On Mon, 22 Jan 2007, Ken Arck wrote: > <----Folks seem to forget that PL/DPL was never meant to be a security > feature, although it seems many Hams try to use it as one.
*BINGO* A repeater is closed by virtue of the owner saying "this is my system, screw off." -- not by hiding the access method (PL, DPL, DTMF, etc). I don't know where that myth started from but it's been wrong from day one. Requiring a PL does NOT equal a closed repeater. -- Kris Kirby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a bit longer." -- Henry Kissinger
