May 2004 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[ARRL-ODV:10669] Re: IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards
by Art Goddard 31 May '04

31 May '04

Thanks, Paul. I finally got it! 73, Art ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Rinaldo" <prinaldo(a)mindspring.com> To: "arrl-odv" <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Cc: "Ed Hare W1RFI" <w1rfi(a)arrl.org> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 3:33 AM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10666] Re: IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards > Art, et al, > > Ed Hare is scheduled to go to the Denver meeting and make a brief presentation. Our plans for participation in the IEEE BPL standards process depends upon their having one, as the meeting is exploratory. I've been active on BPL in IEEE-USA Committee on Communications and Information Policy and contributed to Carl Stevenson's draft of the IEEE-USA comments to the BPL NPRM. So, both Ed and I will be watching this. > > Paul > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Art Goddard <w6xd(a)comcast.net> > Sent: May 30, 2004 3:02 AM > To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> > Cc: Ed Hare W1RFI <w1rfi(a)arrl.org> > Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10665] IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards > > Here's a link to IEEE news release summarizing their comments to FCC: > http://www.ieeeusa.org/releases/2004/051004pr.html > > In addition, the IEEE Standards Association and IEEE Power Engineering > Society are holding a "Call for Interest in Standards Development for > Broadband over Power Lines" meeting in Denver on 7 June. For more > information, visit > http://standards.ieee.org/announcements/pr_bplinvite.html. > > What involvement in BPL standards is planned by ARRL? Seems like we did > have an effect on HomePlug standards... > > 73, Art > > > > > >

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10668] Re: IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards
by Andy Oppel 31 May '04

31 May '04

If BPL is deployed on a wide scale, the league will have to offer a WAPO (Worked All Power Outlets) award. -- Andy Oppel, N6AJO At 03:33 AM 5/30/2004, Paul Rinaldo wrote: >Art, et al, > >Ed Hare is scheduled to go to the Denver meeting and make a brief >presentation. Our plans for participation in the IEEE BPL standards >process depends upon their having one, as the meeting is exploratory. I've >been active on BPL in IEEE-USA Committee on Communications and Information >Policy and contributed to Carl Stevenson's draft of the IEEE-USA comments >to the BPL NPRM. So, both Ed and I will be watching this. > >Paul > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Art Goddard <w6xd(a)comcast.net> >Sent: May 30, 2004 3:02 AM >To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> >Cc: Ed Hare W1RFI <w1rfi(a)arrl.org> >Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10665] IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards > >Here's a link to IEEE news release summarizing their comments to FCC: >http://www.ieeeusa.org/releases/2004/051004pr.html > >In addition, the IEEE Standards Association and IEEE Power Engineering >Society are holding a "Call for Interest in Standards Development for >Broadband over Power Lines" meeting in Denver on 7 June. For more >information, visit >http://standards.ieee.org/announcements/pr_bplinvite.html. > >What involvement in BPL standards is planned by ARRL? Seems like we did >have an effect on HomePlug standards... > >73, Art

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10666] Re: IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards
by Paul Rinaldo 30 May '04

30 May '04

Art, et al, Ed Hare is scheduled to go to the Denver meeting and make a brief presentation. Our plans for participation in the IEEE BPL standards process depends upon their having one, as the meeting is exploratory. I've been active on BPL in IEEE-USA Committee on Communications and Information Policy and contributed to Carl Stevenson's draft of the IEEE-USA comments to the BPL NPRM. So, both Ed and I will be watching this. Paul -----Original Message----- From: Art Goddard <w6xd(a)comcast.net> Sent: May 30, 2004 3:02 AM To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Cc: Ed Hare W1RFI <w1rfi(a)arrl.org> Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10665] IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards Here's a link to IEEE news release summarizing their comments to FCC: http://www.ieeeusa.org/releases/2004/051004pr.html In addition, the IEEE Standards Association and IEEE Power Engineering Society are holding a "Call for Interest in Standards Development for Broadband over Power Lines" meeting in Denver on 7 June. For more information, visit http://standards.ieee.org/announcements/pr_bplinvite.html. What involvement in BPL standards is planned by ARRL? Seems like we did have an effect on HomePlug standards... 73, Art

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10665] IEEE on BPL and BPL Standards
by Art Goddard 30 May '04

30 May '04

Here's a link to IEEE news release summarizing their comments to FCC: http://www.ieeeusa.org/releases/2004/051004pr.html In addition, the IEEE Standards Association and IEEE Power Engineering Society are holding a "Call for Interest in Standards Development for Broadband over Power Lines" meeting in Denver on 7 June. For more information, visit http://standards.ieee.org/announcements/pr_bplinvite.html. What involvement in BPL standards is planned by ARRL? Seems like we did have an effect on HomePlug standards... 73, Art

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10664] Re: BPL comment extension
by Joel Harrison 28 May '04

28 May '04

WHAT??????????? No DX-100 and 75A4? GL in the contest there OM........ 73 Joel W5ZN -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 5:53 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10663] Re: BPL comment extension Ali has a six meter beam on one of the towers, but I don't see a radio. There are 3 IC-781s, 3 FT1000MPs, 1 FT1000D, 1 Orion, and 6 Alpha 87As. The 15 meter antenna is big enough to work EME. Dave K1ZZ

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10663] Re: BPL comment extension
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 28 May '04

