Monitoring VARA


Sholto Fisher
 

Does anybody know if it's possible to monitor VARA just with the application? I've tried tuning in as best I can but I don't get any info on the screen.

Someone is doing VARA testing on top of the packet network at 14105 and I'd like to be able to inform them (politely) they are disrupting on going qsos.

73

Sholto
K7TMG


John G8BPQ
 

No, you can't monitor, but if VARA receives a connect request for a call other than yours it will report it, I think in the CANCELPENDING message. BPQ will log this to its VARA driver window.

73,
John

On 05/03/2018 19:23, Sholto Fisher wrote:
Does anybody know if it's possible to monitor VARA just with the application? I've tried tuning in as best I can but I don't get any info on the screen.

Someone is doing VARA testing on top of the packet network at 14105 and I'd like to be able to inform them (politely) they are disrupting on going qsos.

73

Sholto
K7TMG


Sholto Fisher
 

I can see this being an issue for part 97 compliance. There has to be a way for the stations concerned to transmit an ID which can be monitored/understood by others. WinMOR has this self identification and I think for VARA to be legal it will have to do the same.


Andrew O'Brien
 

I wondered about that too, but there again there is no ID with several other modes when transmitting long files... just the beginning and end of a transmission. 
Andy K3UK

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 5:43 PM, Sholto Fisher <sholto.fisher@...> wrote:
I can see this being an issue for part 97 compliance. There has to be a way for the stations concerned to transmit an ID which can be monitored/understood by others. WinMOR has this self identification and I think for VARA to be legal it will have to do the same.




--
Andy


John G8BPQ
 

I'm testing a version of Vara that Includes CWID, though I don't think that is in the currently released version.

73, John


On 5 Mar 2018 22:43, Sholto Fisher <sholto.fisher@...> wrote:
I can see this being an issue for part 97 compliance. There has to be a way for the stations concerned to transmit an ID which can be monitored/understood by others. WinMOR has this self identification and I think for VARA to be legal it will have to do the same.


M5AKA
 

While in the USA Part 97 mandates IDing at 10 minute intervals, (ID can be in the mode you are transmitting e.g. VARA), this restriction doesn't apply to other countries. A call sign embedded in data packets should meet the US ID requirement.

In the UK the ID time interval is now left to the operators discretion, for example when experimenting with very low bit rate modes it may well be impractical to ID more frequently that once every 30 minutes.

73 Trevor M5AKA


On Tuesday, 6 March 2018, 7:55, John Wiseman <john.wiseman@...> wrote:


I'm testing a version of Vara that Includes CWID, though I don't think that is in the currently released version.

73, John


On 5 Mar 2018 22:43, Sholto Fisher <sholto.fisher@...> wrote:
I can see this being an issue for part 97 compliance. There has to be a way for the stations concerned to transmit an ID which can be monitored/understood by others. WinMOR has this self identification and I think for VARA to be legal it will have to do the same.




Virus-free. www.avg.com


Sholto Fisher
 

Hi Trevor,

I'm aware that IDs can be done in the mode itself but if there's no way of monitoring the ID I'm sure the FCC would take a dim view of it.
After all what's the point of an ID if there is no ready method to observe it? Shouldn't be a problem though if there's going to be a CW ID in the software.

Going back to Andy's point, during long Pactor message transfers (like a WX fax) does the Winlink software ID every 10 minutes for both the RMS and client? I always assumed it did but now I'm not sure.

I'm fairly sure it does in WinMOR.

73

Sholto
K7TMG


Graham
 

Andy / Sholto, 

Is it possible  for  some  one to  quote the  actual  wording  part97 requirement ?
is this the  same  for  all  bands and or  sub-bands  etc ?

Need  the ID be in the  same  mode that  is  being  used ,  or  part of therein ?

Tnx-Graham.



Walter Underwood
 

No, it is impossible. (Just kidding.)

First hit for “part 97 identification”: https://www.w5yi.org/page.php?id=124

Also, there is an implication that the transmission should be decodable. Right now, people monitoring VARA are not able to decode it.

97.309 (4)(b): “RTTY and data emissions using unspecified digital codes must not be transmitted for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of any communication.


wunder
K6WRU
Walter Underwood
CM87wj
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)

On Mar 6, 2018, at 8:25 AM, Graham <g0nbd@...> wrote:

Andy / Sholto, 

Is it possible  for  some  one to  quote the  actual  wording  part97 requirement ?
is this the  same  for  all  bands and or  sub-bands  etc ?

Need  the ID be in the  same  mode that  is  being  used ,  or  part of therein ?

Tnx-Graham.




