[HN Gopher] Unlicensed Radio
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Unlicensed Radio
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 52 points
       Date   : 2022-04-14 19:10 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (computer.rip)
 (TXT) w3m dump (computer.rip)
        
       | karteum wrote:
       | For people interested in regulation in EU/CEPT area, unlicensed
       | bands (ISM and SRD) are captured in ERC 70-03, where you can see
       | the bands and associated limitations (in terms of EIRP, Duty-
       | Cyle, and other things)
       | https://docdb.cept.org/download/25c41779-cd6e/Rec7003e.pdf
       | 
       | Annex 1 is about generic SRD. The other annexes are about other
       | bands and/or more favourable conditions for specific
       | applications. This may seem complex and over-regulated, but there
       | is a good reason for that :
       | 
       | - CEPT cares that all applications get a fair chance to access
       | the spectrum (not just "the technology which emits the strongest
       | signal") : for example, all Wi-SUN equipments (APs, relays and
       | end nodes) can emit up to 500 mW (with power-control) while Lora
       | end nodes have a 25 mW transmit power. Technical studies and
       | simulations have shown that Lora (and siblings) would not survive
       | if wi-sun was going to be widely deployed, and this is one reason
       | why some parts of the bands for networked SRD have a 25 mW
       | limitation while other parts are less constrained.
       | 
       | - those "additional opportunities" in other annexes are made
       | based on dedicated technical studies (to check the impact on
       | adjacent bands/services) that do a lot of assumptions with
       | regards to potential/future densities of devices (because what
       | matters if often the aggregated interference, not just the one
       | from a single device)
        
       | nullc wrote:
       | > Twitter.com still takes 10 seconds to render 140 characters of
       | text, but it's getting that text at the better part of a gigabit
       | per second!
       | 
       | Assuming your phone is laying on top of the access point. :P
       | 
       | Some of the distances for higher speeds are so short that I
       | wonder if we need new terms for 'wireless' (there is no wire) vs
       | 'untethered' (you're not stuck at a specific location).
        
       | ranger207 wrote:
       | > Everyone grumbles about Baofeng people, but I've had some
       | contact with rural police and fire departments and you would be
       | amazed at the things their "radio technician" (chief's nephew)
       | thinks are a good idea.
       | 
       | @jcrawfordor, what kind of bad ideas have you heard of here?
        
         | Animats wrote:
         | He's talking about these: [1]
         | 
         | They're cheap VHF FM analog handheld radios. Prices start
         | around US$30. They can emit on the 462 MHz and 467 MHz Family
         | Radio Service and General Mobile Radio Service bands, usable by
         | anyone in the US and. That's fine. They can also emit in
         | amateur radio bands, at higher power (8 watts claimed), which
         | requires a ham license. The device controls do not make much of
         | a distinction between the two modes. They're often used in the
         | ham bands by non-hams, mostly preppers, hunters, militias, and
         | people who own too much camo. This annoys radio hams.
         | 
         | [1] https://baofengradio.us/
        
           | sbierwagen wrote:
           | GMRS is not unlicensed. A license currently costs $70, is
           | good for ten years, and can only be used by you and your
           | immediate family.
           | 
           | Baofengs are not type certified for FRS or GMRS, since their
           | transmission power is too high and the antennas are not
           | permanently attached. It is illegal to use them on those
           | frequencies, even if you have a ham or GMRS license, though
           | enforcement is nonexistent.
        
         | jcrawfordor wrote:
         | In my experience it used to be common for rural PDs and FDs to
         | just have every frequency someone could think of, within band,
         | programmed into their radios regardless of authorization. I've
         | even seen a rural PD distribute amateur radios to unlicensed
         | officers as part of very half-thought-out emcomm plan.
         | 
         | This is getting less common these days as more and more rural
         | public safety organizations transition to state-run trunking
         | networks.
        
