On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:34:48 EDT, (Dave Platt)
wrote:

Sticking a passive reflector being the antenna, for a few dB of gain,
might not count as a modification to the actual antenna, and might
thus be legal.

It doesn't count as a modification of the antenna, unless it's a
"periscope" antenna ("fly-swatter") used for Part 101 microwave
stations, and then it's proscribed because the side lobes exceed those
permissible for antennas in those services.

The issue of whether it's OK to allow other people to use your home
wireless network, on a cable or DSL line, would be a contractual issue
between you and your ISP... I don't think it's an FCC issue at all.

It certainly is not.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:50:58 EDT, "xpyttl"
wrote:

IANAL, but it sounds like shaky ground to me. Of course, you could take
that attitude that the probability of an enforcement action is close to
zero, and you could be right. But I, personally, wouldn't try it.

As I advise my clients - both ham and commercial - what answer will
you have if or when you are caught with your hand in the cookie-jar?

Keeping out of trouble is easier than getting out of trouble.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

Hog Wash ... As a HAM Part 15 rules do not apply.. USe Part 97... As a ham
you can run much higher power and use gain antennas not marketed with the
router...

73 jerry n9lya
"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Mike Coslo wrote:

Some members of our club have been discussing this very thing. Some
say it is just plain illegal.

On the other hand, I am not at all sure.

1.It is not illegal to put a wirelss router on my Cable modem.

2. If there is a bad spot in my yard, I can say install a better
antenna on the router. (if indeed those commercial units do anything.

3. If I have a big yard, or say if I had a farm and wanted to get
some internet access from one of my outbuildings, is it okay if I put a
little yagi setup, esp if I am a Ham?

4. Now if I am wanting internet access at a mountaintop station that
doesn't have access otherwise, is it illegal to do the same thing as in
step 3?

One thing to be aware of: the FCC requires that Part 15 radios and
their antennas be certificated as a complete system.

If you substitute a different antenna (other than one which the
radio's manufacturer has actually tested and certificated with the
radio), then the original certification of the Part 15 equipment is
voided, and it becomes (technically) illegal to use the radio to
transmit until you have it re-tested for compliance at a properly
equipped test facility.

This means that, if one wants to pick nits, most people who install
higher-gain aftermarket antennas on their 802.11 access points /
routers / cards may very well be operating illegally. I've only ever
heard of one case of a company fined for doing this (and they were
also operating with an illegally-high-powered amplifier)... I doubt
it's an issue that's on the FCC's radar, unless somebody files a
formal complaint about a specific situation.

These Part 15 rules don't apply if you're using the system within your
ham Part 97 privileges... but you then have to honor _all_ of the
rules for Part 97 use. You can't pick and choose (e.g. put on a
high-gain antenna and an amplifier under Part 97, and then use the
system on Part-15-only frequencies with encryption turned on and for
running a business). If you want to stay fully legal, you have to do
it one way or the other... within Part 15, or within Part 97.

My rationale is that I have paid for the service. As long as I am
not doing anything that was illegal at the cable drop already, such as
providing other people service, I am not doing anything that a wireless
router does. I'm only giving it an antenna with a bit more punch.

Unfortunately, modifications to the antenna itself are probably
outside of what Part 15 allows, unless you use an antenna that the
AP's manufacturer has actually certificated with that particular AP.

Sticking a passive reflector being the antenna, for a few dB of gain,
might not count as a modification to the actual antenna, and might
thus be legal.

The issue of whether it's OK to allow other people to use your home
wireless network, on a cable or DSL line, would be a contractual issue
between you and your ISP... I don't think it's an FCC issue at all.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:51:48 EDT, Michael Coslo wrote:

IEEE 802.11 Experiments in Virginia's Shenandoah Valley, on page 35 of
the July 2005 QST. I would be surprised if QST allowed these amateurs to
write up their illegal activities.

QST has some links encouraging this activity also

The encouragement is to use said circuits for ham radio purposes -
WAS on 2.4 GHz ???

Yes, I don't see any encouragement to use the capability to extend Internet
service. Now, more narrowly defined Internet service, something like
WinLink for example, might well be a neat use of this capability.

...

exactly... Allow no Gateway to the internet... Only allow access to your
station..

In my case.. WiFi user (HAMONLY) can access my BPQ/FBB Packet Station then
link to the world via Packet (isolated protedcted acess) over the
internet... But only to other Packet BBS's... No way to get Google or
sexpit.com type web content... Winlink access would also be available..
But again NO INETNERT... Protect your self its not worth it if you screw
up..

If I have a Ham Realted site I wish to make available to my wifi clients...
They are hosted on my own server, and no way to get to inet.. Inet can get
to my sites.. But visitor coming in on Ham Only Wifi cannot get to
internet...

If you are simply trying to extend your range and want every tom dick and
harry to have internet access... Keep Ham radio out of it... And use Part
15 Rules and live with what you have a Sudo ISP..

Ptherwide Ham Radio is cool and legal.. Just use common sense.. And do not
allow Internet Access via your WiFi...

73 jerry
"Phil Kane" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:51:48 EDT, Michael Coslo wrote:

IEEE 802.11 Experiments in Virginia's Shenandoah Valley, on page 35 of
the July 2005 QST. I would be surprised if QST allowed these amateurs to
write up their illegal activities.

QST has some links encouraging this activity also

The encouragement is to use said circuits for ham radio purposes -
WAS on 2.4 GHz ???
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:48:44 EDT, "h" wrote:

Hog Wash ... As a HAM Part 15 rules do not apply.. USe Part 97... As a ham
you can run much higher power and use gain antennas not marketed with the
router...

Only if you use a WiFi channel that falls completely within the ham
band, and that all other Part 97 rules (ID, content, control operator,
no-encryption-for-secrecy. etc) are followed. Otherwise Part 97 will
not shield you.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:49:12 EDT, "xpyttl"
wrote:

Yes, I don't see any encouragement to use the capability to extend Internet
service. Now, more narrowly defined Internet service, something like
WinLink for example, might well be a neat use of this capability.

Again, following the content rules of Part 97.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

email: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net