SBARC-list

sbarc-list@lists.netlojix.com

3 participants
2727 discussions

Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems
by Rod - Traveling 14 Mar '15

14 Mar '15

Hello Walt, I fully understand your frustration with our lack of constructive action. I have not given up, but will try this different approach. I appreciate your interest in the past and your efforts to clarify and highlight the need and try to motivate us to take action. That has been helpful and provides motivation to move forward. It is with sincere regret that my efforts have been ineffective to date. I know that you supported my efforts. I just fell short, though admittedly, this isn’t something that one person can implement. I wish you and Jayne all the best and hope that someday, your dream (our dream) of an effective emergency service system will be realized. Your friend, Rod WB9KMO From: Walt Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 10:43 PM To: Alain Michel ; mailto:rfritz22@cox.net ; William Talanian ; sbarc list Cc: 'WB6RDV' ; Jay Hennigan Subject: Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems Greetings: Three years ago, Jayne and I rekindled our interest in SBARC (Jayne and our son were members back in 1978) because we hoped that he club would be useful in case of an emergency, especially an earthquake. WE have been trying unsuccessfully to interest club members and ARRL for almost three years about doing something about the matter. We have expressed our disappointment that neither ARRL or SBARC was interested in taking effective steps to establish some sort of effective emergency procedure. At this point Jayne has lost all interest in Amateur Radio, and I have developed other interests to which I intend to dedicate all my efforts, so, Rod, count us out. Walt From: Alain Michel Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 4:00 PM To: mailto:rfritz22@cox.net ; William Talanian ; sbarc list Cc: 'WB6RDV' ; Jay Hennigan Subject: Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems " When I ask, "how do we get help when the big one hits?", the answer is always, "dial 911"." Hi Rod, I don't mean to sound impertinent but that's funny; "call 911". Both my wife and I are FEMA trained CERT instructors down here in San Diego County; we instruct our students that if they follow the "disaster preparedness" we outline, they may not need 911. First responders are going to be sooo overwhelmed that the fire, EMT's and law enforcement that Santa Barbara current enjoys, may very well be deployed elsewhere [if damage is just light to moderate] to cities [Ventura and elsewhere] where the damage may be much more severe. For at least the first 72 hours, folks are going to be on their own---prepared or not. We instruct our citizens to be prepared for 7 days...minimum. Late last year, I was listening to L.A.'s KNX 1070 AM radio station. A reporter was interviewing an L.A. fire chief who was retiring. She asked him how well LA County "first responders" were prepared to handle another Northridge or a Landers? His response? "There are about 10,000 first responders [emt's & firefighters] for 4 million people---you do the math." I must say that I am a bit surprised there there are not more SBARC folks chiming in... Vry 73 de Alan...N6HPO Valley Center C.E.R.T. WWW.VCFPDCERT.ORG On Thursday, March 12, 2015 8:42 AM, "Rod Fritz (rod(a)sbatv.org)" <rfritz22(a)cox.net> wrote: Thank you Andy and Bill. I was delighted to see your article. It clearly states some concerns that I have and have likewise tried to work around, as you have. One important contention of mine comes to mind. That's the vulnerability and limitations of the 911 system. When I ask, "how do we get help when the big one hits?", the answer is always, "dial 911". As you have just illustrated, that may not work. Furthermore, even if it does, I contend that 911 access and access to resources may quickly be saturated and ineffective. This rings of "best effort" again. Legislators might admit we can't afford a perfect system (or maybe even an excellent or very good one?). As the currently common (I hate it) reply goes, "it is what it is." Worse yet, when access to resources is limited, who gets them? I leave it to your imagination how this would play out but I contend that individual citizens are on the bottom of the list. I recognize and applaud CERT for what they are doing to prepare citizens. They are an important part of the solution but they don't address the communication that is necessary. I know they're working to improve in this area and we ought to assist them in this regard. Consider ham radio as a partial solution... I want to preface this by saying that I believe that ARES is a valuable resource. ARES is well established but it relies solely on 911 for community (citizen) input. It is my understanding that there is no plan in place for citizens to contact emergency services through ARES. ARES is subservient to the government and the 911 system. I believe that ARES could be structured to better serve the citizens of the community, but it is what it is. I welcome any changes that would make the ARES structure serve citizens better. And then there's SBARC... SBARC has incredible potential to serve the citizens of the community and we're already part way there. We need to stop relying solely on ARES for amateur radio emergency services. We need to help more citizens become "active" radio amateurs. How about at least one per city block? We need to establish an end to end plan with real redundancy to connect citizens to services they need, even when conventional means don't work. This would use a diversity of communication types and paths, not only ham radio. I think several of us have good ideas how we can make this work well and I know it is needed and would be oh so valuable when the big one hits. Details are beyond the scope of this email but I propose an SBARC Emergency Service committee to make it happen. As an SBARC Board member, I will attempt to establish this committee. Which of you would like to participate? 73, Rod Fritz, WB9KMO -------- Original message -------- From: William Talanian <w1uuq(a)cox.net> Date: 03/12/2015 7:22 AM (GMT-06:00) To: sbarc list <sbarc-list(a)lists.netlojix.com> Subject: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems Think it can't happen? <http://andrewseybold.com/3539-it-cant-happen-to-me> _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5646 / Virus Database: 4306/9283 - Release Date: 03/12/15

