Ok... time for more questions, now that the marathon meeting is over <g>. A number of times I've heard potential uses that seem to blur the line between amateur and commercial, so my question is - how do we draw the line? As an example - connecting to the Seattle MeshNet. As I read it, the MeshNet is non-amateur. Are we looking to be a generic carrier grade ISP? If so, then this will work, but we won't be able to use amateur frequencies to do it. Similar question for connecting firehalls down south - if we are sticking to strictly amateur uses, then the usage by laptops and other devices at a firehall would be limited to amateur related uses - i.e. - no non-hams using it. It may be that I'm just missing a big concept here, but I see a lot of blurring of the lines in conversation, and I think it needs to be better spelled out before we get in front of too many folks. I'll stop with this one for now, rather than continue to show my ignorance and unfamiliarity <g>. Rob
An excellent point to bring up, and one I've struggled with in the past as well. Short answer: read Article 0 <https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-index.php?page=Constitution&structure=HamWAN#Article_0_Mission> of the Constitution <https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-index.php?page=Constitution&structure=HamWAN>. It describes HamWAN's mission. Longer answer with rationale for HamWAN's mission: A useful and vibrant computer network is one that allows like-minded people to communicate together. In the case of the Internet, we have the ultimate wide deployment across geographical regions and social groups. It is everywhere and provided to everyone. From there, you see communities forming around their collective commonalities. Topic-specific message boards, mailing lists, IRC channels, web sites/apps, etc. We cannot hope to compete with the speed of terabit fiber-optics, or the budgets of global ISPs to be all things to all people. I, however, am a nerd. And I enjoy the company of my fellow nerds. It is these nerds that I would like to exchange data with. I believe that passing a basic amateur radio license exam is a good filter for the quality of nerd that I'd like to see on the network. Such a requirement also broadens the adoption of amateur radio itself in our society filled with computer nerds, who would love to play with digital networks, but don't have a ham license. This is a good thing. The compu-nerds might learn new things in the realm of radio along the way. Voice net check-ins burn at my computer-literate soul, and the injection of computer-savvy nerds into the amateur radio hobby will fix these archaic procedures. So there you have (part of) the rationale for requiring all participants to be licensed radio amateur operators. I'm also a bit of an independent. Why should I put my communications needs solely in the hands of large corporations and the Internet? Most of my communication is local. I would be very happy to achieve independence from the corporate teat for at least my local communications needs. On this kind of independent network, WE define the rules. Comcast wants to charge $200/mo for a 50Mbit downlink feed. I think we can beat that if we build it ourselves. And make it symmetrical at the same time, so none of this 10Mbit uplink limit. Nerds are not just consumers, they're also providers of data services. The common Internet services target your typical mom & pop audience, who are dominantly consumers of data. I'd love to live in a world where I can carry around a ham-phone <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NinjaTel_Van>, my car is a mobile ham-hotspot, and my house is tied into the HamWAN, all at a significantly lower cost than the for-profit commercial offerings, while being tailored to my nerdy needs. And there you have some rationale for "free digital communication" as a goal. I can go on for quite a while on this subject. :) I'm also a bit of a survivalist. I like knowing exactly how my communications facilities work and how to fix them. Should my Internet or cell service go down, I like knowing I have another completely independent system of communication. The other emergency communications groups share this attitude, and it makes them great partners in building this network. These are the driving forces behind the emergency communications part of HamWAN's mission. Did I mention I'm a nerd? :) Doing the R&D to bring this type of network to life is great fun. A long focused effort by a group of nerds will (and already has) produced valuable results. These need to be published so that others may benefit from our experience in building their own networks of this kind. And there you have mission point #2, about conducting and publishing R&D. The publication of this knowledge also ties in with point #4, of educating and spreading knowledge. Point #4 is also supported by requiring participants to pass ham exams. Lastly, I realize HamWAN will not be in control of all such like-minded networks. These types of ideas (both technical and organizational/social) can spread like wildfire, and independent groups are sure to spring up. When groups' networks grow and start touching each other, I want to be sure they are compatible. For this reason the last sentence of the mission statement is that HamWAN will act as a coordinator of interoperability. The recent decision to go with AMPRnet block registration solves a large part of the interoperability problem. But there are other considerations, such as the universal adoption of the NV2 protocol which would make a roaming ham's equipment compatible with other groups' networks. We may also have to implement an inter-network registration system for roaming hams. There are analogous systems in the cellular telco world. If we develop & establish a universal system of digital ham identity at least, that would go a long way even if we fail on the protocol adoption front. Someone suggested using the LoTW client certificate, which is not a bad idea at all. ARRL provides a rigorous identity verification system in LoTW signup, although I'm not sure how good they are at expiring said certs in a timely manner should the registration lapse or be revoked by the FCC. Phew! I'm out of words. There's so much work ahead it's scary. Recruiting recruiting recruiting recruiting <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE>! There's no way I can implement the entirety of this vision for the future alone. --Bart On 2/12/2013 9:16 PM, Rob Salsgiver wrote:
Ok..... time for more questions, now that the marathon meeting is over <g>.
