[HCARC] Fwd: [CTDXCC] [PVRC] PVRC Position On rm-11708, rm-11831 and 16-239

Sun Jul 7 17:59:06 EDT 2019

More discussion regarding the encryption of Winlink.
Be sure to scroll thru the entire text of the email!

73DonW4WJ

From: ctdxcc at lists.kkn.net
Reply-to: tsrwvcomm at aol.com
To: n8noe at arrl.net
Cc: lee.mcvey at prodigy.net, pvrc at mailman.qth.net, jtmiller47 at gmail.com, hdwgby at gmail.com, rkolarik at neb.rr.com, ctdxcc at lists.kkn.net, pete.n4zr at gmail.com, ab2ra at htva.net, brennanprice at verizon.net, hdwhite at charter.net, mjmarcus at marcus-spectrum.com
Sent: 7/7/2019 4:10:11 PM Central Standard Time
Subject: Re: [CTDXCC] [PVRC] PVRC Position On rm-11708, rm-11831 and 16-239

As I said 2 weeks ago, Jeff; this is widely known to have been a contrived unprotected mode, peer to peer use of Pactor.
I dispelled this false claim a few weeks ago.
Read www.pactor.com to see that this peer to peer mode is not what is used in ham radio. Winlink uses the ARQ and compression to effectively encrypt the data.

Suggest you listen carefully to episode 105 of "Ham Radio Now", and see this admission which ARRL Directors and probably you and Brennan know Full well.
This is with a Pactor modem:https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/1222718116209
Sent from smartphone, please excuse typos
On Jul 7, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Jeffrey M. Swiger <n8noe at arrl.net> wrote:

Ted and all;I have sent Links, Screen shots and more along Showing YES you CAN Decode..Has anyone Payed ANY attention to those?Again, I’ll send just a Quick link just so you might READ and run it yourself:http://www.kd0cq.com/2013/07/sorcerer-decoder-download/?fbclid=IwAR03HBolL9nMfqQFy3g4rAvJdwLVS-E2bqEyceHoN1uzTwkxWG7xEakJHWoI’m NOT so PRO PACTOR, but do use the Modes available to me and Wider Modes should be a Larger Focus eating Bands up,
and now talk of re-alocation of 144mhz band?
WAY more to think about..73 All, hope Ya’ll had a great 4th..Jeff-N8NOE

On Jul 7, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Ted via CTDXCC <ctdxcc at lists.kkn.net> wrote:

Dear Brennan, all:
Several directors and Vice directors have admitted to each other and to me in recent weeks that Pactor cannot be decoded over the air, even with a Pactor modem. I'll share the emails of admission if you wish  to see them.

I have publicly asked in front of the FCC for the ARRL board to use their w1aw station and Winlink software and Pactor modem to prove that its not effectively encrypted- in 4 moths no one has done this!
And N5AUS , a non elected director of ARRL in Texas, is reported to have admitted that Winlink data tranmissions are   effectively encrypted this also at the CTDXCC meeting on Tuesday.  So, let's please stop the charade, Brennan, that someone nearly needs to "buy a modem". That's flatly not true.
Even with an SCS modem Winlink transmissions can not be decoded for meaning.

What about the modem, or software
decoders, for Winmor, ARDOP and VARA as used by Winlink?

Where are those decoders available to anyone? They are not.
Can someone coming across a Winlink transmission start the decoding process mid-stream, or is the entire transmission
required to be copied start to finish, with no missing bits or bytes, to result in meaningful text?

Brennan, please be factual.
At the CTDXCC meeting in Tuesday in Austin, a show of hands showed UNANIMOUS support for using only openly transparentOver-the-air decoding.

