| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 11.09.00 08:04l 153 Lines 7360 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_244F
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/244F
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000911/0115Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:12397 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_244F
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 00 22:34:29 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_244F>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> service but you can't in practice. There are no licenses left for
> deploying such a wireless service. All of the big players are sitting
> on the LMDS/MMDS licenses until they can figure out how to deploy a
> service that will generate them billions of dollars to pay the
> overinflated auction based license fees.
>
> because the FCC lets licensees play "dog in the manger", there is
> significant pressure to dig up more spectrum. Guess where is going to
> come from? within the next five to ten years, I believe amateur radio
> will lose most of the spectrum above 440 to commercial interests. The
> only way to stop it is to occupy it. Converting more taxi radios and
> filling the bands with idle repeaters isn't going to help.
ABSOLUTELY.
> I want to keep amateur radio around for a while and doing interesting
> things even if it means slitting the throats of a few sacred cows.
>
> this means thinking outside of traditional roles and operations such
> as providing datacomms for underserved/not profitable communities (ie
> rural and 2/3ed tier cities, university researchers, poor schools
> etc.)
That will help - but I think the big "killer application" is instant
handheld access to e-mail/newsgroups - even web pages(Motorola and RS
know this). While I'd like to see amateurs allowed more freedom to
access commercial Internet sites - I don't see how to make sense out of
it, not with the way Hams banter about things. It is better to just
allow free access in another service. MURS is the first service that
fits the bill(albiet with only 5 frequencies). Near 2m, it is on a
fairly reasonable frequency(above 300Mhz, you start to get a lot of
feedline loss), and the 2W ERP limit is totally reasonable for a
Internet-backboned network. And, best of all, there can be no debate
over "commercial" Internet access.
> I'm asking you to not just think out side the box but to punch holes
> in the side and climb out.
I am also irked by the "unused/underused" repeater syndrome. There is
so much more Amateurs could be doing there. With respect to digital
usage, I've been trying to get Amateurs to think differently for a few
months now. Maybe it is just the "vocal minority", but my take is
that, in general, veteran amateurs and the ARRL always opt for the
status quo. It aint worth fighting with them over this stuff. For
example, when presented with reasonable options to the old outdated
Morse Code requirements, they would NEVER compromise. Belatedly, and
much to their consternation - the FCC finally did something about it
and lowered the old 5/13/20wpm reqs to 5wpm across the board. Of
course, the "end-of-the-world" predictions about the second coming of
CB weren't true - but they will NEVER admit that either.
For the most part, I think most of the veteran amateurs don't care that
much about their VHF/UHF allocations. Once all the possible dedicated
repeater frequecy pairs were "staked out", and any attempts to get
allocations for digital applications were "snuffed" - the "battle" was
over, and all their excitement went out the window. Other than a few
well-maintained good-coverage repeaters, 2m/1.25m/70cm/33cm/23cm/13cm
are wastelands. Like the Morse Code fight, the "old boys" ended up
winning a battle - but also like the Morse Code fight, they will "lose
big-time" in the end. I am thru trying to fight these fools - I would
RATHER have the VHF/UHF amateur frequencies put to good use, such as
they are in the other succesful free/nearly free public services such
FRS/GMRS, and hopefully MURS. The FCC learned their lesson with CB
(stay away from skip, and insure manufacturers don't produce
radios/equipment that allows jamming/harranging to be easily acheived),
and in recent years they seem to be doing things right with respect to
the public radio services. If MURS shows that it can work out, then I
expect to see some portion of the virtually unused VHF/UHF Amateur
spectrum be converted to free public services(I would fight attempts to
auction it off), where it can be put to good use. A conversion of 50%
of the VHF/UHF frequency allocation sounds like a good starting number.
> --- eric
------- Stewart - N0MHS --------
Wireless High-Speed Networking and
Public Radio Services Information(MURS,FRS,GMRS,ARS,CB):
http://www.pubcel.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 20:48:26 GMT
From: "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org>
Subject: MURS potential
On 7 Sep 2000, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
> "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net> writes:
> > "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us> wrote in message
> > news:uk8cpwmxy.fsf@harvee.billerica.ma.us...
> > > To use your example of 100 users in the community, the end-user link
> > > would be 256 kilobits per second. Guaranteeing them the full
> > > bandwidth all the time would be very expensive proposition. However,
> > > if you purchase a T1, you can oversell a 256 kbps chunk of bandwidth
> > > 25 times which is a reasonable oversell factor for high-speed
> > > service. This means, at worst you would get 10.24 kbits per second
> > > which is slower than a modem but the condition would not persist.
> >
> > You have a cite for that number? I think it is way off the mark for
> > current internet users. That's 100 users "active online" not "100
> > users signed up for the service".
>
> No cites because it is empirical. You oversell bandwidth until people start
> to complain then you add a little more bandwidth. Publicized oversell
> ratios are frequently lies. In the dial-up ISP world, small
> pops oversell at a 10 to 1 ratio. very large-scale pops (2000
> modems+) oversell at close to 30 to 1. The math behind this is based
> on queuing theory.
More specifically: The premise that not every node (customer) will request
traffic (passage through the queue - the ISP's network) at the same time.
Some
nodes will be idle when others are active. In the real world, some people
work (or at school), while others are retired, etc.... The question comes
down
to: What is the average concurrent usage? Then they plan around that
(possibly with a 10% overestimate).
> the world gets different when you're talking about ethernet type
> competition for bandwidth versus competition for a phone line. You
> can use very high oversell rates because traffic tends to be bursty
> and you can interleave on a time basis to achieve overall higher
> utilization of the channel.
>
> > Perhaps you should remove rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc from
> > your crossposting, since this is simply not something that can be
> > done using ham radio. It is a commercial service you are talking
> > about. Has nothing much to do with this newsgroup.
>
> let me bring things back to the original point. I argued that amateur
> radio should be able to provide/carry traffic for community access
> Internet. In theory, one should be able to do with a commercial
> service but you can't in practice. There are no licenses left for
> deploying such a wireless service. All of the big players are sitting
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_244G
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
