[EAS] Source of the "scary" text in Suffolk Co

Ed Czarnecki ed.czarnecki at monroe-electronics.com
Thu Sep 8 12:18:13 CDT 2016


Yes, but the standard EAS text for the NPT is something along the lines of
"A National Periodic Test has been issued for:  the United States, effective
Sept 28, 2017 at 2:00 pm until 2:15 pm."  Pretty harmless stuff for all but
the most ardent tin foil hat folks.

But your point is well taken.  NPT is now supposed to be "immediate upon
receipt"  which further widens the race condition between EAS and CAP
polling.

IMHO having the LP's wait 1 minute to allow for CAP polling is a temporary
expedient.  It impacts the test conditions - are we testing CAP only?
Stress testing CAP with media from a third party server?  Testing system "in
the wild" as it actually is now - even with the EAS/CAP race condition?  All
are valid test objectives, but testing "in the wild" is very different from
the first two.  

Asking LPs to hold the EAS message helps with the first two test objectives,
which could yield very good info.  But it skews any findings from the third
scenario of testing the entire system as things really are.  Hopefully the
FCC understands the test objectives and test conditions - it would not be
good if the regulator came away with the wrong conclusions from a particular
test scenario.

Anyway, I still think it would be better for the EAS device to poll IPAWS
immediately upon receipt of any CAP message.  Or for the station device
itself to hold the EAS message until IPAWS is polled (which you can do with
DASDEC v3.0 software). 

BTW, I heard a rumor that an FCC notice was forthcoming on the topic of
immediacy.  Anyone else hear news of this?

Edward Czarnecki, PhD 
Senior Director – Strategy  & Global Government Affairs
MONROE ELECTRONICS
585-765-2254 ext. 122 | fax 585-765-9330
Reston VA | Lyndonville NY
www.digitalalertsystems.com 

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

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016, Ed Czarnecki wrote:

>
>>>> Yes.  And the ordering of CAP vs. EAS distribution channel is
> unpredictable.  Each of the three messages may have reached different 



More information about the EAS mailing list