| |
SM7UZI > BPQ 06.01.99 15:13l 69 Lines 3416 Bytes #-10152 (0) @ WW
BID : SM7UZI4433
Read: DB1RAS GUEST
Subj: Re: bpq vs flexnet
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0MW<DB0ERF<DB0MGB<
DK0MAV<DB0HB<DB0HRO<OZ4BOX<OZ3BOS<OZ3PAC<OZ3BOC<SK7IQ
Sent: 990106/1042Z @:SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU #:59460 ððùHappyùNewùYearù1999ùðð
From: SM7UZI@SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU
To : BPQ@WW
Hello!
>>The flexnet driver for all tncs i the 6pack driver.
>>For that to work must there be a 6pack frimeware for the
>>tncs. So if kantronics makes a 6pack frimare will it work.
>But the point is Kantronics *don't* make a 6pack for *any* of their TNC's.
Flexnet have been around for a while now, I don't know if it is because they
think it isn't popular enough yet or if they don't care becuase they think they
can sell there tncs any way and will not ever make any.
They could easily add 6pack support in their firmware, the code takes
very little memory.
You can just hope that they will make a 6pack, or someone else will.
>Would you suggest that I throw 700 dollars-worth of TNC's in the trashcan
>or should I trust Kantronics judgement on this one
700$ seems very expensive.
No, but I wouldn't buy a kantronics tnc, I have got the impression
that you have to pay much for frimware upgrades, other upgrades etc and don't
get very much support for the money.
There is no real meaning in buying a tncs for low speed packet at all.
A old 386 or 486 computer which you can get cheap and a scc card work as good
and is cheaper.
The tncs with capabillty enough to handle a modern node software like tnc3 are
very expensive and mainly for higher speed packet.
For unnatended nodes for low speeds is rmnc flexnet to prefer.
>Investing (or rather, wasting) that sort of money may be justified in a
>"full-blown" networking environment but, in the UK at least, many many
>stations run 'hobby-nodes' as front-ends to their PMS's where the only
>sensible option is to make the best use of existing equipment.
To get the best use of existing equipment is usually a good reson for the use
of flexnet.
If you for example want to upgrade to 9k6 is it cheaper to get a new
modem, than upgrading your kantronics tnc.
The prolem is that kantronics doesn't support their tncs and the users of
them with the needed software, and the packet users will suffer.
And possible also kantronics, but the amateur radio equipment is probably a
small part of their business.
>Advocates of (PC/)Flexnet can extoll it's virtues as often as they like
>but, if it cannot be run on a station's equipment, that's the end of it.
>TNC's operating in international-standard KISS mode will be around for a
>long time yet.
There is no real standard.
Bpq kiss, smack, extended kiss and other variants are used.
There have been many ways tried to get rid of kiss, like host modes etc.
To use hostmode or some thing else is to prefer, kiss isn't very good.
6pack isn't something that is used only by flexnet, it is a protocoll also used
by other packet driver since it is much better than kiss.
.a&$a. .a&$a. .a&$$$$$$$$$$&a. .a&$a. Anders Lageras
$$$$$$ $$$$$$ $$$$$$$' `$$$$$$ $$$$$$ Lund Sweden JO65PQ
$' `$$ $$$$$$ `ý$$$$$s,s$$$$$ý $$$$$$ AARS Member No. 81
$s,s$$ $$$$$$ a$$$$$$ý $$' `$ Packet:
73 de SM7-$$$$$$ $$$$$$ a$$$$$$ý $$s,s$ SM7UZI@SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU
$$$$$$ $$' `$ a$$$$$$ý $$$$$$ E-mail: anders.lageras@usa.net
$$$$$$a$$s,s$ a$$$' `$$$$$$&a. $$$$$$ ICQ#: 5161379
$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$s,s$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$ Homepage:
`ý&$$$$$$$$ý' `ý&$$$$$$$$$$$ý' `ý&$ý' http://www.visitweb.com/uzi/
o==|=====-
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
