On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 18:31 -0700, John D. Hays wrote: > It may be splitting hairs, but would you consider it infrastructure, > if the server and access point (not repeater) was self contained, > having uninterruptable power supplies (with generator backup), and not > dependent on an external network? If not, why?
Yes, still infrastructure. I would consider infrastructure to be anything that is used to connect two stations, other than the stations themselves. Consider the effect of losing that repeater for whatever reason - you would lose the "wide area network covering most of the city" that Mike was talking about. In my opinion, the value of amateur radio as an emergency communications system is that we are able to form an ad-hoc network that can operate without infrastructure, using whichever operators and whatever equipment survives a disaster to communicate. Repeaters are useful as long as they aren't relied on. It sounds like Mike's group has thought about this and planned for it. Brian
