mo@seismo.CSS.GOV (Mike O'Dell) (02/09/86)
I have just been informed that all the packet BBS's are now off the air. A ham in Florida was just awarded a pink ticket for operating a packet BBS. I don't have many (any!) details, but the cause cited appears to be the bit about "no 3rd party traffic while under automatic control." (See the latest ARRL newletter for details.... ) While I am not a fan of interconnecting BBS's (we know how well Usenet works - I hope ham packet is more useful!), this materially restricts why anyone would want to use packet in the first place - computer to computer communications (yes, a TNC is a computer...). Rumor has it that the august ARRL considers packet to vitally important to the survival of ham radio. I suggest they mount an effort at least as vocal as the last "no code" fiasco if they don't want to see it go down in flames. The next thing you know, they'll be applying the ruling to digipeaters. "I learned the code, so now what can I connect to??" -Mike O'Dell KB4RGM
mojo@kepler.UUCP (Morris Jones) (02/12/86)
There's a very important point to the FCC ruling that we have to
remember. Amateur Radio CANNOT become a common carrier! Besides
providing unfair competition with the commercial carriers, it's
contrary to the spirit of *Amateur* Radio as experimentalists and
hobbyists.
Now how do we tread the fine line and operate our packet BBSes? If
there really is no control over third party traffic on Amateur Radio,
then we start to cross that line. I think at the very least we'll
have to emphasize clearly the nature of the third party traffic that
will be permissable (non-business, trivial, experimental -- following
the guideline that "Amateur Radio traffic must be trivial to the
degree that recourse to the established commercial carriers is not
justified").
I also think we're going to have to provide more control over the
BBSes -- more control operators and control points. It may mean
a set of rules for designating BBS users as control operators, and
providing protected access.
It won't be easy, but we can find a way to live with it.
Personally I think the spectrum should be chopped up and sold to
the highest bidder ....
--
Mojo
... Morris Jones, MicroPro Product Development
{lll-crg,ptsfa,dual,well,pyramid}!micropro!kepler!mojorb@ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) (02/21/86)
As I recall, AT&T attempted to get the FCC to outlaw phone patches on the basis that the established common carrier was loosing the revenue from the long distance connection. A citation such as this does not necessarily mean that the final word has been given, but it is not a good sign. It seems like the FCC has taken a profound change in it's role as protector of a public commodity. The emphasis seems to be on commercialization of the "Ether" (tells you how long I've been a ham). I personally see this as being identical to selling national park land. Of course, when looking at the "Mobile Homes" in the national parks, and the "Store Bought Ham Gear" in some ham shacks, I wonder if these actions are not justified. The last "Home Brew" rig I built wouldn't be usable today (no FCC certification). As for "advancing the state of the art", except for a few "advancements" in the digital communications fields, the last big contributions of ham radio were "SSB", and "SSTV". I keep wondering how long it will be before "CB" bbs's start showing up. If we don't use it, we'll loose it.