Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mb04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 476A53800009C; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 07:30:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U49Yj-0004ma-PE for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 12:29:33 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U49Yj-0004mR-9e for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 12:29:33 +0000 Received: from eterpe-smout.broadpark.no ([80.202.8.16]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U49Yh-0000aB-LG for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 12:29:32 +0000 Received: from ignis-smin.broadpark.no ([80.202.8.11]) by eterpe-smout.broadpark.no (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) with ESMTP id <0MHY0062HDCMYK30@eterpe-smout.broadpark.no> for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 13:29:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([84.48.126.39]) by ignis-smin.broadpark.no (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) with ESMTPA id <0MHY000NVDCKDS90@ignis-smin.broadpark.no> for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 13:29:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 13:29:08 +0100 From: Steinar Aanesland In-reply-to: <51151485.8000602@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org, "*rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk" Message-id: <51164114.9090305@broadpark.no> MIME-version: 1.0 References: <33a081ba8fa54d99adcf8022fbb0c07b@kabelmail.de> <981c2fdebe29e7ff448a2bfb7bf53238@sensemail.ch> <1360312446.81440.YahooMailNeo@web133202.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <51151485.8000602@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 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: Hi all, I am a member of NRRL, but this comes as a BIG BIG surprise to me . I have read almost all the info my organization is sending to me but this proposal I have never seen. I can't remember this being discussed in my local NRRL group (LA3F) either. This is very strange. [...] 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 [80.202.8.16 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 7ab87d4d3ea1d9dcb73a78e83fe4d608 Subject: Re: LF: NRRL proposal for a 630m Band Plan Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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: 3039ac1d60185116416c3a4d X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi all, I am a member of NRRL, but this comes as a BIG BIG surprise to me . I have read almost all the info my organization is sending to me but th= is proposal I have never seen. I can't remember this being discussed in my local NRRL group (LA3F) either. This is very strange. (sorry for the cross posting) LA5VNA Steinar spam filtering: STRONG >> >> 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 =96 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 =96 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, afte= r >> considering >> experiences. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >=20