[HamWAN PSDR] New to HAMWAN (NE Portland)

Wed Sep 5 16:16:28 PDT 2018

John,

Thanks for bringing it up for discussion.  I don’t know how serious Bart is about re-thinking the infrastructure, but what you identify are only a few layers of the onion that would have to be looked at before such a transition could take place, if it were able to at all.

A large part depends on whether the move away from Part 97 is to ultimately transition to a commercially capable and supporting network, or to remain an amateur project in non-amateur RF space.

Some other aspects:

1.	If it were to convert to non-amateur (RF) space, could it even still be used for amateur radio communication?  I suspect there would be issues due to the need for no encryption, etc in order to remain “ham compliant”.
2.	Some of the tower locations in North sound outright rejected HamWAN due to perceived competition with the commercial carrier Startouch, who runs a wireless ISP operation in several locations.  Such a transition would further put HamWAN into the realm of commercial ISPs and less into the “more accommodating” space for amateur radio support.
3.	Current facilities would likely want or need to be re-evaluated.  A move to non-amateur space puts HamWAN an administrative policy decision away from becoming a commercial ISP.  Any “deals” we have on site rent would likely be re-evaluated to higher cost structures.
4.	Currently HamWAN has gone on record with the FCC  on various topics as it relates to use of amateur RF space.  Abandoning this space gives those who would like to see it re-purposed more ammunition.
5.	If the goal is to go toward a commercial ISP model, there are a whole host of other issues that would need to be looked at, although probably the greatest improvement would be in funding.  That said, how many of the EMCOMM community would you retain if everything were charged commercial provider rates?  Lots of sticky wickets in here, particularly in the regulations regarding commercial carriers.
6.	If the goal is NOT to go toward a commercial ISP model, in addition to item #1 above you would still have additional problems.  At this point we can say that HamWAN is an amateur network and can’t be used for business.  If the frequency use changes, it becomes even more difficult to “draw the lines” between a “non-amateur Ham network” and a normal commercial ISP.  Establishing usage and traffic rules for amateur vs non-amateur traffic becomes a MUCH more substantial undertaking than today.  
7.	Whether the goal is to go commercial or not, it puts everyone on HamWAN’s board in a delicate spot with respect to their own licenses.  If any use of the spectrum generates revenue, then the recordkeeping would need to be spotless to ensure nobody gets into the “pecuniary interest” trap.
8.	At this point we are having issues with enough time/volunteers/$$ to do what is currently on the table.  Changing frequencies and creating new rules and tools for accommodating different (non-ham) types of usage, policing it, and managing it are only likely to add to the problem, not help it.

All in all, a good conversation to have regardless of the eventual outcome.  It’s a conversation that needs to happen sooner or later.

Cheers,

Rob

From: PSDR <psdr-bounces at hamwan.org> On Behalf Of John D. Hays
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 3:49 PM
To: Puget Sound Data Ring <psdr at hamwan.org>
Subject: Re: [HamWAN PSDR] New to HAMWAN (NE Portland)

Nigel,

The license for the address space says that it must be used within Amateur Radio -- not necessarily on the air, but within the context of Amateur Radio, which I take to include infrastructure.  I simply reference https://www.ampr.org/terms-of-service/

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:21 PM Nigel Vander Houwen <nigel at nigelvh.com <mailto:nigel at nigelvh.com> > wrote:

John,

With regards to the address space, it’s still an amateur network, so we wouldn’t need new space, there’s no requirement to only use it on part 97 frequencies. It’s just reserved for ham use.

You are correct that we gain some spectrum and some transmitter power flexibility.

Nigel

On Sep 5, 2018, at 14:56, John D. Hays <john at hays.org <mailto:john at hays.org> > wrote:

When Bart first proposed the HamWAN concept to various amateur radio forums, he observed that radio repeater sites would be beneficial to building the network.  It was pointed out that many of those sites provide space on a discounted or gratis basis for amateur radio purposes only (often in support of public service/emergency communications), and the repeater operators would likely loose their sites or start having to pay commercial rates.  Also, using 44.x.x.x routable addresses come with an amateur radio requirement.  In addition, running part 97 has greater transmitter power flexibility.

So, the network could be rebuilt using non Part 97 compliance, but new address space would be required (or a giant NAT infrastructure for IPv4) as well as re-negotiating site rentals.

So, unless those steps are undertaken, the network is under Part 97 rules for segments running in the US and its territories.

However, if Kent wanted to use the published HamWAN engineering work to build a similar WISP system, with associated costs, that is a possibility.

  _____  

John D. Hays
Edmonds, WA

K7VE

  <http://k7ve.org/images/Facebook-26.png>    <https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B16WvG35kZ7SUFYwZldBMmJXeWs&revid=0B16WvG35kZ7STXlkYm1oMkpHYzVxOUlxVEtXc1dqMXZhdjZFPQ>   <http://k7ve.org/blog>   <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays> 

_______________________________________________
PSDR mailing list
PSDR at hamwan.org <mailto:PSDR at hamwan.org> 
http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr

_______________________________________________
PSDR mailing list
PSDR at hamwan.org <mailto:PSDR at hamwan.org> 
http://mail.hamwan.net/mailman/listinfo/psdr

-- 

  _____  

John D. Hays
Edmonds, WA

K7VE

  <http://k7ve.org/images/Facebook-26.png>    <https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B16WvG35kZ7SUFYwZldBMmJXeWs&revid=0B16WvG35kZ7STXlkYm1oMkpHYzVxOUlxVEtXc1dqMXZhdjZFPQ>   <http://k7ve.org/blog>   <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.hamwan.net/pipermail/psdr/attachments/20180905/5c6c802c/attachment.html>