8 11

Re: [Sbarc-list] ARES activation needs, was: Redundant systems
by Rod Fritz (rod＠sbatv.org) 13 Mar '15

13 Mar '15

Because of current activities that local hams participate in and our robust infrastructure (even simplex is notable), SBARC participants are already reasonably prepared to step up when needed in an emergency. An ad hoc group of hams could quickly network as we do for public service events and provide useful communication. We are ready now, but could be much better prepared to serve. Important first questions are 1) who would welcome the benefits of our service, and 2) what valuable services could we provide? - Rod -------- Original message -------- From: Jay Hennigan <jay(a)west.net> Date: 03/13/2015 1:25 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Thorsten von Eicken <tve(a)rightscale.com>, Rod - Traveling <rod(a)sbatv.org>, Walt <zharasty(a)verizon.net>, Alain Michel <opalockamishabob(a)yahoo.com>, William Talanian <w1uuq(a)cox.net>, sbarc list <sbarc-list(a)lists.netlojix.com> Subject: Re: [Sbarc-list] ARES activation needs, was: Redundant systems On 3/12/15 22:25, Thorsten von Eicken wrote: > I don't want to turn this thread into a long polemic, but after a couple > of years of participation with ARES I gave up because it became apparent > that local authorities were not involving us pretty much regardless of > what we could do. That was at the time of all the fires in the area and > ARES was not mobilized a single time (unless I missed something). I > didn't have the sense that it was SBARCs or ARES' fault but I'm also not > really interested in those politics anyway... My conclusion was that I > was wasting my time and I'm not trying to blame anyone here for this. > Thorsten I can see both sides of the coin. ARES and SBARC have value in case of a *telecommunications* emergency. We aren't firefighters, we aren't paramedics, we aren't traffic cops, we aren't mountain rescue people. At least we aren't in the context of ARES and SBARC although some of us may be as individuals. If the landline, cellular and public safety voice and fixed and mobile data networks are operational during a fire, we probably shouldn't be mobilized. We kind of went down that road many years ago with close ties to Search and Rescue where ARES was activated very frequently in cases where there was no need for communicators. Eventually both groups realized that there wasn't a need. Andy's example of the Centurylink fiber cut in Arizona is a good example of a situation where amateur radio could have been quite useful. It would be interesting to talk to the area hams and any local ARES groups to see how, if at all, they contributed. And, as Bill and others have pointed out many times, our contribution to the community in terms of what we do on our own in terms of communication systems is itself an asset, even in the absence of any emergency. In my opinion we need to toot our own horn a bit more when it comes to the things the community takes for granted such as the vessel tracking systems, weather stations, ELT receivers, and remote camera systems that SBARC provides. These are real benefits to society that people not in-the-know assume are just there "in the cloud" or are provided by the taxpayers. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay(a)impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV

