6 Comments
User's avatar
Steve Stroh N8GNJ's avatar

As for the "single point of failure", this has bitten many Amateur Radio clubs that I've been associated with. Single points of failure include:

* FCC license for the club callsign being registered (and accessed in the FCC registration system) by a single individual who does not share or make it easy to find in their personal systems.

* Website hosting - again, single individual registered the site and paid the bill and updated the website.

* Domain registration - ditto.

* Repeater site relationship with the site owner. After a death of the single person who maintained the relationship with the site owner, and thus communiction ceased, the club gets a "get your stuff off my site" letter because the site owner could not communicate with the club about an issue like interference.

* Bank accounts for clubs.

Etc. You're very correct to be worried about points of failure, but the problem is much, much broader than that. For example... the radioid.net site / system / database is owned / hosted / maintained by a single person (last time I looked it up). EVERY Amateur Radio system for DMR, P25, NextEdge, etc. is dependent on this one database... what happens when that person dies?

Expand full comment
Tom Salzer's avatar

Arrrggghhh. I was not aware of the radioid.net SPOF (Single Point Of Failure). My cynical side is usually suppressed, but this makes me wonder if our wonderfully resilient hobby is actually as resilient as we think it is!

Expand full comment
Steve Stroh N8GNJ's avatar

Tom - In my opinion, there is no need to "manually" ID using D-Star or System Fusion or M17 (or Packet Radio) because the user's AMATEUR RADIO CALLSIGN is embedded in the data stream of those modes. This was clarified quite some time ago during the packet radio era when it was expected that packet radio systems would ID via CW every ten minutes. When it was explained that the callsign IS in the data stream, then everyone relaxed. But while D-Star and System Fusion, M17, Packet Radio, etc. are all systems that are designed for Amateur Radio (and thus Amateur Radio callsigns), DMR is NOT designed for Amateur Radio and there is no way TO embed a callsign into a DMR radio. DMR was designed for commercial use and thus operate in commercial use by operating under a system license. What is transmitted in DMR is a user or radio ID. Amateur Raadio has adapted to that issue through the means of a central database at https://radioid.net. Thus when I'm operating on DMR, the ID that is transmitted is 3146960, which radioid.net assigned to me as translatable to N8GNJ. Some radios have the ability to hold (or even look up, via Internet connectivity) the DMR ID to a callsign, and display the callsign. I suspect the same is true with NextEdge and P25 digital voice systems, but I've never worked with those two.

But if the unit does not transmit an AMATEUR RADIO CALLSIGN, then it falls to the user to do so manually, at least every ten minutes during operation.

Expand full comment
Tom Salzer's avatar

I might be misunderstanding, or maybe I just completely missed the boat. One of the points I was trying to make is that not everyone using one of those modes is on a radio that can transmit ID digitally. Yes, I'm talking hotspots that bridge between modes. I haven't seen that work seamlessly. (It's also frustrating to listen to a C4FM QSO for 30 minutes [real example] and hear nobody actually identify.) Based on that, I conclude that to assure we are properly identifying, we need to do it every 10 minutes. While it may be accepted practice not to do so, I don't see an exception in Part 97 that supports this. If this is the practice but Part 97 is silent on it, then this needs clarification in Part 97. Or am I completely misguided on this?

Expand full comment
Jason's avatar

Technically, for your hotspot, you are relaying third party traffic, and unfortunately, you are responsible for the compliance of the transmissions. So those hams on that reflector *really should* ID to be good citizens in helping out their fellow hams, but your hotspot is your responsibility, and their own RF transmissions are theirs. There is also the case of analogue repeaters using Echolink and Allstar that may be linked and are just transmitting plain old FM.

In short, everyone should ID properly verbally, but it's ultimately the hotspot or repeater owner's responsibility to disconnect if IDing isn't happening properly. This is also why, if you connect a local repeater to a reflector, be sure to disconnect before you shut your radio off. No one want's to make a headache for their local repeater owner.

And Steve's explanation is fantastic. That ham is misinformed to think that DMR is encoding their callsign. It does not.

Expand full comment
Steve Stroh N8GNJ's avatar

Tom - I cannot speak to hotspots, etc. (that's YOUR expertise), but speaking solely for myself, if I'm transmitting on a RADIO (portable, mobile) that I know does transmit my callsign as part of the header information (every time I push the PTT button) such as D-Star, SF, M17, Packet, etc. than I feel I have met the letter of the regulations - I am transmitting my callsign. How that header with the embedded callsign gets propagated into other gateways, etc. and other modes, maybe there's an issue there, but I think that is so far down in the technical weeds that few can be made to care about it.

We can barely get the FCC to act on really substantive issues like removing obsolete, arcane, outdated symbol rate limits from the Amateur Radio VHF / UHF bands that are holding back substantive progress on radio technology in Amateur Radio. Thus, asking the FCC for clarification on Part 97 is either a non-starter (issues like NextNav are keeping them busy) or if they do decide there's an issue there, it's possible that we'll end up with a worst-case interpretation or clarification, like requiring packet radio systems to ID with CW again. I'm comfortable with this ambiguity... one of many such ambiguities... in the FCC Amateur Radio regulations which were last substantively updated decades ago now, quite possibly predating the rise of digital systems.

It would be an interesting project to rewrite Part 97 regulations to be a lot more modern, starting over / clean sheet of paper instead of just tinkering with the current wording.

Expand full comment