KAF6045

Letter is still not all that clear. Reading the underlined portion comes across as the equivalent to a "leased line" -- originally a phone company provided direct line from one location to another with no ability to "dial" other locations. Often used (pre-Internet and VPN) for transferring data between distant facilities of a company. This (the connection in the letter) is merely getting routed through the Internet system, but as described is still a one-to-one (repeater to repeater) linkage. Not an ad-hoc any-equipped repeater to any-equipped repeater. The letter also starts off stating that "cable" is probably fine, while DSL (and likely old ISDN) provided over phone wires is not. BUT... Many "cable" ISPs offer VoIP service fas a replacement for telephone dial-up calling -- which makes them an "interconnected" service per the text of 9.3(4). And even that gets confusing these days -- the "DSL or dial-up Internet" appears to assume that, taking the modem away, one still has a working phone line with a dial-tone on the wires. But, for example, I have u-Verse. There is no functional dial-tone on the phone line -- the phone company doesn't even offer POTS service in this area, only u-Verse which uses the entire bandwidth of the wires for digital data. The dial-up phone has to plug into the modem which digitizes it into VoIP packets. I had missed that the OP had mentioned EchoLink in the thread subject when I'd previously worked my way down to it, but still-- EchoLink allows for multiple ad-hoc user connections to repeaters, doesn't even require that one go through a repeater to enter the system (Just a microphone and speaker on the Internet access computer), and requires some form of validated registration (which means some central authority that the software must route through). Given that there is EchoLink software that runs on cell-phones, porting it for GMRS is likely falling into the 9.3(4) exclusion. Heck, how would one ensure any user of the software is not in the 9.3(4) situation? My interpretation of the underlined portion of the letter at least allows for the repeater operator(s) to ensure that both ends of this single repeater<>repeater connection are clear (if they can find a cable ISP that does not offer VoIP connections to regular phones) -- at that point they just have to monitor the users of their repeaters (call signs, et al), but that is already their responsibility.

Neither of those reference GMRS. They are (old class D) 27MHz CB and MURS services. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-95/subpart-E/section-95.1749 is the GMRS closest match. The question then becomes: for what purpose is this Internet connection desired? If the intent is to transmit/receive voice data I suspect one will fall afoul of To create a viable Internet linking system, one will need to replicate the functionality of D-Star, YSF, or (Amateur) DMR network servers, without the benefit of radios that already incorporate (AMBE) CODECS to go from analog voice to efficient digital packets. One would have to implement such CODECS in software on some hosting computer. The second factor is that any such Internet "GMRS Network" will have have a recognized organization taking user registrations, and validating them against a database of known GMRS licensees... AND THERE LIES THE RUB. D-Star, DMR, and YSF capable radios transmit the user identification (call sign, or for DMR, a 7-digit "private call" ID that has been registered against a call sign). But a GMRS radio doesn't have that capability -- so there is no way to confirm that any voice data is tied to a valid GMRS user. Analog voice closest match is maybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Radio_Linking_Project and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EchoLink I'm not clear on how user validation is done, though call signs do need to be registered for EchoLink, if not IRLP. Of note, Amateur rules (part 97) explicitly has a section for Though I'll concede, at the base, that may mean the equivalent of paper telegrams being relayed from one station to another until it reaches a destination for delivery. But we've had AX.25 packet for decades, and TNCs with "mailboxes" -- though those were not directly "Internet" linked (which then leads to APRS).

Yeah... I have one R-Pi running a simple web-server. My router config page was designed with a whole slew of (ugh) games and required ports listed, along with a few server protocols. The only thing it should be accepting, as I have it, is inbound requests for port 80 (HTTP) {I don't have a valid certificate to make HTTPS an option}. A bit more secure than using the "IP Passthrough" tab which lets anything through to a designated device. {Hmmm, it actually has three separate entries for mIRC!}

The FCC rules for GMRS are accessible at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-95/subpart-E The entries regarding ID are... {side note: I think Part 97 [Amateur Radio] requires ID every 10 minutes} As for the MXT-90... I can't find an online manual, not even at Midland's web-site. Based upon FCC records, it was released 6 years ago. It is 5W output and only operates on the 462.xxx frequencies using Narrow FM (deduced from the 11K emission mode in a 12.5K bandwidth; GMRS main frequencies are wide FM, often 16K emission mode in a 20K bandwidth). This (2016 release) predates the FCC redefinition of FRS vs GMRS. Since it doesn't operate on 467.xxx it neither covers the (formerly) FRS-only interstitials (which are limited to 0.5W) nor does it cover the GMRS repeater input channels. So... Don't bother looking for repeaters.