A number of times I've heard potential uses that seem to blur the line between amateur and commercial, so my question is -- how do we draw the line?
As an example -- connecting to the Seattle MeshNet. As I read it, the MeshNet is non-amateur. Are we looking to be a generic carrier grade ISP? If so, then this will work, but we won't be able to use amateur frequencies to do it. Similar question for connecting firehalls down south -- if we are sticking to strictly amateur uses, then the usage by laptops and other devices at a firehall would be limited to amateur related uses -- i.e. -- no non-hams using it.
It may be that I'm just missing a big concept here, but I see a lot of blurring of the lines in conversation, and I think it needs to be better spelled out before we get in front of too many folks.
I'll stop with this one for now, rather than continue to show my ignorance and unfamiliarity <g>.
Rob
_______________________________________________ PSDR mailing list PSDR@hamwan.org http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
Short answer - I did read the mission <g>. In this instance I had no knowledge of Seattle vs NW Mesh and looked up the wrong one. There are will still be the need to make ongoing distinctions though, and your long answer even can create some situations where the line would be blurred. As an example - using hamWAN as an Internet survival backup for amateur purposes is one thing - i.e. - during a disaster contacting another ham or looking up information on a website. Shopping via hamWAN on the other hand, crosses the commerce line - i.e. - you can't order a pizza on ham radio. I see this as one of those ongoing conversations that will probably be more of an issue as we get started than once things "firm up". Once we start having some demonstrated amateur uses it will help illustrate the drawn lines. Rob From: PSDR [mailto:psdr-bounces@hamwan.org] On Behalf Of Bart Kus Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:06 AM To: Puget Sound Data Ring Subject: Re: [HamWAN PSDR] system usage An excellent point to bring up, and one I've struggled with in the past as well. Short answer: read Article 0 <https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-index.php?page=Constitution&structure=HamWAN# Article_0_Mission> of the Constitution <https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-index.php?page=Constitution&structure=HamWAN> . It describes HamWAN's mission. Longer answer with rationale for HamWAN's mission: A useful and vibrant computer network is one that allows like-minded people to communicate together. In the case of the Internet, we have the ultimate wide deployment across geographical regions and social groups. It is everywhere and provided to everyone. From there, you see communities forming around their collective commonalities. Topic-specific message boards, mailing lists, IRC channels, web sites/apps, etc. We cannot hope to compete with the speed of terabit fiber-optics, or the budgets of global ISPs to be all things to all people. I, however, am a nerd. And I enjoy the company of my fellow nerds. It is these nerds that I would like to exchange data with. I believe that passing a basic amateur radio license exam is a good filter for the quality of nerd that I'd like to see on the network. Such a requirement also broadens the adoption of amateur radio itself in our society filled with computer nerds, who would love to play with digital networks, but don't have a ham license. This is a good thing. The compu-nerds might learn new things in the realm of radio along the way. Voice net check-ins burn at my computer-literate soul, and the injection of computer-savvy nerds into the amateur radio hobby will fix these archaic procedures. So there you have (part of) the rationale for requiring all participants to be licensed radio amateur operators. I'm also a bit of an independent. Why should I put my communications needs solely in the hands of large corporations and the Internet? Most of my communication is local. I would be very happy to achieve independence from the corporate teat for at least my local communications needs. On this kind of independent network, WE define the rules. Comcast wants to charge $200/mo for a 50Mbit downlink feed. I think we can beat that if we build it ourselves. And make it symmetrical at the same time, so none of this 10Mbit uplink limit. Nerds are not just consumers, they're also providers of data services. The common Internet services target your typical mom & pop audience, who are dominantly consumers of data. I'd love to live in a world where I can carry around a ham-phone <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NinjaTel_Van> , my car is a mobile ham-hotspot, and my house is tied into the HamWAN, all at a significantly lower cost than the for-profit commercial offerings, while being tailored to my nerdy needs. And there you have some rationale for "free digital communication" as a goal. I can go on for quite a while on this subject. :) I'm also a bit of a