[EAS] FCC NPRM on improving EAS just issued

[Ed Czarnecki]

In Canada, there is a CRITICAL difference in how the stakeholder
relationships formed.  In Canada, Pelmorex (their version on the Weather
Company, with a cable channel) volunteered to develop and maintain the
Canadian CAP server, as well as committed to carry the CAP feed over their
existing C- and Ku-band band assets.  The system altogether is called NAAD.

Without Pelmorex' support and persistence, I do not think that a Canadian
NAAD would have evolved for many more years.  It took years to get the
broadcast and cable operators on board, and at the end of the day, the
Canadian regulator ran out of patience and issued a rare mandate (rare in
that country).

The CRTC's challenge was money as well, but Pelmorex filled that gap.  The
CRTC has left virtually all of the specification development to coalitions
of industry and other government agencies.  I am serving on several of those
Canadian committees, and the dynamics are absolutely fascinating - very
different positioning and behavior than in their US counterparts.  In some
ways very refreshing, in others more frustrating.  And there are a number of
basic operational issues that our Canadian counterparts are just beginning
to wrestle with.

In sum, the CRTC appears to have a much more laissez faire in approach than
the FCC, at least at present, in regards to their public warning capability.
They seem to be basically taking the "upper management" approach ... that
is, "just get it done, you guys work out the details how ..."

Edward Czarnecki, PhD 
Senior Director – Strategy  & Global Government Affairs
Monroe Electronics / Digital Alert Systems

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

On Sun, 31 Jan 2016, Tim Stoffel wrote:
> We don't just need a daisy chain; we don't need just the internet; we 
> need both systems.

The Canadian version of EAS, called NPAS, does not use in-band, daisy-chain