1 0

Redundant systems
by William Talanian 13 Mar '15

13 Mar '15

Think it can't happen? <http://andrewseybold.com/3539-it-cant-happen-to-me>

2 2

Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems
by Rod Fritz (rod＠sbatv.org) 13 Mar '15

13 Mar '15

Thank you Andy and Bill. I was delighted to see your article. It clearly states some concerns that I have and have likewise tried to work around, as you have. One important contention of mine comes to mind. That's the vulnerability and limitations of the 911 system. When I ask, "how do we get help when the big one hits?", the answer is always, "dial 911". As you have just illustrated, that may not work. Furthermore, even if it does, I contend that 911 access and access to resources may quickly be saturated and ineffective. This rings of "best effort" again. Legislators might admit we can't afford a perfect system (or maybe even an excellent or very good one?). As the currently common (I hate it) reply goes, "it is what it is." Worse yet, when access to resources is limited, who gets them? I leave it to your imagination how this would play out but I contend that individual citizens are on the bottom of the list. I recognize and applaud CERT for what they are doing to prepare citizens. They are an important part of the solution but they don't address the communication that is necessary. I know they're working to improve in this area and we ought to assist them in this regard. Consider ham radio as a partial solution... I want to preface this by saying that I believe that ARES is a valuable resource. ARES is well established but it relies solely on 911 for community (citizen) input. It is my understanding that there is no plan in place for citizens to contact emergency services through ARES. ARES is subservient to the government and the 911 system. I believe that ARES could be structured to better serve the citizens of the community, but it is what it is. I welcome any changes that would make the ARES structure serve citizens better. And then there's SBARC... SBARC has incredible potential to serve the citizens of the community and we're already part way there. We need to stop relying solely on ARES for amateur radio emergency services. We need to help more citizens become "active" radio amateurs. How about at least one per city block? We need to establish an end to end plan with real redundancy to connect citizens to services they need, even when conventional means don't work. This would use a diversity of communication types and paths, not only ham radio. I think several of us have good ideas how we can make this work well and I know it is needed and would be oh so valuable when the big one hits. Details are beyond the scope of this email but I propose an SBARC Emergency Service committee to make it happen. As an SBARC Board member, I will attempt to establish this committee. Which of you would like to participate? 73, Rod Fritz, WB9KMO -------- Original message -------- From: William Talanian <w1uuq(a)cox.net> Date: 03/12/2015 7:22 AM (GMT-06:00) To: sbarc list <sbarc-list(a)lists.netlojix.com> Subject: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems Think it can't happen? <http://andrewseybold.com/3539-it-cant-happen-to-me> _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list

3 2

Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems
by Rod - Traveling 13 Mar '15