survivalist. I like knowing exactly how my communications facilities work and how to fix them. Should my Internet or cell service go down, I like knowing I have another completely independent system of communication. The other emergency communications groups share this attitude, and it makes them great partners in building this network. These are the driving forces behind the emergency communications part of HamWAN's mission. Did I mention I'm a nerd? :) Doing the R&D to bring this type of network to life is great fun. A long focused effort by a group of nerds will (and already has) produced valuable results. These need to be published so that others may benefit from our experience in building their own networks of this kind. And there you have mission point #2, about conducting and publishing R&D. The publication of this knowledge also ties in with point #4, of educating and spreading knowledge. Point #4 is also supported by requiring participants to pass ham exams. Lastly, I realize HamWAN will not be in control of all such like-minded networks. These types of ideas (both technical and organizational/social) can spread like wildfire, and independent groups are sure to spring up. When groups' networks grow and start touching each other, I want to be sure they are compatible. For this reason the last sentence of the mission statement is that HamWAN will act as a coordinator of interoperability. The recent decision to go with AMPRnet block registration solves a large part of the interoperability problem. But there are other considerations, such as the universal adoption of the NV2 protocol which would make a roaming ham's equipment compatible with other groups' networks. We may also have to implement an inter-network registration system for roaming hams. There are analogous systems in the cellular telco world. If we develop & establish a universal system of digital ham identity at least, that would go a long way even if we fail on the protocol adoption front. Someone suggested using the LoTW client certificate, which is not a bad idea at all. ARRL provides a rigorous identity verification system in LoTW signup, although I'm not sure how good they are at expiring said certs in a timely manner should the registration lapse or be revoked by the FCC. Phew! I'm out of words. There's so much work ahead it's scary. Recruiting recruiting recruiting recruiting <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE> ! There's no way I can implement the entirety of this vision for the future alone. --Bart On 2/12/2013 9:16 PM, Rob Salsgiver wrote: Ok... time for more questions, now that the marathon meeting is over <g>. A number of times I've heard potential uses that seem to blur the line between amateur and commercial, so my question is - how do we draw the line? As an example - connecting to the Seattle MeshNet. As I read it, the MeshNet is non-amateur. Are we looking to be a generic carrier grade ISP? If so, then this will work, but we won't be able to use amateur frequencies to do it. Similar question for connecting firehalls down south - if we are sticking to strictly amateur uses, then the usage by laptops and other devices at a firehall would be limited to amateur related uses - i.e. - no non-hams using it. It may be that I'm just missing a big concept here, but I see a lot of blurring of the lines in conversation, and I think it needs to be better spelled out before we get in front of too many folks. I'll stop with this one for now, rather than continue to show my ignorance and unfamiliarity <g>. Rob _______________________________________________ PSDR mailing list PSDR@hamwan.org http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
They are trying to software to get below the part 15 in 2.4 Ghz . The -1 channel. Steve N0FPF On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Rob Salsgiver <rob@quailsoftltd.net> wrote:
Short answer – I did read the mission <g>. ****
** **
In this instance I had no knowledge of Seattle vs NW Mesh and looked up the wrong one.****
** **
There are will still be the need to make ongoing distinctions though, and your long answer even can create some situations where the line would be blurred. As an example – using hamWAN as an Internet survival backup for amateur purposes is one thing – i.e. – during a disaster contacting another ham or looking up information on a website. Shopping via hamWAN on the other hand, crosses the commerce line – i.e. – you can’t order a pizza on ham radio. ****
** **
I see this as one of those ongoing conversations that will probably be more of an issue as we get started than once things “firm up”. Once we start having some demonstrated amateur uses it will help illustrate the drawn lines.****
** **
Rob****
** **
*From:* PSDR [mailto:psdr-bounces@hamwan.org] *On Behalf Of *Bart Kus *Sent:* Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:06 AM
*To:* Puget Sound Data Ring *Subject:* Re: [HamWAN PSDR] system usage****
** **
An excellent point to bring up, and one I've struggled with in the past as well.
