Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!agate!ig!uwmcsd1!bbn!gatech!mcnc!ecsvax!urjlew
From: urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP (Rostyk Lewyckyj)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
Message-ID: <4726@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: 3 Mar 88 19:38:56 GMT
References: <17327@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> <1004@bcd-dyn.UUCP> <5607@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Lines: 53
Summary: The best idea expressed here so far.

In article <5607@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>, peting@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Mark Peting) writes:
> One solution for providing a packet band without taking anyone's spectrum
> is to allow the use of any unused UHF television channel in an area.
> Even in large cities there are hundreds of megahertz available for this.
> Just make it clear that any channel can be taken away if needed for T.V.
> If the packet modems were able to switch to any channel then it would
> not be any trouble to go to a new channel, and anyone trying to send into
> a T.V. channel would never key up since the channel would always be busy
> with the T.V. signal.  Also since UHF is rather line of sight there 
> shouldn't be much problem with interference with other cities that have
> a different UHF assignment.
> 
I most heartily agree with this proposal. I hope that somebody
will start work on a proposal based on this to the FCC. 
In order to have a better chance of success, the proposers need
to take care of the following items in advance of their approach
to the FCC.
 Develop plans for a transmitting system which would
not inadvertently cause interference to an occupied channel.
This means more than just a check for existing carrier before blasting 
out your own transmission.  Currently channels are allocated 
so that reception coverage areas will not overlap with at least 
one reception area's worth of buffer area between assigned locations.
If a computer hobbyist located just outside the reception area of an 
allocated channel cranked up his radio modem transmitter,
his signal might easily cause havoc to receivers just inside
the channels normal (fringe) reception area.
Develop an almost fool proof way to keep people from getting around
any interference preventing safeguards. At present the inability
of the general public from getting equipment that can transmit on
these TV frequencies minimizes thoughtless and malicious jamming.
Experience with illegal modifications to CB tranmitters shows
that this will probably be a serious problem. 
The system also needs to be able to be easily modified to transmit on
different channels, so that it can be used in different locations where
different channels are free.
 
If the proponents of this plan can come up with solutions for these
difficulties, then there may be a chance for getting the FCC to
consider it. However you should be aware that other commercial
interests have surely cast their covetous eyes at all that "unused"
spectrum.
  
[ The original article I am following up was also posted to
rec.ham-radip.packet. Our site does not consider this to be
a serious group and refuses to handle it. Therefore I have 
had to remove it from the distribution list. Perhaps someone
with access to both groups would be so kind as to forward this
note to that group].
-----------------------------------------------
  Reply-To:  Rostyslaw Jarema Lewyckyj
             urjlew@ecsvax.UUCP ,  urjlew@tucc.bitnet
       or    urjlew@tucc.tucc.edu    (ARPA,SURA,NSF etc. internet)
       tel.  (919)-962-9107