       | akira2501 wrote:
       | > Because the ISM bands were basically reserved to be a no-man's
       | land that non-communications devices could freely emit into,
       | there are no licensing requirements for ISM emissions.
       | 
       | Just because there are no formal licensing requirements does not
       | mean that an implied license doesn't exist, nor does it mean that
       | there are no rules. The ISM bands have for a very long time had
       | both transmitter and antenna power limits attached to them.
       | 
       | What I think is missing in this article is an understanding that
       | all RF spectrum belongs to the public. The FCC does not own it,
       | it licenses parts of it for coordination so that the spectrum is
       | _usable_ by the public at large. They operate the spectrum on
       | _behalf_ of the public, and their decisions and procedures are
       | based entirely around this concept.
        
         | GekkePrutser wrote:
         | In Europe there's not only power limitations but also duty
         | cycle on some bands. Eg on 868Mhz you can only transmit 1% of
         | the time.
         | 
         | I don't think the equivalent US band of 915Mhz has this, and it
         | has a much higher maximum power which is really nice. Wish we
         | had something like this here.
        
           | vvanders wrote:
           | Yep, you can see this if you go poke into LoRa and associated
           | protocols. 915MHz does have some restrictions on either using
           | spread spectrum, frequency hopping or much lower power limits
           | so it's still quite different than say the ham bands.
        
           | Terry_Roll wrote:
           | Yes the Europeans give away some of their knowledge when
           | looking at radio spectrums, the recent 5G bands causing
           | problems with aircraft at airports in the US is one such
           | example of forward planning or lack of.
        
           | CraigJPerry wrote:
           | There's also listen-before-talk rules for devices in certain
           | ISM bands in the EU. Affects at least LTE, Wifi and a few
           | other users in 5.8ghz
        
         | jcrawfordor wrote:
         | Yes, the limitations are due to device certification under part
         | 15. However, this is in no way an implied license, as "license"
         | has specific meaning within the context of various parts of the
         | FCC regulations. Part 15 covers unlicensed radiators, so
         | essentially "licensed" and "part 15" are antonyms. This is most
         | significant in that licensing almost always implies some degree
         | of protection from interference (although it may be rather
         | limited), while part 15 devices receive no such protection...
         | when someone interferes with your WiFi, you cannot complain to
         | the FCC (there's some recourse related to the legality of
         | devices, but you cannot for example seek a license modification
         | to address the interference as licensed users generally can to
         | some degree). The existence of "soft licensed" services such as
         | the part 95 services somewhat complicates this as there are
         | services like family radio service (part 95B) that are
         | "licensed by rule," meaning that there _is_ an implicit
         | license, but that somewhat illustrates the point: part 95B
         | radios like the common consumer Motorolas and Midlands are
         | implicitly licensed, WiFi is not! FRS has (limited) regulatory
         | protection from interference, WiFi does not. FRS has
         | limitations on nature of usage, Part 15 has none, but the
         | device must be certified to meet part 15 specs for emissions.
         | 
         | The whole "part 15" thing gets more into device certification,
         | which I mentioned in the post I will discuss in the future as
         | it's a topic all of its own. The history of part 15 device
         | certification is closely related to the history of the ISM
         | bands in some ways, but they are not 1:1, as part 15 covers
         | both unintentional/incidental radiators (essentially all
         | electronic devices) as well as intentional radiators which do
         | not have a license... microwave ovens and WiFi are the
         | quintessential examples of the latter.
         | 
         | It is of course obvious that RF spectrum belongs to the public,
         | but in the US it is regulated by both the FCC and the NTIA
         | depending on the user and the importance of the ITU cannot be
         | understated as many of these services have at least partial
         | international coordination. Certain radio licenses in the US
         | will also require the approval of either Industry Canada or
         | Mexico's IFT, although this is required under FCC regulations
         | some of which implement treaty obligations. That said, I live
         | in the US and am not a radio technician in the federal
         | government (which is generally exempt from FCC regulations), so
         | I tend to stick to what I know best: 47 CFR! It's also
         | important to understand that in most cases the FCC _does not_
         | coordinate spectrum usage on a level more granular than
         | services and instead leaves it to other government agencies or
         | private organizations, within the scope of each service. Part
         | 90 is an interesting example, which is FCC licensed on a
         | frequency level but coordinated by private companies for profit
         | (the FCC just approves whatever frequency the private frequency
         | coordinator recommends). I 'll probably write on this in the
         | future.
        
