[grc] [Stubblefield] Internet threat to STL 900 Mhz band
Michelle Bradley
mae at recnet.com
Wed Jun 19 07:50:04 PDT 2019
The problem is that false alarms spread fake news and unnecessary
engagements. It is one thing to state that internet interests are
looking for spectrum to expand into, but to actually insinuate that a
specific piece of spectrum is being directly threatened, without any
confirmation is another thing.
It also puts a lot of unnecessary burden on those of us who are
following and advocating on spectrum issues.
Also, if there is a threat, we need to weigh the credibility of the
threat and the chances of the threat coming to fruition.
For example, the Amateur Radio community is concerned right now due to a
proposal by France to seek spectrum for non-safety aviation purposes in
a meeting of the CEPT (Europe's standards agency) Electronic
Communications Committee, Project Team A. One of the bands that they
called out specifically in a document is the 144~146 MHz band, which is
the 2-meter amateur radio band for possible allocation in all regions
(worldwide) for new allocations in the aeronautical mobile service on a
primary basis.
While this is a credible threat at this time, this venue can be seen as
a low level planning meeting that is intended for developing CEPT
positions to represent the European Union in an upcoming World Radio
Conference. Of course, other nations would have to also be on board
with this. This threat should be on the radar, but we are not losing 2
meters tomorrow. The Project Team A meetings are taking place in Prague
until June 21. We will see how this all works out.
This is an example where there was a specific threat made to spectrum.
The concerns expressed as a result of the France proposal are currently
valid and need to be watched until the threat is tabled in the ECC or
dies in the WRC.
*Michelle A. Bradley, CBT*
/Amateur Radio: KU3N/
/Founder - REC Networks/ - *https://recnet.com*
*1-844-REC-LPFM* / +1 202 621-2355
SBE Certified
On 6/19/2019 10:25 AM, Spencer Graves via grc wrote:
> Hi, Tom et al.:
>
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
>
> Nearly everyone on this list would probably agree that many
> actions of this FCC (and even the FCC under previous administrations)
> needed to be monitored and resisted. If we do not get an occasional
> false alarm, we could too easily overlook something really important.
>
>
> Best Wishes,
> Spencer Graves
>
>
> On 2019-06-19 07:10, Tom Voorhees via grc wrote:
>> Michi is correct. I apology, for the false alarm. I was blinded by
>> concern for the internet sucking up all possible spectrum and its
>> 1984 Orwell security implications, to include the gold rush for 5G
>> and iot, the internet of things. Tom.
>>
>> On 2019-06-18 16:48, Michelle Bradley via grc wrote:
>>> Contact your local SBE Frequency Coordinator:
>>>
>>> https://www.sbe.org/sections/freq_local.php
>>>
>>>
>>> =m
>>>
>>>
>>> *Michelle A. Bradley, CBT*
>>> /Amateur Radio: KU3N/
>>> /Founder - REC Networks/ - *https://recnet.com*
>>> *1-844-REC-LPFM* / +1 202 621-2355
>>> SBE Certified
>>> On 6/18/2019 7:43 PM, Spencer Graves via grc wrote:
>>>> What is this, how might it impact KKFI.org (90.1 FM, Kansas
>>>> City), and how might I go about getting more information on it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In particular, KKFI has a Studio to Transmitter Link (STL)
>>>> that includes microwave antennae on the roof of the building
>>>> holding our studio and another one close to the top of our tower
>>>> almost 6 miles away. Am I correct that we have some flexibility
>>>> regarding which specific frequency (or frequencies) we use? Are
>>>> all those options in the 900 MHz band? And how might I find out
>>>> which specific frequency we are using at a particular time?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Spencer Graves
>>>> Secretary, KKFI.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2019-06-18 16:21, Michelle Bradley via grc wrote:
>>>>> There are still 73 records in the spectrum 942-944 that are
>>>>> operating in accordance with §74.502(a) which permits BAS stations
>>>>> licensed as of 11/21/84 to continue operating on a co-equal
>>>>> primary basis to other services operating in the band. Looks
>>>>> like that 942-944 is still available for new stations in Puerto
>>>>> Rico. Other than that, there are no other Part 74 records from
>>>>> 900~999 MHz except for the designated 944-952 band.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Michelle A. Bradley, CBT*
>>>>> /Amateur Radio: KU3N/
>>>>> /Founder - REC Networks/ - *https://recnet.com*
>>>>> *1-844-REC-LPFM* / +1 202 621-2355
>>>>> SBE Certified
>>>>> On 6/18/2019 4:30 PM, Tom Voorhees wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks for pointing out the 944-952 relevance Michi. Although I
>>>>>> am aware when 944-952 is over crowded, some may have been
>>>>>> licensed above or below 944-952? Can your database provide the
>>>>>> answer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2019-06-18 13:01, Michelle Bradley via grc wrote:
>>>>>>> Tom..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am looking through these documents. Can you point to where a
>>>>>>> specific threat was made to the reallocation of the BAS spectrum
>>>>>>> between 944-952 MHz specifically? Much of what I see are
>>>>>>> centered
>>>>>>> around the 896-901/935-940 private land mobile (part 90) spectrum
>>>>>>> (which is commonly called in the industry "The 900 MHz Band"). The
>>>>>>> FCC does have a proceeding to revamp this band.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there is a direct threat to 944-952, then I can look further
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>> it and we can engage if appropriate. Otherwise, we should not be
>>>>>>> creating any real noise and creating new paranoia and rumors if
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> proceeding does not affect broadcast's interests in the 944-952 BAS
>>>>>>> STL spectrum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Michelle A. Bradley, CBT*
>>>>>>> /Amateur Radio: KU3N/
>>>>>>> /Founder - REC Networks/ - *https://recnet.com*
>>>>>>> *1-844-REC-LPFM* / +1 202 621-2355
>>>>>>> SBE Certified
>>>>>>> On 6/18/2019 3:27 PM, Tom Voorhees wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Per the below links, 900 Mhz FCC licensed radio STL studio to
>>>>>>>> transmitter links appear to be on the chopping block to be
>>>>>>>> sucked up by the spectrum hungry internet industry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> STLs could be forced into the much less secure internet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The proposal claims national power grids would be more secure
>>>>>>>> within a dedicated 900 Mhz private industry internet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is more phony crap to justify converting all radio
>>>>>>>> spectrum for exclusive use by the internet, as no IP internet
>>>>>>>> protocol technology is anyway near completely secure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190618/carriers/pdvwireless-rebrands-amid-continued-focus-on-private-lte-for-utilities
>>>>>>>> https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190313/policy/in-potential-boost-private-lte-fcc-proposes-reconfiguring-900-mhz
>>>>>>>> Tom.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> This is the Stubblefield mailing list.
>>>>>>>> To post, send an email to: Stubblefield at lists.prometheusradio.org
>>>>>>>> For list options or to unsubscribe, please visit:
>>>>>>>> http://lists.prometheusradio.org/listinfo.cgi/stubblefield-prometheusradio.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> grc mailing list
>>>>>>> grc at maillist.peak.org
>>>>>>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> grc mailing list
>>>>> grc at maillist.peak.org
>>>>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> grc mailing list
>>>> grc at maillist.peak.org
>>>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> grc mailing list
>>> grc at maillist.peak.org
>>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>> _______________________________________________
>> grc mailing list
>> grc at maillist.peak.org
>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>
> _______________________________________________
> grc mailing list
> grc at maillist.peak.org
> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
More information about the grc
mailing list