28 May '04

Ali has a six meter beam on one of the towers, but I don't see a radio. There are 3 IC-781s, 3 FT1000MPs, 1 FT1000D, 1 Orion, and 6 Alpha 87As. The 15 meter antenna is big enough to work EME. Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President) Sent: Fri 5/28/2004 11:47 PM To: arrl-odv Cc: Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10662] Re: BPL comment extension I need A6 on 50 MHz and above......any EME over there OM ???? If so, I'm QRV. 73 Joel W5ZN -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 5:35 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10661] Re: BPL comment extension I doubt that he was thinking of us one way or the other. As Chris says, the issue was different on the reply comment deadline. I'm sitting here in Dubai at the 80-meter operating position at A61AJ, waiting for 4:00 AM local time for the contest to start. Everyone else is in bed -- I figured I'd stay up, since 80 meters will close when the sun comes up about an hour and 40 minutes later. Apologies in advance if you call me on 80 and I don't hear you -- the 3 element beam transmits better than it receives. Please work A61AJ on as many bands as you can. 73, Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Haynie, Jim (President) Sent: Fri 5/28/2004 10:49 AM To: arrl-odv Cc: Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10651] Re: BPL comment extension

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10662] Re: BPL comment extension
by Joel Harrison 28 May '04

28 May '04

I need A6 on 50 MHz and above......any EME over there OM ???? If so, I'm QRV. 73 Joel W5ZN -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 5:35 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10661] Re: BPL comment extension I doubt that he was thinking of us one way or the other. As Chris says, the issue was different on the reply comment deadline. I'm sitting here in Dubai at the 80-meter operating position at A61AJ, waiting for 4:00 AM local time for the contest to start. Everyone else is in bed -- I figured I'd stay up, since 80 meters will close when the sun comes up about an hour and 40 minutes later. Apologies in advance if you call me on 80 and I don't hear you -- the 3 element beam transmits better than it receives. Please work A61AJ on as many bands as you can. 73, Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Haynie, Jim (President) Sent: Fri 5/28/2004 10:49 AM To: arrl-odv Cc: Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10651] Re: BPL comment extension

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10661] Re: BPL comment extension
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 28 May '04

28 May '04

I doubt that he was thinking of us one way or the other. As Chris says, the issue was different on the reply comment deadline. I'm sitting here in Dubai at the 80-meter operating position at A61AJ, waiting for 4:00 AM local time for the contest to start. Everyone else is in bed -- I figured I'd stay up, since 80 meters will close when the sun comes up about an hour and 40 minutes later. Apologies in advance if you call me on 80 and I don't hear you -- the 3 element beam transmits better than it receives. Please work A61AJ on as many bands as you can. 73, Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Haynie, Jim (President) Sent: Fri 5/28/2004 10:49 AM To: arrl-odv Cc: Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10651] Re: BPL comment extension

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10660] Re: BPL comment extension
by R. B. Vallio 28 May '04

28 May '04

The question now being "did he understand what you told him?" :>) 73, Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: W3KD(a)aol.com To: arrl-odv Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 7:21 AM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10654] Re: BPL comment extension In a message dated 5/28/2004 9:29:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, n2ff(a)optonline.net writes: Both actions indicate partiality. The question is what do we do about it? Frank, per my prior message in response to Tom, I don't think we are being treated differently, and certainly not from others who OPPOSE BPL. The issue in our extension filing (which admittedly should have been granted), and that in the reply comment extension are different. Had FCC not extended the reply comment date after receiving NTIA (initial) comments (which are supposed to be filed today and which will be favorable to going ahead with BPL and making specific technical suggestions) FCC would have set themselves up for an appeal based on an Administrative Procedure Act violation, since there would have been no time for anyone to respond to NTIA. Our argument on the initial comment date, that we needed more time to address the NTIA study, was less compelling because of (1) the time available before comments were due to review the study, which was short but not non-existent; and (2) the fact of the reply comment period, which offered an opportunity to address the NTIA study. So, while this whole proceeding is a freight train without brakes, and FCC wants to pad the record with stuff favorable to BPL, and they have prejudged the entire issue, it is hard to compare the two extension of time requests in any way that establishes anything. Chris

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:10659] Re: BPL comment extension
by R. B. Vallio 28 May '04

28 May '04

Thanks for putting this issue in proper perspective, Chris. 73, Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: W3KD(a)aol.com To: arrl-odv Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 6:48 AM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:10653] Re: BPL comment extension In a message dated 5/28/2004 12:56:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, frenaye(a)pcnet.com writes: Interesting that our request for an extension was turned down but this one was granted (3 weeks). -- Tom CARRIER CURRENT SYSTEMS, INCLUDING BROADBAND OVER POWER LINE SYSTEMS. Granted in part the Motion of NAC/Amherst , and extended the deadline for filing reply comments. (Dkt No. 03-104, 04-37). Action by: Chief , Office of Engineering and Technology. Reply Comments Due: 06/22/2004. Adopted: 05/26/2004 by ORDER. (DA No. 04-1552). OET <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1552A1.doc> <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1552A1.pdf> <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-1552A1.txt> Not at all, Tom. Look at the reason for the extension. NTIA hasn't yet filed its comments and a technical proposal. FCC knows full well what that is going to be, because it was vetted at an IRAC meeting. They are waiting for the NTIA filing, because it will assist them in going ahead with their BPL proposal. They just used that bozo antenna consortium as a vehicle. Chris

1 0