[W2CRA] What would make linked-repeater-networks better within the Amateur Service? (fwd)

[Art Greenberg]

Just received ...

Does anyone care to respond to Mr. Elkin on behalf of CRA?

I wonder if he has a business interest in VoIP systems. A quick check of 
"www.webetize.com" reveals:

-  A post related to software development and deployment methodologies (c) 
2004.  Old hat by now.

- A post having to do with the Sun Microsystems - Microsoft "dispute" also 
(c) 2004. That's long enough ago that I don't recall the dispute referred 
to.

-- 
Art Greenberg
artg at eclipse.net

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:07:50 -0400
From: Keith <keith at Webetize.com>
To: WebmasterW2CRA at gmail.com
Subject: What would make linked-repeater-networks better within the Amateur
     Service?

Cherryville Repeater Association

What would make linked-repeater-networks better within the Amateur Service?

If I understand it correctly the ARRL sees lone repeaters the same as 
linked-repeater-networks. I strongly disagree with such a statement and would 
like to hear from the linked-repeater-network community on the subject. VoIP is 
changing the telephone network at a rapid pace and I believe that VoIP is 
changing the Amateur Service. I would like to see that VoIP continues in the 
same Amateur tradition of a  unique and wonderful openness that encourages 
invention and comradery.

If you have any comments on the use of VoIP and linked-repeater-networks and 
what would make their use better within the Amateur Service, I appreciate 
hearing from you.

Respectfully,

Keith Elkin KB3TCB

http://www.qsl.net/w2cra/