Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dc03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 2004E3800008C; Fri, 8 Feb 2013 03:26:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U3jGj-0007j7-QB for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 08:25:13 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U3jGj-0007iy-0T for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 08:25:13 +0000 Received: from mail.senselan.ch ([194.153.189.2]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U3jGh-00030o-Do for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 08:25:11 +0000 Received: (qmail 9431 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2013 08:24:50 -0000 Received: from webmail.senselan.ch (traumwandler@sensemail.ch@194.153.189.10) by mail.senselan.ch with ESMTPA; 8 Feb 2013 08:24:50 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 09:24:49 +0100 From: traumwandler@sensemail.ch To: In-Reply-To: <33a081ba8fa54d99adcf8022fbb0c07b@kabelmail.de> References: <33a081ba8fa54d99adcf8022fbb0c07b@kabelmail.de> Message-ID: <981c2fdebe29e7ff448a2bfb7bf53238@sensemail.ch> X-Sender: traumwandler@sensemail.ch User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.8.1 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Are you aware of this proposal? What do you think about it? 73 de Toni, HB9ASB Recommendation From the viewpoints of NRRL we would (at the time being) like to present the following proposal for a 630 m IARU Region 1 bandplan: 472 - 479 kHz (630 m) 472 - 475 kHz CW only – maximum bandwidth 200 Hz 472.000 - 472.150 CW Beacons only (IARU coordinated) 472.150 - 472.300 CW QRSS 472.600 CW DX Calling 474.750 CW Calling 475 - 479 kHz CW + digimodes – maximum bandwidth 500 Hz Contests should be discouraged in this very narrow 630 m band where radio amateurs are secondary users. Comment: NRRL feels that it will be premature to further subdivide different digimodes. This may be better to do at the next conference, if necessary, after considering experiences. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [194.153.189.2 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Scan-Signature: 7001055fa59a9c23b9831ea6d317a074 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: LF: NRRL proposal for a 630m Band Plan X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40835114b6c73a96 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Are you aware of this proposal? What do you think about it? 73 de Toni, HB9ASB Recommendation From the viewpoints of NRRL we would (at the time being) like to present the following proposal for a 630 m IARU Region 1 bandplan: 472 - 479 kHz (630 m) 472 - 475 kHz CW only – maximum bandwidth 200 Hz 472.000 - 472.150 CW Beacons only (IARU coordinated) 472.150 - 472.300 CW QRSS 472.600 CW DX Calling 474.750 CW Calling 475 - 479 kHz CW + digimodes – maximum bandwidth 500 Hz Contests should be discouraged in this very narrow 630 m band where radio amateurs are secondary users. Comment: NRRL feels that it will be premature to further subdivide different digimodes. This may be better to do at the next conference, if necessary, after considering experiences.