| |
VK2DYX > BPQ 07.08.99 17:38l 65 Lines 3484 Bytes #-9932 (0) @ WW
BID : 8560_VK2DYX
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Obsolete
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0BOX<DB0MAK<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<OK0POK<9A0YRB<
PP5BLU<WB0TAX<VK7AX<VK7AX<VK2TGB<VK2IO<VK2KLW<VK2DYX
Sent: 990806/2234Z @:VK2DYX.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC #:8560 [Taree] FBB7.00g23
From: VK2DYX@VK2DYX.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC
To : BPQ@WW
Well we have quite a discussion going here. One fact I have noticed is that
it has moved to a comparison of flexnet and bpq as node software.
My comments on the use of one or the other was a comparison of the two
software packages as an interface for my bbs to the radios as well as to a
lesser degree the function of running a node. I think this was also the case
with several others in the debate.
BPQ with one simple package does this quite well. Flexnet on the other hand
needs two computers or one very powerful one, that is if it will run flexdigi
with whatever operating system you want to use, forget it if it is Windows.
Perhaps if one is happy with Dos then it can be done, I for one would not go
back to dos as I have used windows for to long and have found it "in my
situation" to be quite stable, not perfect but good enough for what I do
here.
As to the comments about the adaptive parameters, I have said before that I
operate in a mostly rose network with vitually no other users or
forwarding paths where adaptive parameters are used. Also all my links to
rose nodes are GOOD rf paths so I do not need POOR path prformance
enhancement. I also have some mixed paths, for example one forward goes via
Rose switch - Linux node(floppy in a 386) - X1J node - Digi - BPQ node - FBB.
So how is that for a mix...just about all the different types available. I
don't think that the flexnet routing table system could make one scrap of
improvement on that path Hi!!!
If one wishes to run a node as it should be run in a network I agree that bpq
is not the best and one of the other systems would be much better. TNC based
systems are still in use in my area as we do not run high speed backbone
links due to long distances and difficult terrain. Some links are around
250Km others are in isolated areas with VERY difficult access, some are solar
powered, therefore they need to be reliable, of course someone will say use
RMNC but that is not rose is it, that is flexnet so it does not fit into the
network. It would be just another different system to negotiate.
So back to my original comments, by running BPQ here it allows me to run the
WFbb bbs interfaced to my DRSI cards and kiss links to other computers, it
also allows me to run a node that gives access from one rose net to another
because there is a break in the overall rose network that has yet to be
fixed. I personally don't care if the kiss implementation in bpq is not the
best as it does not affect my operation. If I needed to run kiss tnc's then
maybe I would have to change, but why run kiss tnc's when there is so much
better hardware in the form of USCC type cards, or even just the simple
modems that work very well. The only use I have ever made of tnc's/packet
controllers is to operate pactor and other HF modes.
Remember these are my comments on my system and my operation, I am not
telling anyone else what to run or how to run their setup. It is very
interesting to read other peoples information about their systems as it helps
one to make the choice of which setup to try, so please stop this bpq bashing
and lets just discuss the pro's and cons of the different software in the
various environments that it is used in so we can all get a better
understanding of the benefits of one over another or what will do the
particular job needed.
73. de Karl, sysop, VK2DYX @ VK2DYX.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC
E-mail karlb@midcoast.com.au
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
