DCC has recently received a number of questions regarding licensing policies and the future of
internet voice gateways in the UK. Here are those questions, and the answers to them from a DCC
perspective.
-
Can anyone explain what on earth has the Echolink validation process got to do with
the online NOV application process.
For all the DCC knows, the applicant may not
even want to use Echolink, but may want to use their NOV for eQSO, Wires, or IRLP
instead.
It is not necessary to stipulate which system one wants to use when applying
for an NOV.
As is now common knowledge, DCC had what it believed (and RA agreed) were some quite
legitimate concerns around the validation process which was in place for Echolink.
Given that there is currently no necessity to specify which software will be employed,
DCC had no means of knowing whether further problems were likely to be encountered.
Attempting to be fair and even handed - especially since DCC has NO desire
to mandate the use of any particular software package over another - the online
application system was withdrawn while clarification from the Echolink team was sought.
Since that clarification has now been provided by K1RFD is has been possible to
re-enable the online NoV application process, effective 08:00 BST 26th September 2003
-
Would you please let me know why, as the Primary user of the 144 - 146 MHz bands we
are unable to obtain authorisation from the RA for licensing of Internet Gateways on
already approved frequencies in this band, regardless of individual station
requirements and circumstances.
Surely, as the 'primary user' of the band, it is down
to the RSGB frequency coordination and radio amatuers themselves to decide on
suitability of the continued use of these frequencies according to individual
station requirements and circumstances.
Thus far the blanket suspension of NoV's in this band has been particularily unfair
to rural areas of scattered population where 70cm does not provide adequate coverage,
and there is too limited use of 6m and 4m to make a service for mobile use practical.
As has been stated many times previously (although perhaps not in quite so public a
forum) this is simply an RA policy decision, and not one which they were minded to
reverse or review further when they were last asked to do so by DCC (at 1st September
2003 review meeting).
It is important to remember that irrespective of our status in that band or
any recommendations made by RSGB, it remains RA's prerogative as to whether they will
issue (or permit RSGB to issue) NoV's for any particular purpose and on any particular
frequency.
While DCC shares the frustrations of those who are keen to make use of frequencies
in this band we are also aware of RA's concerns, which are based upon the quantity
of "interference" complaints they have received from other (amateur) users of the
band.
Essentially, these have been due to the apparent inability of some gateway
operators to correctly adjust their transmitter deviation to an absolute maximum of
2.5 kHz peak, and the refusal by some other band users to acknowledge that (in IARU
Region 1) the 2M band has been "12.5 kHz spec" since agreements made at the 1996 Tel
Aviv conference were enacted in 1997.
Experience has shown that better results for simplex gateways (and therefore better
"service") can be obtained with smaller footprints and more gateways, and this is
directly due to the absence of "busy channel marking". It can be shown,
drawing on both historical and contemporary experience from the "traditional" voice
repeater network that large service areas are counterproductive.
With the current high availability of equipment for 50 MHz, gateway sysops should in
- at least for the short term - give very serious consideration to this currently
under used band.
-
What is the actual 'reason' for the suspension of issuing of
licences for any repeater or node in the 430 - 440 MHz band thus preventing further
experimentation with dedicated internet linked UHF repeaters. ?
This is a requirement of the Primary User, and since their use of the spectrum is
directly related to matters of national security they are (probably quite correctly)
not minded to share their precise reasons with us.
Their decision affects the installation of any unattended transmitter
within the 300 - 500 MHz region; RA local offices can not currently issue licenses to
business users in this band without recourse to special clearance procedures.
It is important to note that the restrictions (thus far) have been placed only on
unattended installations, and there is nothing currently which will prevent
experimentation on an attended basis, using the frequencies already designated for
this purpose.
-
Why are the current findings of the Internet Linking Review that we need some
fairly obvious information for the review ? Surely, obtaining this information was
the purpose of the review in the first place, so are we still at square one ? What
has the review done or acheived to date ?.
These answers we'd rather read at the DCC
website than the existing bulletin which says basically nothing.
The danger with any response to the above, at this stage of the proceedings, is that
is may be misunderstood. As has been stated previously elsewhere, the review was
commissioned by RA who engaged an independent consultantancy to review the various
submissions and present their conclusions.
It is not currently appropriate to discuss this in detail, but it should suffice - for
the time being - for the reader to understand that the actions of the Primary User
have shed a somewhat different light on matters.
RA has some quite legitimate concerns - shared by RSGB (and DCC in particular) - around
the potential impact on other (amateur) band users, both in the UK and other IARU
Region 1 member societies.
In answer to the final point: the review appears to have served to convice RA that, at
the very least, the experiment should be allowed to continue for the time being. We
are given to understand that RA will shortly be publishing the document (on their
website) produced by their consultant.
If you have comments regarding the above, or require further information, please click
here to EMail the
undersigned.
Iain Philipps, G0RDI
Chairman, RSGB Data Communications Committee
|