M5AKA
 

I feel it unlikely FCC would take a dim view of someone fully complying with the Part 97 ID requirement.

In your earlier post you can the impression CW IDs were "legal" requirements, they are not.

But if someone really wants to add an extra ID in CW to all their digital transmissions then they can, even though it in unnecessary.

73 Trevor M5AKA



Virus-free. www.avg.com

On Tuesday, 6 March 2018, 15:55, Sholto Fisher <sholto.fisher@...> wrote:


Hi Trevor,

I'm aware that IDs can be done in the mode itself but if there's no way of monitoring the ID I'm sure the FCC would take a dim view of it.
After all what's the point of an ID if there is no ready method to observe it? Shouldn't be a problem though if there's going to be a CW ID in the software.

Going back to Andy's point, during long Pactor message transfers (like a WX fax) does the Winlink software ID every 10 minutes for both the RMS and client? I always assumed it did but now I'm not sure.

I'm fairly sure it does in WinMOR.

73

Sholto
K7TMG



M5AKA
 

Graham, the latest version of § 97.119 Station identification is at


73 Trevor M5AKA


On Tuesday, 6 March 2018, 16:26, Graham <g0nbd@...> wrote:


Andy / Sholto, 

Is it possible  for  some  one to  quote the  actual  wording  part97 requirement ?
is this the  same  for  all  bands and or  sub-bands  etc ?

Need  the ID be in the  same  mode that  is  being  used ,  or  part of therein ?

Tnx-Graham.





Virus-free. www.avg.com


Sholto Fisher
 

Trevor,

I don't think an ID sent in a mode (without the possibility of reasonably being able to monitor it) is in the spirit of Part 97 even if you insist it is fully complying with the regulations. I can easily imagine the FCC would turn this argument on its head and suggest that if you are unable to ID a particular mode then it is up to the operator to decide its legality under Part 97 and whether or not to use it.

It just seems common sense to me that authors of digital modes (to be used in the Amateur service) would ensure an easy method of monitoring transmissions.

I am fully aware that CW IDs are not legal requirements but it seems reasonable that if there is no chance of identifying a transmission using the software itself a CW ID does makes sense.

73

Sholto
K7TMG


Graham
 


Tnx Walter  

Ok....That's the  codes  and  cypher clause ,  as every one  can  download the  same  software , that  get's round  the  issue of 'obscurement' ...  so  far so  good , not aimed at disclosure of the source  code , that's  under  IP rites etc 

However , in the  link Trevor  provided , there  may be a  catch ,   

If I'm  correct,  the  part97  defines as to  which  modes  and  emissions  may be  used in  what  part of the  bands ,  if the  section  is  defined  as  ''data''  then  using a  CW   ID  is  not to the  word of the  regulation's ?   ''emission authorized for the transmitting channel''

''The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways:''

Would  that  imply  ID to  be a DATA  transmission ''only''  in a data  section  of the  band ???

Tnx -G,


M5AKA
 

"if the  section  is  defined  as  ''data''  then  using a  CW   ID  is  not to the  word of the  regulation's"

Graham, US amateurs can, if they really want to, ID in CW as well the mode they are using. The FCC don't prohibit it, CW is permitted everywhere, see §97.305 Authorized emission types:

(a) Except as specified elsewhere in this part, an amateur station may transmit a CW emission on any frequency authorized to the control operator.


73 Trevor M5AKA



On Tuesday, 6 March 2018, 17:19, Graham <g0nbd@...> wrote:



Tnx Walter  

Ok....That's the  codes  and  cypher clause ,  as every one  can  download the  same  software , that  get's round  the  issue of 'obscurement' ...  so  far so  good , not aimed at disclosure of the source  code , that's  under  IP rites etc 

However , in the  link Trevor  provided , there  may be a  catch ,   

If I'm  correct,  the  part97  defines as to  which  modes  and  emissions  may be  used in  what  part of the  bands ,  if the  section  is  defined  as  ''data''  then  using a  CW   ID  is  not to the  word of the  regulation's ?   ''emission authorized for the transmitting channel''

''The call sign must be transmitted with an emission authorized for the transmitting channel in one of the following ways:''

Would  that  imply  ID to  be a DATA  transmission ''only''  in a data  section  of the  band ???

Tnx -G,




Virus-free. www.avg.com


Graham
 

Thank's Trevor ,  perhaps reached the  same  , by differing  paths . 

The  next version of  VARA , will  have  a  selectable  CW  identification , which would  appear to follow the  consensus as to  station  ID 

Though, I am minded, Where  as  CW is  universally  permitted,  from the link,  119-b-[3] , there is a  mode continuity requirement , in terms of
station ID. 

73-G,