And what type of antenna might "That guy" be using. Stick a GMRS band YAGI (beam) antenna pointing at the repeater and I'm sure signals can improve. After all, Amateurs with high-gain yagis mounted on hand-held sticks have used 5W handhelds to work SATELLITES (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio_satellite#FM_satellites) and possibly even the ISS (260 miles)

One wonders if the "GF" might be ineligible for a GMRS license (under age -- there doesn't seem to be a requirement that they be a US citizen in Part 95E)

Just out of curiosity, what IP# are you "using" when making those connection attempts? Most routers issue LAN-side IP addresses in the 192.168.x.x block (though some may use 10.x.x.x). These are considered pseudo private IP addresses, that do not get propagated out to the WAN ("Internet"). You can, typically, connect from one LAN device to another LAN device as they are both "inside", and don't require routing packets to the Internet itself (though some routers will block WiFi connections from being seen internally, only allowing cabled computers to see each other). The router normally performs NAT -- it keeps a table of outgoing connections and what it mapped them to on the outside: LAN IP# / socket # / (TCP/UDP) <====> WAN IP# / socket # / (TCP/UDP) where the WAN IP# is the number the ISP assigned to the router. This table is used to map incoming reply packets back to the device/application that initiated the connection. If you are trying to connect from outside, the router is seeing an incoming packet that does not match to its translation table. You would need to configure the router (the one supplying the device you are trying to connect to, not the one at your end) to accept incoming requests and route them to one of the internal devices (being able to connect to multiple internal devices is much trickier -- many routers can designate a handler device for unsolicited inbound traffic). You would then need to connect to the IP# of the router. A dynamic DNS provider may be of use, but requires being able to run periodic outbound updates from the device (so the DDNS provider can get the WAN IP# currently assigned).

A search of the ULS shows only one GMRS license under the name "Collins, Glen E" (Somewhat humorous call sign too -- starts WRTH... Wasn't that the abbreviation for the old World Radio/TV Handbook ?). Said license was granted June 18 2022 -- one day after the OP posted ? (with, it appears, the application having been June 16)

The ratio is even worse for the BTech MURS-V1. It has "15" channels. 1-5 are the MURS channels with no codes 6-10 are the same MURS channels with CTCSS codes preset (but programmable if one doesn't like the default) 11-15 are the same channels using preset DCS codes. I've reset mine so bank one is standard MURS (1-3 NFM, 4-5 WFM), low power, no tones. Bank two is high power. Bank three is back to low power, but with 4-5 set to NFM (only 4-5 have option for bandwidth).

I'd expect any change in coordination would incorporate the (current) 10-year license term as a transition period. That is, one would operate with the restriction printed upon their license until it is renewed, at which time the new restrictions would take effect. Somewhat similar to the current exclusion which mentions that the current line-A restriction does not apply if one's prior license had listed those particular frequencies (hold over from the days of GMRS users being authorized only two primary frequency pairs [simplex/duplex]?).

Line-A is /defined/ in Part 90 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-90/subpart-A but that only specifies "Commission coordination with the Canadian authorities in the assignment of frequencies is generally required", doesn't state frequencies. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-1/subpart-F/subject-group-ECFR8fff3365c42ee11/section-1.928 gives bands in which coordination is required. Part 95 does have the generic "Near a U.S. border or in an area that is or may be subject to an international treaty or agreement. Treaties and agreements may be viewed or downloaded from the FCC Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/agree/. " Unfortunately, the agreements only state that frequency coordination will be done between US and Canada -- which basically means the restricted frequencies could be changed at any time the two countries discuss possible interference. ?

You all make me glad I got my GMRS license some decades ago (in the era when one was licensed for two of the 8 primary channels, plus the 7 interstitials -- and the Maxon GMRS 210+3 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi4jPPju8b4AhV2JEQIHahSB5AQFnoECA0QAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Frsws.zapto.org%2Fradiosoftware%2FMaxon%2FGMRS-2103O.pdf&usg=AOvVaw35bH5wYY31Aop7VP5e9n9V ) kilo alpha fox six zero four five (I also got lucky when I upgraded from Technician -- to Extra. Snagged alpha fox six victor november)

The BC Link web pages and manual aren't firm on it, but from the lack of mention of a GMRS license it reads, to me, that these are (2017 FCC) FRS radios, and only operate on 12.5kHz... So using NFM on the GMR45 might be reasonable (otherwise the difference between 12.5kHz and 20kHz [FCC spec for GMRS] may result in some odd sounding voices or clipping). cf: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-95/subpart-B?toc=1 The GMR45, OTOH, does need a license. Normal GMRS bandwidth is 20kHz on (using the FCC consolidated channel scheme) 15-22 (the original GMRS channels -- from back in the day when a license was only authorized TWO of the channels) AND on GMRS interstitial channels 1-7 (which were available to all GMRS licenses, but at a low power limit, because they were stuck between each primary channel and overlapped). 8-14 weren't part of the GMRS channel line-up -- they were originally FRS (0.5W/12.5kHz) channels snuck between GMRS repeater input frequencies. They are still limited to 0.5W NFM. cf: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-95/subpart-E?toc=1 I'd concur with the prior respondent: first ensure all radios interoperate with no tone squelch. (Set the GMR45 to its lowest power mode -- and maybe walk a ways down the street; it may be putting out so much power that it is overloading the front-ends of the BC-Link units). Then, verify that the BC-Link units work when both are set to the same channel and CTCSS code (these are not really "privacy" codes -- any radio /not/ configured for CTCSS can hear you; they just mean you don't hear others unless they are set to the same code). The handhelds appear to be full CTCSS encode/decode. The mobile has options for tone encode only (sometimes used to get into a repeater, but the repeater does not send a tone back) and encode/decode (T vs TSQ on display). Don't try to use both CTCSS and DCS at the same time (the handhelds don't do DCS). CTCSS is just a subaudible continuous single tone. DCS is a serially encoded "number" that has to be matched by the receiver..