[OZAPRS] APRS with Foundation license
Ray Wells
vk2tv at exemail.com.au
Wed Oct 6 07:50:11 EST 2010
Thanks, Richard,
You introduce factors I hadn't considered.
Ray vk2tv
On 06/10/10 00:01, Richard Hoskin wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Ray alluded to this in an earlier post and after talking the WIA on
> this subject both for APRS & D-Star I understand the following;
>
> The key words and definitions in this are;
>
> 1) Intent (general legal jargon)
>
> 2) Reasonable measures. (LCD para 11A (2) )
>
> First the question to be asked is what Reasonable measures (actions
> that the operator can be reasonably be expected to take) has the IGate
> operator taken to adhere to the LCD and prevent a non-authorized
> transmission from his / her station.
>
> The answer is that he/she has implemented a Passcode system by means
> of the IGate / APRS-IS software that will not allow any inadvertent
> non-authorized transmission to emanate from their station.
>
> The Passcode is considered an international standard which is used
> throughout the APRS-IS network to limit inadvertent (accidental) RF
> access and as such should protect the IGate owner from regulation
> breaches.
>
> The Second question is; What is the intent of the person generating
> the non-authorized transmission?
>
> The answer; It could be argued that the if a non-authorized person
> goes to the trouble of finding, generating then configuring a Passcode
> into an APRS application then the Intent of that person is to generate
> an non-authorized transmission and hence the onus is on that person,
> not the IGate operator.
>
> It does not matter that the generator of the non-authorized
> transmission is or is not aware of the regulations (sorry officer I
> didn't see the 60kmh sign), by their actions it was the Intent of that
> person to generate a transmission on the APRS network (the network
> consists of both APRS-IS and RF). Hence that person is accountable for
> the non-authorized transmission.
>
> For what it's worth the use of a Passcode could be interpreted that
> the APRS network (both APRS-IS and RF) is a non-public transmission
> network carried over a public communications network. IE a VPN or in
> old packet terms a gateway tunnel. This would not however change the
> Intent of the person generating the non-authorized transmission.
>
> Hope this is helpful.
>
> Cheers
>
> Richard
>
> VK3JFK
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au [mailto:ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au]
> *On Behalf Of *Ray Wells
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 5 October 2010 7:22 PM
> *To:* ozaprs at aprs.net.au
> *Subject:* Re: [OZAPRS] APRS with Foundation license
>
> Nor should we have to monitor every packet, Scott.
>
> Ray vk2tv
>
> On 05/10/10 19:17, Scott Evans wrote:
>
> As an I-gate sysop, there is only one way an F call will appear from
> the Internet to RF is if they are using a valid call pass, Now for
> those of us that use Linux the code for such is freely available and
> is distributed with both APRSD & XASTIR (possibly others) so for
> instance..
>
> callpass VK7FXXX
> Passcode for VK7FXXX is 4791
>
> Now there is nothing preventing any person Amateur or otherwise from
> receiving APRS data, but this is not the issue, it the transmission
> coming most likely from an iPhone/Android application or a PC. the F
> call in this instance should ONLY enter a call pass of -1 (or left
> blank if that is what the client prefers)
>
> There was much discussion a while back on the javAPRSSvr mailing list
> (this is the software used by the CORE & T2 servers and also by some
> I-Gate sysops, myself included) on developing a better way to
> authenticate a users credentials, there was talk of using SSL certs
> but the maintenance would be horrendous! not to mention breaking
> compatibility with older APRS clients like UI-View etc... So this was
> soon knocked on the head as being to time consuming to maintain and
> implement, after all this is a hobby not on-line banking!
>
> So my take on this is that whilst the LCD states what is does for each
> grade of licence, we are obliged to adhere to them, of course there
> will be a minority that won't but you get that with any rules & regs!
>
> I for one will not be implementing any such "filtering" to catch out
> any possible breach of license, I only have the APRS spec ALIAS's set
> and that's for nogate/rfonly/nocall I certainly don't have the time to
> sit and monitor every packet that is transmitted within range of my
> I-Gate!
>
> --
> Scott Evans <scott at vk7hse.hobby-site.org
> <mailto:scott at vk7hse.hobby-site.org>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OZAPRS mailing list
> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au <mailto:OZAPRS at aprs.net.au>
> http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OZAPRS mailing list
> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au
> http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.aprs.net.au/pipermail/ozaprs/attachments/20101006/d8ee0d3b/attachment.htm
More information about the OZAPRS
mailing list