Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site redwood.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!hplabs!hpda!fortune!redwood!rpw3
From: rpw3@redwood.UUCP (Rob Warnock)
Newsgroups: net.news.stargate
Subject: Re: Stargate Deployment: possibilities
Message-ID: <165@redwood.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 16-Feb-85 06:23:26 EST
Article-I.D.: redwood.165
Posted: Sat Feb 16 06:23:26 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Feb-85 08:42:56 EST
References: <598@ncoast.UUCP> <560@vortex.UUCP>
Organization: [Consultant], Foster City, CA
Lines: 32

+---------------
| Just a reminder before you go rushing out for ham licenses. The rules
| regarding ham traffic (particularly third party which is what we're
| talking about here) are very strict (*much* more strict than what a
| moderated Stargate would propose).  This would probably make usage
| of the ham bands for such traffic pretty much impractical.
| --Lauren--
+---------------

Righto! But... One can gain a LOT of practical experience on the ham bands,
experience which may prove useful when it comes time to ask the FCC to
license COMMERCIAL packet radio repeaters! Just as "stargate" is carrying
"dummy" articles right now, so could ham radio carry "test" messages, or
private traffic between two hams/sysadms.  Remember, there's still a lot
of R & D to do -- the TAPR stuff is just a first step (though a big one).

Carrying 3rd party traffic IS permissable, if it's not "for pay" and you
are COMPLETELY responsible for the contents (though as Lauren points out,
the conditions are stiff).

I still think it's neat. Imagine being able to read netnews while you're up
in the mountains somewhere (or being able to send mail if you need rescue).
Cellular telephone is here "real soon now". Can "cellular packet net" be far
behind? Hook "stargate" to TAPR and you've got a public-run XTEN! (Almost...)


Rob Warnock
Systems Architecture Consultant

UUCP:	{ihnp4,ucbvax!dual}!fortune!redwood!rpw3
DDD:	(415)572-2607
USPS:	510 Trinidad Lane, Foster City, CA  94404