Short answer: read Article 0<https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-index.php?page=Constitution&structure=HamWAN#Article_0_Mission>of the Constitution<https://www.hamwan.org/t/tiki-index.php?page=Constitution&structure=HamWAN>. It describes HamWAN's mission.
Longer answer with rationale for HamWAN's mission:
A useful and vibrant computer network is one that allows like-minded people to communicate together. In the case of the Internet, we have the ultimate wide deployment across geographical regions and social groups. It is everywhere and provided to everyone. From there, you see communities forming around their collective commonalities. Topic-specific message boards, mailing lists, IRC channels, web sites/apps, etc. We cannot hope to compete with the speed of terabit fiber-optics, or the budgets of global ISPs to be all things to all people.
I, however, am a nerd. And I enjoy the company of my fellow nerds. It is these nerds that I would like to exchange data with. I believe that passing a basic amateur radio license exam is a good filter for the quality of nerd that I'd like to see on the network. Such a requirement also broadens the adoption of amateur radio itself in our society filled with computer nerds, who would love to play with digital networks, but don't have a ham license. This is a good thing. The compu-nerds might learn new things in the realm of radio along the way. Voice net check-ins burn at my computer-literate soul, and the injection of computer-savvy nerds into the amateur radio hobby will fix these archaic procedures. So there you have (part of) the rationale for requiring all participants to be licensed radio amateur operators.
I'm also a bit of an independent. Why should I put my communications needs solely in the hands of large corporations and the Internet? Most of my communication is local. I would be very happy to achieve independence from the corporate teat for at least my local communications needs. On this kind of independent network, WE define the rules. Comcast wants to charge $200/mo for a 50Mbit downlink feed. I think we can beat that if we build it ourselves. And make it symmetrical at the same time, so none of this 10Mbit uplink limit. Nerds are not just consumers, they're also providers of data services. The common Internet services target your typical mom & pop audience, who are dominantly consumers of data. I'd love to live in a world where I can carry around a ham-phone<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NinjaTel_Van>, my car is a mobile ham-hotspot, and my house is tied into the HamWAN, all at a significantly lower cost than the for-profit commercial offerings, while being tailored to my nerdy needs. And there you have some rationale for "free digital communication" as a goal. I can go on for quite a while on this subject. :)
I'm also a bit of a survivalist. I like knowing exactly how my communications facilities work and how to fix them. Should my Internet or cell service go down, I like knowing I have another completely independent system of communication. The other emergency communications groups share this attitude, and it makes them great partners in building this network. These are the driving forces behind the emergency communications part of HamWAN's mission.
Did I mention I'm a nerd? :) Doing the R&D to bring this type of network to life is great fun. A long focused effort by a group of nerds will (and already has) produced valuable results. These need to be published so that others may benefit from our experience in building their own networks of this kind. And there you have mission point #2, about conducting and publishing R&D.
The publication of this knowledge also ties in with point #4, of educating and spreading knowledge. Point #4 is also supported by requiring participants to pass ham exams.
Lastly, I realize HamWAN will not be in control of all such like-minded networks. These types of ideas (both technical and organizational/social) can spread like wildfire, and independent groups are sure to spring up. When groups' networks grow and start touching each other, I want to be sure they are compatible. For this reason the last sentence of the mission statement is that HamWAN will act as a coordinator of interoperability. The recent decision to go with AMPRnet block registration solves a large part of the interoperability problem. But there are other considerations, such as the universal adoption of the NV2 protocol which would make a roaming ham's equipment compatible with other groups' networks. We may also have to implement an inter-network registration system for roaming hams. There are analogous systems in the cellular telco world. If we develop & establish a universal system of digital ham identity at least, that would go a long way even if we fail on the protocol adoption front. Someone suggested using the LoTW client certificate, which is not a bad idea at all. ARRL provides a rigorous identity verification system in LoTW signup, although I'm not sure how good they are at expiring said certs in a timely manner should the registration lapse or be revoked by the FCC.
Phew! I'm out of words. There's so much work ahead it's scary. Recruiting recruiting recruiting recruiting<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE>! There's no way I can implement the entirety of this vision for the future alone.