13 Mar '15

Hello Alain, Thank you for your valuable background info. I am CERT trained and greatly value that knowledge and the simulation experience I gained. This training is very important in the first few days of a disaster, as you say. I highly recommend that every citizen complete this training, the more, the better. Even one person trained and prepared in a neighborhood can make a critical life-saving difference. If a citizen needs help, 911 is generally the only game in town in their minds. CERT presents a practical option if 911 doesn’t fill the citizen’s need. They need to be aware of this though. I suggest that if a citizen doesn’t attend CERT training themselves, they better at least acquaint themselves with someone who does. Keep up your good work. Let’s get the message out and activate as many people as we can. Thank you, Rod From: Alain Michel Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 6:00 PM To: mailto:rfritz22@cox.net ; William Talanian ; sbarc list Cc: 'WB6RDV' ; Jay Hennigan Subject: Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems " When I ask, "how do we get help when the big one hits?", the answer is always, "dial 911"." Hi Rod, I don't mean to sound impertinent but that's funny; "call 911". Both my wife and I are FEMA trained CERT instructors down here in San Diego County; we instruct our students that if they follow the "disaster preparedness" we outline, they may not need 911. First responders are going to be sooo overwhelmed that the fire, EMT's and law enforcement that Santa Barbara current enjoys, may very well be deployed elsewhere [if damage is just light to moderate] to cities [Ventura and elsewhere] where the damage may be much more severe. For at least the first 72 hours, folks are going to be on their own---prepared or not. We instruct our citizens to be prepared for 7 days...minimum. Late last year, I was listening to L.A.'s KNX 1070 AM radio station. A reporter was interviewing an L.A. fire chief who was retiring. She asked him how well LA County "first responders" were prepared to handle another Northridge or a Landers? His response? "There are about 10,000 first responders [emt's & firefighters] for 4 million people---you do the math." I must say that I am a bit surprised there there are not more SBARC folks chiming in... Vry 73 de Alan...N6HPO Valley Center C.E.R.T. WWW.VCFPDCERT.ORG On Thursday, March 12, 2015 8:42 AM, "Rod Fritz (rod(a)sbatv.org)" <rfritz22(a)cox.net> wrote: Thank you Andy and Bill. I was delighted to see your article. It clearly states some concerns that I have and have likewise tried to work around, as you have. One important contention of mine comes to mind. That's the vulnerability and limitations of the 911 system. When I ask, "how do we get help when the big one hits?", the answer is always, "dial 911". As you have just illustrated, that may not work. Furthermore, even if it does, I contend that 911 access and access to resources may quickly be saturated and ineffective. This rings of "best effort" again. Legislators might admit we can't afford a perfect system (or maybe even an excellent or very good one?). As the currently common (I hate it) reply goes, "it is what it is." Worse yet, when access to resources is limited, who gets them? I leave it to your imagination how this would play out but I contend that individual citizens are on the bottom of the list. I recognize and applaud CERT for what they are doing to prepare citizens. They are an important part of the solution but they don't address the communication that is necessary. I know they're working to improve in this area and we ought to assist them in this regard. Consider ham radio as a partial solution... I want to preface this by saying that I believe that ARES is a valuable resource. ARES is well established but it relies solely on 911 for community (citizen) input. It is my understanding that there is no plan in place for citizens to contact emergency services through ARES. ARES is subservient to the government and the 911 system. I believe that ARES could be structured to better serve the citizens of the community, but it is what it is. I welcome any changes that would make the ARES structure serve citizens better. And then there's SBARC... SBARC has incredible potential to serve the citizens of the community and we're already part way there. We need to stop relying solely on ARES for amateur radio emergency services. We need to help more citizens become "active" radio amateurs. How about at least one per city block? We need to establish an end to end plan with real redundancy to connect citizens to services they need, even when conventional means don't work. This would use a diversity of communication types and paths, not only ham radio. I think several of us have good ideas how we can make this work well and I know it is needed and would be oh so valuable when the big one hits. Details are beyond the scope of this email but I propose an SBARC Emergency Service committee to make it happen. As an SBARC Board member, I will attempt to establish this committee. Which of you would like to participate? 73, Rod Fritz, WB9KMO -------- Original message -------- From: William Talanian <w1uuq(a)cox.net> Date: 03/12/2015 7:22 AM (GMT-06:00) To: sbarc list <sbarc-list(a)lists.netlojix.com> Subject: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems Think it can't happen? <http://andrewseybold.com/3539-it-cant-happen-to-me> _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list

