put strap outside of the deck is ok？

I agree with @God prefers Diesels
If you are going to continue with that trailer, throw some V-boards up there and call it a day. That's about the best you can do with what you have. Atleast you can say you tried at that point.

 

I put V boards on Bees, they still got out and stung the hell out of me.

 

I have to have the curtain van to haul the seed. Can’t get wet or it will start to grow. If I was hauling it way down the road then it would get shrink wrapped and then the straps actually hold the pallets tight.

Ive seen a guy flip his truck hauling seed and amazingly the seed stay inside the trailer. The curtains contained it.

 

The trailer I use was built for me specifically to haul seed. That’s all I haul. It’s perfect for hauling seed.

 

Dude u are missing the point. But by all means do what u want. V boards. Great invention. Have a good one. Stay safe

 

Sorry, but I'll have to disagree with you and so does the Green Book. The original specs were written around 2002 after a study was done about the crashes and cargo securement losses at the time. In the general and the Handbook issued by the government back then, here are two of the cited sections. Now mind you, 20 year old doesn't mean it's outdated. Unless it's been specifically changed (not reworded), it's still regulation....but you're blatantly wrong about the anchor points not being required to be rated to wit:
49 CFR 393.104(c):
(c) Vehicle structures and anchor points. Vehicle structures, floors, walls, decks, tiedown anchor points, headerboards, bulkheads, stakes, posts, and associated mounting pockets used to contain or secure articles of cargo must be strong enough to meet the performance criteria of § 393.102, with no damaged or weakened components, such as, but not limited to, cracks or cuts that will adversely affect their performance for cargo securement purposes, including reducing the working load limit.

And the rub rail reference is from these two references:

1.) Cargo Securement Rules | FMCSA

Proper Use of Tiedowns

The new regulations require each tiedown to be attached and secured in a manner that prevents it from becoming loose, unfastening, opening or releasing while the vehicle is in transit. All tiedowns and other components of a cargo securement system used to secure loads on a trailer equipped with rub rails must be located inboard of the rub rails whenever practicable. Also, edge protection must be used whenever a tiedown would be subject to abrasion or cutting at the point where it touches an article of cargo. The edge protection must resist abrasion, cutting and crushing.

and from the North American Cargo Securement Standard Driver Handbook on Cargo Securement:

Driver's Handbook on Cargo Securement - Chapter 2: General Cargo Securement Requirements
Tiedown use

Each tiedown must be attached and secured so that it does not become loose or unfastened, open, or release during transit.

All tiedowns and other components of a cargo securement system must be located within the rubrails (when present).

Note: This requirement does not apply when the width of the load extends to or beyond the rubrails.



Tiedown within rubrail

Unless these have been specifically withdrawn, and there would be a documented change in the Federal Register and the Federal Code of Regulations, they are still applicable and enforceable.

Note the "Note:" section...for the cite that you ask about.

Enjoy.

 

You should read further. That rub rail rule was abolished in 05-06

 

As for the rubrail rule, there is some contradictory information from the FMCSA. The cargo securement had book is not law, it’s a guide line. Only the green book, the actual regulations are law.

The rubrail rule was 393.104(f)(4). It was recended in 2006. Here’s an excerpt from the federal register that also ties into both points.
“With respect to the comments from DOE, Kinedyne, and Mr. Takacs recommending that rub rails have specified WLLs in order to be used as cargo securement anchorages, FMCSA notes that the 2002 final rule did not include a requirement that anchor points be rated and marked. The 2002 final rule noted that while the Agency agreed with the basic principle of rating and marking of anchor points, there was insufficient data to support establishing manufacturing standards at that time. Any such amendments to the regulatory language to adopt provisions requiring the rating and/or marking of anchor points are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
FMCSA appreciates the comments provided by EMC, and agrees that vehicle manufacturers can incorporate features that assist the vehicle operators in complying with the cargo securement regulations. The Agency believes that in many instances, the nature of the cargo dictates the ability of the cargo securement devices to meet the existing requirements of § 393.104(f)(4). As discussed in the NPRM, however, State enforcement personnel and motor carriers expressed difficulties in achieving uniform and consistent enforcement of the regulation. Therefore, the Agency rescinds
§ 393.104(f)(4) as proposed.”

A link to the whole thing, the relive that info is around the middle of this document, just search for “rub rail”.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2006-06-22/pdf/06-5236.pdf#page=14

edit to add: my first comment is in your quote in bold.

 

No rub rail or rated anchor points were harmed (or used) in the making of this post.

 

Why read further and get the actual information when you're trying to win an internet argument that's been hashed out a thousand times before?