>requirements for identifying.
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eric Weber <webmanou812_at_yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Amateur spam
My callsign at the hotmail account was used about a year ago... Got about
+40 automated "so-n-so is on vacation, I'll respond when I get
back-yada-yada"...
Only lasted for about 2 weeks, then they must move on to another make-it-up
email address....
Made for some interesting reading.....
73's
Eric
kc0ahk
--- Chris Kantarjiev <cak_at_dimebank.com> wrote:
>It seems that a large portion of the spam I get these days contains
>email addresses that are amateur call signs. Don't know if they're
>being mined from the TAPR archives or somewhere else, but...
>
>73 de chris K6DBG
------------------------------
Message: 24
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 17:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Rose <kb8uih_at_sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
How can someone authenticate identity of a stations packets unless the
callsign is in the packet? What is the issuse about the callsign being in
the header of the message?
If the retransmission of a message occurs without proper id of the station
of origin isn't that a violation?
Do you want the hassle of having to prove who sent the message that your
digi repeats? How will you do that if the packets don't have the station
of origin's callsign somewhere?
Thanks,
Chris
KB8UIH
----- Original Message ----
>From: Matt Werner <kb0kqa_at_gmail.com>
>To: TAPR APRS Mailing List <aprssig_at_lists.tapr.org>
>Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 3:57:28 PM
>Subject: Re: [aprssig] Tactical call signs
>
>
>I shortened the part you quoted. I'm assuming that is the particular
>piece you are referring to.
>
>Saying that the station needs to be authenticated by the first
>forwarding station doesn't mean that the callsign needs to appear in
>the header. This section doesn't specify that an amateur callsign
>must appear in the "from" area of the AX.25 header. Under this
>section, I (as a digi operator) can digipeat tactical callsigns so
>long as I know that they are originated by an amateur. It doesn't say
>that I can't digipeat tactical calls, only that I need to authenticate
>them or take responsibility for their content.
>
>On 4/23/07, John Habbinga <kc5zrq_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>(d) For stations participating in a message forwarding system, the control
>>operator of the first forwarding station must:
>>
>>(1) Authenticate the identity of the station from which it accepts
>>communications on behalf of the system; or
>>
>>(2) Accept accountability for any violation of the rules in this part
>>contained in messages it retransmits to the system.
------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