1 0

Response to Rod's Email
by Andrew Seybold 12 Mar '15

12 Mar '15

Rod, thanks for the comments on redundant communications. And you are correct on a number of things. First of all, ARES, for all intents and purposes is non-existent in the County, I don't think that the meaning of that has sunk into the SBARC yet-ALL of our communications sites are because of ARES and not SBARC. Next up is that SBARC has, and has had, a tool for CERT and Homeowners available for over 4 years. I donated a GMRS repeater to the club and it is up and installed at the TZ site, it has a multi-PL tone deck in it so that different organizations can share it IF they obtain a simple $80 FCC license. FURTHER, there is radio at the EOC radio room which is ON the GMRS station so that an organization can contact the OEC directly and vice versa. The ARES van is also at the OEC AND the new director is really interested in working with the ham radio community, at one point we had arranged for ARES to hold their Monday night radio nets from the OEC radio room but nobody ever did. CERT needs to be trained with Ham radio classes, I would recommend that someone, ARES, or SBARC or a combination, start working with the County EOC, and I believe that there is a way of combining ARES, SBARC, and RACES into a common pool of people who would respond when needed and train as needed. Just my two cents. Andy

1 0

Re: [Sbarc-list] Redundant Systems
by Rod Fritz (rod＠sbatv.org) 12 Mar '15

12 Mar '15

Thank you Andy and Bill. I was delighted to see your article. It clearly states some concerns that I have and have likewise tried to work around, as you have. One important contention of mine comes to mind. That's the vulnerability and limitations of the 911 system. When I ask, "how do we get help when the big one hits?", the answer is always, "dial 911". As you have just illustrated, that may not work. Furthermore, even if it does, I contend that 911 access and access to resources may quickly be saturated and ineffective. This rings of "best effort" again. Legislators might admit we can't afford a perfect system (or maybe even an excellent or very good one?). As the currently common (I hate it) reply goes, "it is what it is." Worse yet, when access to resources is limited, who gets them? I leave it to your imagination how this would play out but I contend that individual citizens are on the bottom of the list. I recognize and applaud CERT for what they are doing to prepare citizens. They are an important part of the solution but they don't address the communication that is necessary. I know they're working to improve in this area and we ought to assist them in this regard. Consider ham radio as a partial solution... I want to preface this by saying that I believe that ARES is a valuable resource. ARES is well established but it relies solely on 911 for community (citizen) input. It is my understanding that there is no plan in place for citizens to contact emergency services through ARES. ARES is subservient to the government and the 911 system. I believe that ARES could be structured to better serve the citizens of the community, but it is what it is. I welcome any changes that would make the ARES structure serve citizens better. And then there's SBARC... SBARC has incredible potential to serve the citizens of the community and we're already part way there. We need to stop relying solely on ARES for amateur radio emergency services. We need to help more citizens become "active" radio amateurs. How about at least one per city block? We need to establish an end to end plan with real redundancy to connect citizens to services they need, even when conventional means don't work. This would use a diversity of communication types and paths, not only ham radio. I think several of us have good ideas how we can make this work well and I know it is needed and would be oh so valuable when the big one hits. Details are beyond the scope of this email but I propose an SBARC Emergency Service committee to make it happen. As an SBARC Board member, I will attempt to establish this committee. Which of you would like to participate? 73, Rod Fritz, WB9KMO -------- Original message -------- From: William Talanian <w1uuq(a)cox.net> Date: 03/12/2015 7:22 AM (GMT-06:00) To: sbarc list <sbarc-list(a)lists.netlojix.com> Subject: [Sbarc-list] Redundant systems Think it can't happen? <http://andrewseybold.com/3539-it-cant-happen-to-me>; _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list(a)lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list

1 0

Vessel Speed Reduction Program
by William Talanian 04 Mar '15

04 Mar '15

To: Recipients While not stated here in these documents the Santa Barbara Channel Speed Reduction Program secures part of its tracking date from two SBARC Automatic Identification System (AIS) receiving stations. One AIS station is mounted on the Mesa next to the 19/79 repeater. The other is mounted on Santa Ynez Peak. To see ships in the SB Channel go to <http://www.marinetraffic.com/>. There are two additional AIS receivers. One at UCSB and one operated by NOAA NMS on Santa Cruz Island. This is a worldwide system of tracking commercial shipping, passenger vessels, and small boats (Class B). SBARC systems are tagged as SBARC-SBA for the Mesa and SBARC-SYP for Santa Ynez Peak. I am proud to say we have maintained a 99% availability around the clock for many months at a time. Thanks go to John Franklin, K6LUA, for hosting this data which is forwarded to Greece where the data is processed and the main Server is located.

