| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 17.10.96 14:24l 169 Lines 6668 Bytes #-10851 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_96_221A
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 96/221A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0MWS<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<DB0ACC<PI8DRS<
PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8ZAA<PI8HWB<PI8VAD<PI8VNW
Sent: 961017/0711Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:24998 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA18836 ; Thu, 17 Oct 96 06:17:51 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00006363 ; Thu, 17 Oct 96 07:51:32 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00006335 ; Thu, 17 Oct 96 07:48:15 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.5.5) with SMTP
id AA00008203 ; Thu, 17 Oct 96 07:48:13 MET
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 96 07:44:13 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_96_221A>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 96/221A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
TCP-Group Digest Tue, 15 Oct 96 Volume 96 : Issue 221
Today's Topics:
2300 MHz band reallocated (10 msgs)
posting to packet
x1j slip vs ppp
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 06:22:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: ssampson@othello.UCSD.EDU (Steve Sampson)
Subject: 2300 MHz band reallocated
> However anyone feels about 2300 MHz, it's important to draw the line here
> and mobilize every ham to write and call his/her congressperson right after
> the election. We can defend our bands if half a million hams make noise. If
> we're quiet about it, there will be no frequencies left soon enough.
In case anyone hasn't noticed, we went over 5 trillion in debt in 1995.
Clinton brags about wiping out the annual deficit spending, but any moron
knows you need to run a surplus to pay off a debt. I think a good plan
would be to sell the northern tier states to Canada for 6 trillion, and
let them use any frequency they want...
Not to blame Clinton, I think we should spend even more! If you know you're
going to die (everyone does), you might as well max out your credit cards, and
live like a Queen. You can always declare bankruptcy.
I don't think leasing is a good idea. There is going to be millions of
electronics devices on this band, and you can't just shut them off when
the lease runs out. When the devices no longer serve their function, the
industry will return the band to be resold for another solution.
When you write your Congress, make sure to include a $100 dollar bill to
get your message across. 500,000 Hams times $100 carries a lot of weight
going against the Industry PAC's.
Steve
"If you run out of things to sell, sell them air."
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 10:42:59 -0400
From: Jim De Arras <jmd@cube.WestLab.com>
Subject: 2300 MHz band reallocated
Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> The 2000-page omnibus budget resolution, passed by congress and signed
> by the President this week, contained this bad news for Amateur Radio:
>
> TITLE III -- SPECTRUM PROVISIONS
>
> SEC 3001. COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR SPECTRUM
>
> (a) COMMISSION OBLIGATION TO MAKE ADDITIONAL SPECTRUM
>
> AVAILABLE - The Federal Communications Commission shall --
> (1) reallocate the use of frequencies at 2305-2320 megahertz and
> 2345-2360 megahertz to wireless services that are consistent with
> international agreement concerning spectrum allocations; and
> (2) assign the use of such frequencies by competitive bidding
> pursuant to section 309(j) of the Communications Act of 1934
> (47 U.S.C. 309(j)).
>
> (b) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS -- In making the bands of frequencies
> described in subsection (a) available for competitive bidding, the
> Commission shall --
> (1) seek to promote the most efficient use of the spectrum; and
> (2) take into account the needs of public safety radio services.
>
> That information is from ARRL. There goes our 2305-2310 MHz band, off
> to be sold to the highest bidder without so much as a notice of
> proposed rule making. Obviously, we're going to all write our
> congressmen and get this reversed as soon as the congress gets back
> into session in January.
>
> I'm writing to tcp-group because nobody's publicized this much since it
> happened. My copy of the above information came from an ARRL alert-list
> read by a few dozen people.
That's because that's all it affected, with the bulk of aging Hams
wanting only the status-quo, and keeping the youngsters out with the
code requirment.
Expect to lose it all, in a decade. And rightfully so, we cannot just
sit on rare and expensive spectrum. Those very youngsters we've blocked
out of Ham radio outnumber us, now, and have no use for our little
ancient hobbies.
What EXACTLY can I say, in good faith, to get my congressman to reverse
this ruling? How can our elitist little group justify holding on to any
spectrum just so a few folks can play?
Jim
WA4ONG
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:34:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bill Horne <bhorne@lynx.dac.neu.edu>
Subject: 2300 MHz band reallocated
Don wb9mjn%wb9mjn.ampr.org@uugate.aim.utah.edu said:
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> That s why I am really pissed about this. The available chip sets, and
> cheapness of test equipment for this band, allows for us to have a great
> chance of breaking the pattern. A reasonable cost radio system, to do high
> performance, and efficiency data network was possible until this happened.
[snip]
Don,
Sorry, I disagree. A data network on 2 GHz is unlikely, for both
technical and social reasons.
First, the technical: 2 GHz means line of sight. In the Boston area,
that means tremendous demand for big towers and high hills, neither of
which are cheap. I don't have $58,000.00 a year to rent a space on the
nearest cellsite - do you?
Second, the social: absent the money, we have to negotiate for high
places, just at the time that their value is rising exponentially. I
have, and suspect most hams have, a type 4 personality. Negotiation is not
my strong suite.
There is a water tower visible from my house - *IF I CLIMB A SIXTY-FIVE
FOOT TREE*. Even assuming that I would be successful at chatting up the
people in charge of the tower, able to allay their fears about
liability, pay for equipment, arrange access, engineer a system, and
To be continued in digest: tcp_96_221B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