We must rise up and let current arrl directors and the FCC know what we, hams in general, want and expect in honoring that principles of ham radio, as well as the FCC Part 97 rules. Let's all move to make RM-11831 a reality and get Other clubs and hams involved in letting arrl leaders and FCC know that we value openness and transparency in ham radio. This sets us apart from other radio services.
73 ted N9NB

Sent from smartphone, please excuse typos
On Jul 7, 2019, at 4:10 PM, Brennan Price via PVRC <pvrc at mailman.qth.net> wrote:

And, utterly irrelevant to the question at issue on symbol rates.
"We have a 300 baud symbol rate limit on HF because some people don't want to invest in the equipment to decipher higher rates."
In the rooms I run in professionally, that statement would, and should, get the speaker laughed out.

On Jul 7, 2019 15:58, Brennan Price <brennanprice at verizon.net> wrote:

Buy a modem.
Difficult to decide does not mean impossible to decide.

On Jul 7, 2019 15:51, Jim Miller via PVRC <pvrc at mailman.qth.net> wrote:

As I understand it the compression algorithms used result in a de facto private channel. 

Pactor would need to rewrite and reprogram its modems. 

I think that should be required of them. 

Jim ab3cv 

On Jul 7, 2019, at 3:47 PM, Pete Smith N4ZR via PVRC <pvrc at mailman.qth.net> wrote: 

And I'll bite too ... if it's the de facto encryption that is the real problem, why not add a sentence or two to the NPRM calling for any encoding process to be put in the public domain if it is to be used on the amateur bands? 

73, Pete N4ZR 
Download the new N1MM Logger+ at 
<http://N1MM.hamdocs.com>. Check 
out the Reverse Beacon Network at 
<http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster. 

> On 7/7/2019 1:35 PM, Brennan Price via PVRC wrote: 
> I'll bite. Again. 
> 
> Symbol rate limitations are inherently backwards. Outside of the amateur service rules, they are nowhere to be found in the Commission's rules, and for good reason. 
> 
> The rulemaking (16-239, which spawned from the now-supeseded PRM 11708) does no more and no less than remove these anachronisms and let radio amateurs advance the radio art unfettered. If this Thales pursuit of 144-146 MHz gets legs, do not think for a minute that the existing 19.6 kbps symbol rate limit on the band won't be used against us. 
> 
> The objections with respect to automatically controlled stations and decipherability seek to  relitigate rules automatic control rules that were settled decades ago. Whatever one thinks of the recent petition with respect to these issues (RM-11831), it is regressive to argue that the whole of amateur radio must be encumbered by a symbol rate restrictions because one or a few perceived beneficiaries of removing the restriction will do something bad. The same argument can be--and has been--made about amateur radio in general. It is a dangerous argument to adopt. 
> 
> One simply cannot support symbol rate restrictions and credibly claim not to be a Luddite. (I am not calling Ted a Luddite. To his credit, he suggested band segmentation as a way to make this work a few years back. While I think this was a solution in search of a problem, it was much more of a solution than other proponents of continued symbol rate restrictions have offered. And my admiration of Ted's strongly influential microwave work is documented and unchanged.) 
> 
> 16-239 should proceed to adoption unencumbered by further litigation on tangential issues (RM-11831). As an organization of progressive radio operators, I would expect PVRC to have a similar view. 
> 
> 73 de Brennan N4QX 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________ 
> PVRC mailing list 
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc 
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
> Post: mailto:PVRC at mailman.qth.net 
> Message delivered to pete.n4zr at gmail.com 
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
______________________________________________________________ 
PVRC mailing list 
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc 
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
Post: mailto:PVRC at mailman.qth.net 
Message delivered to jtmiller47 at gmail.com 

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
______________________________________________________________ 
PVRC mailing list 
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc 
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
Post: mailto:PVRC at mailman.qth.net 
Message delivered to brennanprice at verizon.net 

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

______________________________________________________________
PVRC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:PVRC at mailman.qth.net
Message delivered to tsrwvcomm at aol.com

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
_______________________________________________
CTDXCC mailing list
CTDXCC at lists.kkn.net
https://lists.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ctdxcc

_______________________________________________
CTDXCC mailing list
CTDXCC at lists.kkn.net
https://lists.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/ctdxcc