[EAS] GMC

[Ed Czarnecki]

Well, this raises another issue - one that I think the Commission is aware
of.  The IPAWS conformance process was pretty stringent in testing
"integrated" CAP EAS units to the IPAWS/ECIG profile.  However, the test
process for "intermediate" units (converter boxes) did not/could not test
that function.  Hence some of the working in the recent FCC FNPRM, that We
provided some analysis of the FCC order, which can be found here
http://digitalalertsystems.com/pdf/BeltwayNews_Sept2011.pdf

The FCC signaled a key piece of its thinking when it noted ". the purchase
of integrated CAP-complaint devices is neither unreasonable nor particularly
risky,." in agreement with comments made by ourselves and others.
Integrated CAP EAS devices are FCC certified EAS encoder/decoders that can
also internally incorporate CAP message receipt and processing.  The FCC
commented, ". it appears likely that integrated CAP-capable EAS equipment
already on the market will be capable of meeting whatever CAP-based
requirements we may adopt with only minor modifications (via firmware or
software updates) and possible updates to their existing FCC certifications.
Accordingly, our extension of the CAP compliance deadline should not prevent
those that wish to purchase FCC certified, integrated CAP-capable EAS
equipment from doing so or otherwise hamper the marketing activities of
manufacturers of such equipment."

FWIW, we bundled support for the IPAWS ATOM server in the previous v2.0-0
update for both the DASDEC and OneNet.

-----Original Message-----
From: eas-bounces at radiolists.net [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On
Behalf Of Harold Price

Mike,

In fact, part of the conformity assessment program test was to show that the
device could properly handle the Must Carry tag, independent of any
particular delivery system.  At the time the test was run, the IPAWS 3.0
server wasn't even running.

Speaking of the IPAWS ATOM server, I've got an ENDEC connected to FEMA's
test IPAWS OPEN 3.0 ATOM sever, 19,760 polls issued in the last 6.8 days,
all responded to, 340 alerts received and logged (I'm running the filter
wide open, regular users won't be).  Sharks with helmet mounted lasers have
been spotted.

I didn't want to roll out our support for IPAWS 3.0 in the middle of the run
up to the EAN, but the IPAWS ATOM cap delivery is working.  Hopefully the
FCC is hard at work on its part of the puzzle.

Harold

At 12:24 PM 11/16/2011, Ed Czarnecki wrote:
>can be supported directly through a "native"
>state CAP system, and not necessarily gated through IPAWS.

_______________________________________________
This is the EAS Forum Discussion List

Please invite your friends to join our Forum!
http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas

And, remember the main page: http://eas.radiolists.net