Thanks, Marty. I’m all in favor of accepting the FCC’s invitation to offer clarifying language for 2.1043(h) to make it clear that the amateur exemption applies generally. Dave From: Woll, Marty, N6VI Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 9:11 AM To: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ; Imlay, Chris, W3KD; Mileshosky, Brian, N5ZGT Cc: arrl-odv Subject: RE: [arrl-odv:24716] Re: Draft agenda for October 3 EC Meeting Thanks, Dave. That was well before the AREDN project was launched in San Diego and perhaps before the BBHN group in Texas turned its attention from old Linksys routers to the newer Ubiquiti hardware platforms. Apparently no one knew at the time to bring the software-mod issue to our attention. In any case, the inclusion of flexibility comments as Chris suggested is appropriate. Sorry for the bandwidth (no pun intended) on this issue, but it has become a hot topic among some members. When the League releases a story concerning our filing of comments, it may be helpful to include a few words of explanation as to what rules changed when. 73, Marty N6VI From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2015 5:49 AM To: Woll, Marty, N6VI; Imlay, Chris, W3KD; Mileshosky, Brian, N5ZGT Cc: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24716] Re: Draft agenda for October 3 EC Meeting Marty, that proceeding was Docket 13-49. The ARRL publicized the proceeding and filed comments at the time. Our principal focus was on 5850-5925 MHz. Dave