[aprssig] CB traffic on APRS-IS

[Andre]

Op 14-2-2012 23:30, Dave schreef:
> On 13 Feb 2012 at 13:18, Andre wrote:
>
>> In most cept countries you can hook up anything you want to CB and LPD
>> so no problem at all there.
> Negative, far from it in fact.  CB is voice only service, that's all.
> Many use selcall tones, but even that's debatable legally, however,
> nothing is enforced, so everyone gets away with it.  Just as they do all
> running 30W to 100W (or more) "Burners"...  (4W out max, in theory.)
Perhaps in in the UK but Netherlands Germany France Belgium and a lot of 
other countries have had legal packet on CB when it was just 40 channels 
4 watt FM.
>> LPD is a shared band segment inside 70cm 433.075 - 434.750 and in most cept
>> countries the users of LPD devices are alowed to comunicate with hams and
>> reverse.
> True, it exists within the 70cms band.  (An administrative coke up!  When
> they all moved up from 418MHz)  But, we Ham's are secondary (to the
> military/government) users, and any LPD user must accept interference
> ("Harmfull" included) to their systems, while NOT causing any QRM to the
> primary user.  I suspect that we're not regarded as "Primary" in respect
> to LPD users.
>
> In any case, LPD users are NOT generally allowed to cross communicate
> with licenced amateurs, but many licenced amateurs do cross communicate
> with their own personally owned Low Power Devices, that is perfectly
> legal, but NOT with other non HAM owned kit.
>
> Mind you, communicating with a cordless electricity usage meeter is a bit
> of a misnomer.
Again a very different situation from most countries, if you are not 
alowed to communicate with people with a non interfearance basis how can 
you tell them they need to move?
>> so a ham putting up an igate on 434.200 can not be held responsable for what
>> he is picking up and putting into APRS-IS even if it is his own LPD station
>> as by law they are concidered unrelated. Even if the opperator of the CB to
>> LPD gate was to hook up to APRS-IS directly there is nothing we can do about
>> it as I have been told, afterall there is no legal difference between
>> automatic generated objects without a legal callsign and other aprs trafic
>> without legal callsign.
> Holland is obviously more lenient than most.  In the UK we're supposed to
> monitor through traffic (my interpretation of the rules at least) to
> prevent such things.  But again, it's not enforced.
>
yes the UK NOV system is a lot more strict but when it comes to 
transfering what you recieve on a ham frequentie to an internet based 
system there is no law that can stop that, only when broadcasting 
internet trafic to hamfrequenties does the telecomunication laws come in 
effect, it is no different from online recievers.
>> In this case it might even be more legal as the gateway apears to be
>> opperating with a legal callsign, on top of that he apears to be only
>> gating his own stations.
>>
>> Maybe a bit to much CB phobia
>>
> Far from it, it has it's uses, even when you can't talk past the end of
> the street!
>
> Common sense applies perhaps.  Keep the IS for licenced Amateur APRS, and
> punt all the unlicence'd stuff to another system, whatever that might be.
> (Is'nt there already a parallel system for the CW weather op's?)
>
> Or, only allow "Genuine" Ham call's to be gated from IS to RF.   Quite
> how you do that accurately and cleanly, I don't know.
>
The day the code to generate the IS passcodes was released everyone 
became able to gate trafic to the IS so the gate owners became 
responsable for the trafic gated back to RF, maybe not desirable but the 
cold hard fact, but maybe to reasure you, there is a parallel IS for CB 
LPD and PMR trafic run by CB opperators. btw I think you are 
underestemating what you can do on CB with 4 W, before I had my licence 
I regulary had contacts over 30 km from mobile to base using just 0.5 
Watt, offcourse this was in days that CB opperators co-operated to alow 
contacts like that to happen.

We could reinvent the login system but I doubt pete wants to do that so 
we have to make do with what we have and it would not stop gating of LPD 
trafic by hams as a igate has to gate all aprs frames it recieves 
unaltered with the exception of frames with the nogate aliases in the 
digipath.

BTW how does the NOV deal with gating of APRS ham Objects without an 
legal call as the originator?
> 73 Dave G0WBX.
>
73 Andre PE1RDW