--Bart
On 2/12/2013 9:16 PM, Rob Salsgiver wrote:****
Ok….. time for more questions, now that the marathon meeting is over <g>.* ***
****
A number of times I’ve heard potential uses that seem to blur the line between amateur and commercial, so my question is – how do we draw the line? ****
****
As an example – connecting to the Seattle MeshNet. As I read it, the MeshNet is non-amateur. Are we looking to be a generic carrier grade ISP? If so, then this will work, but we won’t be able to use amateur frequencies to do it. Similar question for connecting firehalls down south – if we are sticking to strictly amateur uses, then the usage by laptops and other devices at a firehall would be limited to amateur related uses – i.e. – no non-hams using it.****
****
It may be that I’m just missing a big concept here, but I see a lot of blurring of the lines in conversation, and I think it needs to be better spelled out before we get in front of too many folks.****
****
I’ll stop with this one for now, rather than continue to show my ignorance and unfamiliarity <g>.****
****
Rob****
****
_______________________________________________****
PSDR mailing list****
PSDR@hamwan.org****
http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org****
** **
_______________________________________________ PSDR mailing list PSDR@hamwan.org http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
Seattle MeshNet is not an amateur radio project and is strictly part15. That network would not be a likely peer for HamWAN. You may be confusing that with NW-MESH which is a recently popular ham-based project in the Seattle area. NW-MESH would be a perfect candidate for peering with HamWAN. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NW-MESH/ http://nw-mesh.wikidot.com/ On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Rob Salsgiver <rob@quailsoftltd.net> wrote:
Ok….. time for more questions, now that the marathon meeting is over <g>.* ***
** **
A number of times I’ve heard potential uses that seem to blur the line between amateur and commercial, so my question is – how do we draw the line? ****
** **
As an example – connecting to the Seattle MeshNet. As I read it, the MeshNet is non-amateur. Are we looking to be a generic carrier grade ISP? If so, then this will work, but we won’t be able to use amateur frequencies to do it. Similar question for connecting firehalls down south – if we are sticking to strictly amateur uses, then the usage by laptops and other devices at a firehall would be limited to amateur related uses – i.e. – no non-hams using it.****
** **
It may be that I’m just missing a big concept here, but I see a lot of blurring of the lines in conversation, and I think it needs to be better spelled out before we get in front of too many folks.****
** **
I’ll stop with this one for now, rather than continue to show my ignorance and unfamiliarity <g>.****
** **
Rob****
_______________________________________________ PSDR mailing list PSDR@hamwan.org http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
Ah - THAT clicked it in. I had not heard of the NW Mesh "movement" and had done a search and turned up the Seattle Mesh. Thanks, Rob From: PSDR [mailto:psdr-bounces@hamwan.org] On Behalf Of Cory (NQ1E) Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 1:20 AM To: Puget Sound Data Ring Subject: Re: [HamWAN PSDR] system usage Seattle MeshNet is not an amateur radio project and is strictly part15. That network would not be a likely peer for HamWAN. You may be confusing that with NW-MESH which is a recently popular ham-based project in the Seattle area. NW-MESH would be a perfect candidate for peering with HamWAN. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NW-MESH/ http://nw-mesh.wikidot.com/ On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Rob Salsgiver <rob@quailsoftltd.net> wrote: Ok... time for more questions, now that the marathon meeting is over <g>. A number of times I've heard potential uses that seem to blur the line between amateur and commercial, so my question is - how do we draw the line? As an example - connecting to the Seattle MeshNet. As I read it, the MeshNet is non-amateur. Are we looking to be a generic carrier grade ISP? If so, then this will work, but we won't be able to use amateur frequencies to do it. Similar question for connecting firehalls down south - if we are sticking to strictly amateur uses, then the usage by laptops and other devices at a firehall would be limited to amateur related uses - i.e. - no non-hams using it. It may be that I'm just missing a big concept here, but I see a lot of blurring of the lines in conversation, and I think it needs to be better spelled out before we get in front of too many folks. I'll stop with this one for now, rather than continue to show my ignorance and unfamiliarity <g>. Rob _______________________________________________ PSDR mailing list PSDR@hamwan.org http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
participants (4)
-
Bart Kus -
Cory (NQ1E) -
Rob Salsgiver -
Steve