         | h2odragon wrote:
         | > all RF spectrum belongs to the public. The FCC does not own
         | it,
         | 
         | I wish the FCC and more radio enthusiasts also understood that.
         | Its amazing how many epochal inventions in radio have come to
         | the public through getting around the FCC one way or another.
        
       | drmpeg wrote:
       | > There's good news: 5GHz is not an ISM band.
       | 
       | Part of the band is ISM. 5725 to 5875 MHz.
       | 
       | https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A...
        
       | H8crilA wrote:
       | Is 2.4GHz truly unlicensed? Could I emit 500W or more with
       | whatever modulation or lack thereof and not be prosecuted?
        
         | nullc wrote:
         | > Could I emit 500W or more with whatever modulation or lack
         | thereof and not be prosecuted
         | 
         | You could emit 500w in the 2.4GHz ISM band legally as a ham
         | radio operator, as there is an overlapping ham allocation, so
         | long as you complied with the ham requirements (which limits
         | you somewhat on the 'whatever modulation' front).
         | 
         | But why would you? You're limited to line of sight
         | communications -- far less than 500w will get you to the
         | horizon. :P The only application I can think of for 500w at
         | 2.4GHz would be moon-bounce. :)
         | 
         | Outside of the ham radio overlap, any intentional transmission
         | in that band would have to be via a type-certified device. ...
         | So it's more a question of what devices the fcc will certify
         | than what you're able to do.
        
           | H8crilA wrote:
           | Thanks for the answer (also thanks for the sibling answers),
           | I will only add one thing: why: I would like to realize a
           | dream and build my own somewhat okay radar. At some point,
           | I'm very far away from that :). And I am definitely not going
           | to endlessly ruin every neighbor's WiFi even if it's legal.
        
         | NovemberWhiskey wrote:
         | No; in the US, for example, Part 15 devices are, I think,
         | limited to a maximum of 1W transmitted power at 2.4GHz, and 4W
         | of EIRP (effective isotropic radiated power). i.e. maximum
         | antenna gain of 6dBi at full power.
         | 
         | For fixed, point-to-point installations there is a special rule
         | in effect: you can get more EIRP by having higher gain antennas
         | as long as you back off the power; e.g. you can drop down to
         | 22dBm (159mW) but have a 30dBi antenna and get 52dBm (159W) of
         | EIRP.
         | 
         | A 30dBi antenna at 2.4GHz is, by the way, something like a 1.5
         | meter diameter parabolic grid.
        
           | 8bitsrule wrote:
           | Power levels can depend on the service and region. For an
           | example in the US, this Wikipedia page outlines part 15
           | fairly completely, and links to most types of services with
           | more details:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_47_CFR_Part_15
           | 
           | E.g. I followed the link to '802.11 wireless LANs', thence to
           | to '2.4_GHz_radio_use' where I was surprised to learn that US
           | 'Amateur Radio operators can transmit [video&audio] ... in
           | the 2.4 GHz band--and all ISM frequencies above 902 MHz--with
           | maximum power of 1500 watts.'
        
             | sbierwagen wrote:
             | Back in the day Ubiquiti used to sell a bunch of radio
             | modules that let you transmit on the ham or public safety
             | bands using their wifi equipment. Presumably they also had
             | firmware that implemented the other limits. (Ham
             | transmissions can't be encrypted and must include your
             | callsign)
        
             | NovemberWhiskey wrote:
             | Right; however that's a licensed form of usage - 802.11g
             | channels 1 through 6 are all entirely within the 13cm
             | amateur band in the U.S.
        
         | jcrawfordor wrote:
         | 2.4GHz is unlicensed, but through a few different routes FCC
         | regulations prohibit operating, distributing, marketing, etc an
         | intentional radiator (and many types of
         | unintentional/incidental radiators) without an equipment
         | authorization or device certification. So the pedantic answer
         | is that you can do whatever you want in 2.4GHz but you can't do
         | it using whatever device you want, which creates limitations of
         | generally 1W as sort of the simplest answer.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-17 23:01 UTC)