The problem is that he said that ROS uses FHSS in the documentation. If the
final version doesn't use FHSS, DSSS or any other form of SS and a technical
specification is published the FCC will have no objection.
73,
John
KD6OZH
----- Original Message -----
From: Rik van Riel
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 03:37 UTC
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Consensus? Is ROS Legal in US?`
On 02/23/2010 10:22 PM, John B. Stephensen wrote:
> These modes use interleaving and randomize data values by
> exclusive-ORing with a pseudorandom binary sequence. The methods are
> used in most commerial products and the FCC and NSA know how to monitor
> the signals.
However, this does result in carrier placement also being
somewhat randomized. Maybe not in exactly the same way
as true spread spectrum, since the carrier position is
still somewhat dependent on the data content.
On the other hand, from the ROS documentation it appears
that the carrier location in ROS is also still dependent
on data content (as well as a pseudo-random sequence).
Carrier location it ROS is, as far as I can tell (Jose will
know for sure), dependent on both the data being transmitted
and the pseudo-random sequence being used.
> The FCCs problem is that the military uses FHSS and DSSS to hide the
> existance and content of their transmissions thus preventing the
> monitoring that the FCC is required to do of amateur signals.
That could be a problem with ROS, as long as the protocol
specification is unknown. However, once the protocol has
been finalized and the specification made public, monitoring
ROS communications will be easy.
--
All rights reversed.
