[App_rpt-users] allstar control

Wed Oct 16 23:58:09 UTC 2013

I agree with this statement.  I think over the last several years, there has
been a preponderance of putting link systems up and not understanding their
legal responsibilities.  Being part of a larger system as well, we are not
going to jeopardize the system by NOT controlling when we need to.  We will
try to mitigate any and all Part 97 violation.  We will, on rare occasions,
block permanently because of repeated violations of FCC part 97 rules.

Ultimately in a large system, especially with many different connections
where each node may not be associated with us, we (the control operators of
the system) take the responsibility of control to ensure that our affiliate
nodes can remain compliant with FCC Part 97 rules as well.  Why? Because in
their formal association with us, they trust and expect us to do so.

This is only my opinion but people entering this form of technology need to
understand that there's a lot more than connecting up to a multi-node
network of repeaters.  There is the responsibility defined in Part 97 that
the user needs to clearly understand.  If somewhere along the line where
there's a radio connected to it and these violations occurred then in falls
under Part 97 and if 'your' node is causing the issue, then you will be the
target that will be controlled whether you agree with it or not.

For those of you just getting into this and are fascinated by the
technology:  Understand your FCC rules, Understand the Acceptable Use Policy
of the system your connecting to, and Manage/Monitor your nodes by whatever
means necessary. 

In the event that you getting disconnected by controllers, it's not their
fault, they are doing their jobs and they expect you to do yours as a node
owner and the control operator.

Regards,
Paul

_______________________________ 
Paul J. Agamata
WH6FM
Sysman at Xceptions.COM
Hilo, Hawaii

-----Original Message-----
From: app_rpt-users-bounces at ohnosec.org
[mailto:app_rpt-users-bounces at ohnosec.org] On Behalf Of Scott Zimmerman
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:09 PM
Cc: app_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] allstar control

On 10/16/2013 4:44 PM, DougH wrote:
 > I have no control over the guy next door ---do you?
<-- No, but as amateur repeater control operators, the FCC expects US
stations to be able to make an effort to keep their stations in compliance.
I HATE to quote FCC regulations, but I feel obliged to do so here.

[97.213(c)]:
An amateur station on or within 50 km of the Earth's surface may be under
telecommand where:
(c) The station is protected against making, willfully or negligently,
unauthorized transmissions.
----------------

Using your logic: as a control operator of a large link system I should
merely sit back and let unlawfully operated nodes (jammers, music players,
etc.) connect and clog the rest of our link system with absolutely no
recourse? This is not in compliance with the above FCC rule for legal
operation.

I'm not trying to incite a riot here, but the idea of "complete openness" of
connectivity is a great one if EVERY repeater owner has control operators
that police their nodes as they (lawfully) should. 
Unfortunately, this is simply NOT the case.

We recently had a node on the WAN System that was jamming, playing noise
over other stations, etc. 
As a control operator for the system, my only recourse was to disconnect
and/or block that node from connecting until which time as THEY can bring
themselves into compliance with the above FCC rule. 
The block was put into effect ONLY AFTER sending multiple unanswered e-mail
warnings to the node's owner. As a control operator it is MY responsibility
to make sure the nodes in our system are being lawfully operated and I take
that responsibility seriously.

I realize you can't ALWAYS be in control of who keys a mic into your system,
but according to the above, as control operators, we are bound to do our
best to be sure our repeaters are being operated within the law. The
knowledge of how to block nodes is an important tool toward doing so.

Scott

Scott Zimmerman
Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
474 Barnett Road
Boswell, PA 15531

On 10/16/2013 4:44 PM, DougH wrote:
 > Indeed - it is about keeping idiots out of the system - there are those
out  > there who are only too keen to point fingers at / complain to other
node  > owners who have absolutely no way of stopping unauthorised /
malicious  > access causing interference. That said, some, on other
systems,will block a  > node immediately without thinking about the issue.
 > Having to go cap in hand to another node owner for reinstatement is not
the  > spirit or something anyonne here should need to be reduced
to....education  > is...or making the effort to eliminate the problem(s).
 >
 > I have no control over the guy next door ---do you?
 >
 > Doug - GM7SVK
 >

_______________________________________________
App_rpt-users mailing list
App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3290 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20131016/d77ce296/attachment.bin>