[BC] The real answer for EAS

[towers at mre.com]

As I just posted on EAS, RDS as a system is technically robust.  It's the
manner in which it's implimented which has left it to be a neglected step
child.

I agree with Warren that ANYTHING relying on the public internet for
distribution is a failure point. When it comes of EMA, RADIO links
(private or public) are the only reliable medium on which to convey
information.  Nothing wired (telco).  These so called "public alerting"
services which rely on servers across the continent are a rip-off to not
only the local governments, but the public which blindly relies on them
when the goings get tough.

I have been approached by a few operators about our stations relaying and
I plainly told them that anything coming into our facilty for distribution
will come in by radio direct from the local agency. Not IP. I do not want
that responsability of keeping a DSL or T-1 circuit running regardless of
who pays for it. The conversation pretty much ends at that point.

In that regard, CAP by IP is a failed distribution mode even before it's
deployed.

MM



> While I agree with you on NOAA weather radio, I disagree on RDS.
> As RDS has been rolled out in Europe, it is fantastic, and robust.
> In the USA, not so much, but it could be.
> Don't dismiss RDS because of the way it is done here.
>
> --chip
>
> On Oct 9, 2009, at 1:15 PM, broadcast-request at radiolists.net wrote:
>
>> Message: 14
>> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:08:56 -0700
>> From: "Warren Shulz" <warren.shulz at citcomm.com>
>> Subject: Re: [BC] The real answer for EAS
>>
>> RDS requires a stable backbone for distribution.  FM Alerts sells that
>> as a new alert and warning  product. But when you look behind the
>> curtain it is not survivable or very robust.
>>
>> Actually the best and paid for product is NOAA weather radio.
> [...]
>> Warren Shulz
>> IL SECC