[OZAPRS] APRS with Foundation license

[Ray Wells]

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