1 0

Re: [Sbarc-list] FCC morse statement
by Tony Armendariz 28 Feb '15

28 Feb '15

This http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imp… - --- -.. .- -.-- .----. ... -.. . -.-. .. ... .. --- -. -... -.-- - .... . ..-. -.-. -.-. - --- . -. -.-. ..- — - ….. translates using the following translater: http://morsecode.scphillips.com/translator.html TODAY'SDECISIONBYTHEFCCTOENCUMBERBROADBANDINTERNETSERVICESWITHBADLYANTIQUATEDREGULATIONSISARADICALSTEPTHATPRESAGESATIMEOFUNCERTAINTYFORCONSUMERS,INNOVATORSANDINVESTORS.OVERTHEPASTTWODECADESABIPARTISAN,LIGHT-TOUCHPOLICYAPPROACHUNLEASHEDUNPRECEDENTEDINVESTMENTANDENABLEDTHEBROADBANDINTERNETAGECONSUMERSNOWENJOY.THEFCCTODAYCHOSETOCHANGETHEWAYTHECOMMERCIALINTERNETHASOPERATEDSINCEITSCREATION.CHANGINGAPLATFORMTHATHASBEENSOSUCCESSFULSHOULDBEDONE,IFATALL,ONLYAFTERCAREFULPOLICYANALYSIS,FULLTRANSPARENCY,ANDBYTHELEGISLATURE,WHICHISCONSTITUTIONALLYCHARGEDWITHDETERMININGPOLICY.ASARESULT,ITISLIKELYTHATHISTORYWILLJUDGETODAY'SACTIONSASMISGUIDED.THEFCC'SMOVEISESPECIALLYREGRETTABLEBECAUSEITISWHOLLYUNNECESSARY.THEFCCHADTARGETEDTOOLSAVAILABLETOPRESERVEANOPENINTERNET,BUTINSTEADCHOSETOUSETHISORDERASANEXCUSETOADOPT300-PLUSPAGESOFBROADANDOPEN-ENDEDREGULATORYARCANATHATWILLHAVEUNINTENDEDNEGATIVECONSEQUENCESFORCONSUMERSANDVARIOUSPARTSOFTHEINTERNETECOSYSTEMFORYEARSTOCOME.WHATHASBEENANDWILLREMAINCONSTANTBEFORE,DURINGANDAFTERTHEEXISTENCEOFANYREGULATIONSISVERIZON'SCOMMITMENTTOANOPENINTERNETTHATPROVIDESCONSUMERSWITHCOMPETITIVEBROADBANDCHOICESANDINTERNETACCESSWHEN,WHERE,ANDHOWTHEYWANT. The spacing isn't good, but the text makes sense. 73, Tony, AD6ID Tony Armendariz ad6idham(a)gmail.com 805-264-1132 On Feb 28, 2015, at 12:00 , sbarc-list-request(a)lists.netlojix.com wrote: > > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 15:51:03 -0800 > From: Jay Hennigan <jay(a)west.net> > To: sbarc <sbarc-list(a)west.net> > Subject: [Sbarc-list] Verizon's statement on net neutrality - Can you > read it? > Message-ID: <54F102E7.4030600(a)west.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imp… > > -- > -- > Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay(a)impulse.net

1 0

Verizon's statement on net neutrality - Can you read it?
by Jay Hennigan 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imp… -- -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay(a)impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

SBARC-list