| |
SM3LKS > BPQ 28.01.99 23:18l 234 Lines 7846 Bytes #-10127 (0) @ WW
BID : 29269_SM3LKS
Read: SP6VXT GUEST
Subj: Re: bpq selfinstaller.
Path: DB0AAB<DB0KFB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0BOX<DB0MAK<DB0HOT<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<SP6KBL<
SR6DOP<SR9DIP<SR9ZAA<KA3FMO<7M3TJZ<OZ8PAC<OZ4PAC<OZ4BBS<OZ3BOS<OZ3PAC<
OZ3BOC<OZ6BBS<SK7CY<SK6FV<SK6YW<SK6BA<SK6LK<SM6MVP<SM6HOC<SM7FEJ<
SK7HR<SK7GC<SK5AS<SK5BN<SK5UM<SK0MK<SK5AE<SK5BB<SK4HC<SM4UMY<SK4KS<
SK4WV<SM4TYA<SM3ESS<SK3BG<SK3UB<SK3JR<SM3LKS
Sent: 990119/2229Z @:SM3LKS.Z.SWE.EU #:29269 [Ostersund] FBB7.00g $:29269_SM3LK
From: SM3LKS@SM3LKS.Z.SWE.EU
To : BPQ@WW
SM7UZI wrote:
>Hello!
>>SM7UZI wrote:
>>>>Obsolete ?, not at all.
>>>>How can a program that still follows the standard for NetRom and AX25
>>>>become obsolete ?
>>>The packet driver part of bpq isnt as good as other packet driver.
>>
>>Hmm, what exactly is it that makes BPQ less good ?
>Bpq isnt developed any more flexnet is.
Still no reason why BPQ is less good.
If a program is in developement, it isn't finished yet.
Craches may occur.
FlexNet crashed when I tried it, and not only once. (It crashed a lot)
BPQ isn't developed anymore. Perhaps it doesn't need to.
BPQ has never crashed for me.
>packet driver:
>The lack of adaptive parameters, "packet collector", the use off kiss whic
>doesn't offer the packet driver controll over the tnc.
>The parametsrs of bpq is many times not optimally set.
Adaptive parameters can sometimes cause a network to degrade.
You have little or no control over the settings.
If you can control the settings, they are not adaptive.
>Flexnet has adaptive parameters, packet collector and uses 6pack instead of
>kiss. It supports many more hardwares than bpq does.
>You dont have to worry about any paramters since it is handled by flexnet,
>that makes the packet driver easy to set up and use.
>The adaptive parameters realy makes a big difference.
PLUG-N-PRAY-generation, eh ?
Why is KISS a bad thing to use.
KISS is VERY powerful, if you fully understand the packet-protocol you
want to use.
>Node:
>The node uses net/rom which adds a lot of overhead data and it is even ised
>when connecting your neighbour for no good at all.
It adds overhead, all AX25-traffic does, but not that much.
A bigger problem is the speed in our networks, 1200 bps, and the lack of
proper configuration.
>Bpqs way of measering quallity isnt good, the frames aren't routed the best
>way. And the network information is updatet to seldom which makes it even
>worse. In the net node is the quallity problem fixed, now is round trip time
>measured instead.
The frames is routed the nearest way, and that isn't always the best way.
But you can, as sysop, configure the node to make the frames go the way
you chooce. Sadly to say, many node-sysop doesn't know how to do this.
(They doesn't bother to read the manuals.)
The network-information is updated as often you like.
You can set it from 1 minutes intervalls to <what-ever-you-want> intervalls.
30 minutes is the interval that most of our sysops choosed.
RTT is used in BPQ too, if you read the manual.
>The routing problems make the network hard to use, many time you ahve to know
>very much asbout tghe network so that you can manually navigate you through
>thenetwork.
This indicates a badly configured node or nodes.
Sysops can, if they want, configure the node so you don't have to know
anything about the network, just the point to enter the network, and the
exit-point. The rest is done automatically by the network, if it is
configured right.
<snip...>
>>Is it a new version out there that is newer than 2 years ?.
>Yes.
>
>>Where ?
>http://134.169.78.141/thenetnode/tnn.htm
This is a computer-node, hardly what I want to use in an unattened node.
As a frontend to a BBS or DX-cluster I can accept computer-nodes, but not
unattended for a longer time as it needs constant monitoring so you can
prevent a broken network due to a computer that hangs.
