Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
"Dave Platt" wrote in message ... In article , Mike Coslo wrote: 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. As has been pointed out, the better antenna probably won't comply with Part 15. Now, you can use your Part 97 privileges to extend your LAN, but once you allow Internet content to travel that Part 97 circuit, how do you prevent commercial content? Obscene content? Sounds like you are allowing a non-licensed operator, e.g., Google, to use your circuit. Even if you have some wonderful, magical firewall, it seems as if it might be difficult to explain away the "pecuniary interest" clause, since you are essentially extending a paid-for service. 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. ... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
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. I've found the QST article dealing with this. Its called 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 http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/hi...nications.html It was written form an EC perspective, but the purpose is pretty clear. I'll save further comment until I've read the issue. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
"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. ... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ham WIFI?
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 |