>>And, wasn't it FlexNet we were discussing, not TheNet ?
>Yes but all avliable nodes are better than bpq, would it also better if it was
>replaced by one of them.
>But th net/rom protcoll isn't as good as the flexnet protcoll, so flexnet is to
>prefer. Also of many other reasons.
What reasons ?
In what way is all other nodes better then BPQ ?
>>>Evern for thoose who still for some strange reason wants so use net/rom is
bpq>>>to old.
>>Ahh, it is the NetRom-protocol you are against....
>Not mainly, it is bpq.
>But the flexnet protocoll is better.
In what way ?
What makes it better ?
Why are you against BPQ ?
It uses NET/ROM-protocol, and you are "not mainly" against that.
<snip...>
>>You does not promote FlexNet very well, are you ??
>I'm not promoting any thing, I'm just telling you why bpq should be replaced.
No you are NOT.
You are telling us that we should ABANDON BPQ, but not WHY.
>>Come with some GOOD arguments.
>Come with some GOOD argument for using bpq instead of flexnet or any other
>GOOD node!
I have NEVER told anyone that he/she should abandon any program and use
some other program instead.
But I have replyed to FlexNet-fans that is just doing that, correcting
them if they are wrong about something, and asking questions to clarify
why we should use FlexNet instead of BPQ.
No facts has been issued by FlexNet-fans yet, just the message that
"FlexNet is better..."
>>Just because a program is not maintained any more does not automatically
>>make it obsolete. It just may be perfect, whithout bugs, and no more
>>driver needed.
>But by replacing bpq would we get a better working packet network, that is the
>reson.
Proper configuration of any node can do all that.
<snip...>
>>I did not realize that BPQ was THAT bad.
>The packet driver part of bpq is less good than to use anothe packet driver,
>like tf2.7 or tfx.
>Many bbses also have a bpq node if thay should use hostmode tf2.7b tncs would
>that also improve a bit.
WHAT..., do you approve the use of BPQ now ? :-)
Ànyway, I suppose you mean that if KISS is replaced by hostmode...
OK, KISS is just a HDLC-driver. ALL protocol-information is in the
computer-software, and KISS is ONLY converting raw-data to HDLC-frames
that can be sent over radio.
Hostmode is a frontend to an AX25-TNC. No protocol-information is in the
computer. The TNC is maintaining all AX25-stuff.
What is the difference ?
The software-programmer doesn't have to know anything about AX25 if
hostmode is used. If KISS is used, they have to fully understand the protocol
they want to use, and you are not restricted to AX25.
The result is the same when you look into what you feed the radio.
The difference is what the programmer has to do to make it work.
So why the fuzz about KISS ?
>>OK, we will dismantle every node, and BBS, that uses BPQ, WITHOUT replacing it
>>with another node.
>>What will the result be ?
>As long as they have the digipeat option enabled and a gateway installed,
>would it work as good.
>Since bpq cant handle the routing any way in many areas.
Problem to read AND understand ?
I wrote: "WITHOUT replacing it..."
BPQ can handle the routing very well, if you configure it right.
>>NO working packet-network in many areas.
>That is already reality thenks to bpqs routing.
Tell us were.
<snip...>
>>It was the ONLY program for a while.
>>No, it is not better than any other programs.
>>It just doing its job as good as any other software.
>>So why abandon it ?
>Because it doesn't do the job as good as for example flexnet would do it.
In what way are FlexNet, or any other node, doing the job better ?
And what are they doing better ?
>>I will newer get rid of it until someone manages to tell me why BPQ is out
>>of date.
>I have just done that.
>I think you shall try flexnet and se by your swlf.
No you have not told us WHY BPQ is out of date.
You have told us that it IS out of date, noy WHY.
>Fore more information check out this links:
>
>Introduction to FlexNet:
>http://www.neosoft.com/~hezorn/
>
>FlexNet articles form P.E.S.T:
>http://mail.texoma.net/~n5pvl/flexdir.htm
You have to tell us yourself, in your own words.
Otherwise you can't convince me, as you clearly doesn't have any arguments
of your own why FlexNet is better than any other node.
<snip...>
>>The other programs I have tested have just the same performance as BPQ.
>Try flexnet.
I have.
>It is the xscc driver you need.
No.
<snip...>
73 de SM3LKS
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
