| |
SM7UZI > BPQ 24.08.99 04:39l 210 Lines 9099 Bytes #-9914 (0) @ EU
BID : SM7UZI6447
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: BPQ Obsolete
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0GPP<DB0LX<DB0CZ<DB0GE<DB0ZDF<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DK0MNL<
DF0HMB<DB0HHW<DB0IL<OZ5BBS<OZ4PAC<OZ4BBS<OZ4BOX<OZ3BOS<OZ3BBS<SK7FK<
SK7BQ<SK7BK<SK7WX<SK7IQ
Sent: 990823/2046Z @:SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU #:48855 [Malmö] $:SM7UZI6447 FBB7.00
From: SM7UZI@SK7IQ.MALMOE.M.SWE.EU
To : BPQ@EU
Hello!
>The insults keeps coming from you, now clearly stating that the amateurs
>that don't know anything about packet doesn't understand anything at all.
Packet users, node operators woh by misconfiguration of their nodes packet
dirvers etc is causing problems work their fellow hams, deserves to be
a little insulted now and then!
>This time I don't just think you insultet them.
Why don't those node operators that knows so very little about packet that
they as a result of that are causign problems answear for them selves?
>I'm telling you this time it is not any question aboute it anymore.
>You _have_ insulted them.
Have I maybe insulted you?
>>The help they get is often to use the same setup as their neightbour, which
>>is not the way to do it!
>>Not very good!
>
>OK, then we should have a different setup for every station in the network.
>Resulting in some working setups, and a lot of poor working setups.
>The network will surely breakdown then.
We should have good working setups and well configured nodes.
>>The software that handles the ax25 communication.
>
>I didn't get any any more knowledge from that.
>(I do know what it is, but not everyone does)
Why don't you explain it them?
>I always thought that the part of the software that handles the ax25 was
>the protocoldriver, and the packetdriver sits between it and the
>application you use. (But I might been wrong all these years)
No but that ax25, is a bit different from other protocols (te x256 routing is
gone), makes the picture messed up a bit when you talks about the net/rom
driver as packet driver.
If I have seen it or not is not very important.
>>>Summary: you havn't seen it in action.
>>I'm I supposed to have done that?
>The original question was: "Have you seen it in action ?"
Ascii stupid question get a stupid ansi.
>The question was asked becaused you said you knew how the system worked,
>and I think nobody knows how a system works unless they have seen it in
>action.
You don't.
>>No, but if it would have been of any interest I guess you had told me.
>>A bit childish to day?
>No, but I don't like anyone telling me what I've done or not, as you did.
>Nobody knows what I've done unless I've told them, or they were in the
>neighborhood.
I'm sorry if I have made you upset, bu I would like to se this as a more
global matter, not a discussion about your particulair system.
>>>Almost every bulleting that I've seen originating from FlexNet-fans has
>>>this single standard responce: "Use FlexNet !"
>>>(You are not the only one, but the message is exactly the same)
>>One reson is maybe that the differences between flexnet and other packet
>>drivers is hard to explain to many users who don't have the basic packet
>>knowledge to know if it is bad or good.
>
>OK, but I, and I think that goes for many people, don't want these kind of
>messages (They, if any, are childish replies):
This don't have much to do with any nodes or any thing like that.
>73 from Don Camillio
>
>------------
>(End of example)
Guess Don Cmillio have found flexnet very good!
And you can use flexnet like that.
>>>I don't accept things to progress just because "it's time to do it".
>>>History has shown us that progress just for the cause of progress isn't
>>>so effective as it should have been if it came naturally.
>>>We must let the progress have it's own pace, you can't push it.
>>Not, but this changes of packet nodes etc have been going on for the last ten
>>years, it is nothing new.
>>It came naturally in the rest of europe, where they are interested in
>Then let it come natural here too, don't push it.
My fear is that we will have no packet network here before "it comes natural"!
>>But we don't seems to have a real demand for a better packet network, I
>>don't think it will come natural here.
>
>If "we don't seems to have a real demand for a better packet network",
>why should we change it.
>If the need for a better network exists, the progress will come natural.
No, people use internet insted.
Internet gets more and more usefull and when high speed connections soon will
be avaliable for every one, will it be even mroe useful
There are people now who don't like packet radio, since it is slow bad
working, unreliable etc. The nubmer of packet radio users decrease every day!
Fo future generations will a packet network like the one I use be of no
interest.
But a faater and more reliable packet network would, also I would think it was
rather nice.
There are no reason to be as conservative as you are!
>>The whole point by using flexnet is that net/rom is not used!
>>You must have misunderstood everything!
>>
>>You can link net/rom and flexnet nodes to gether, but you have to do a manual
>>hop at the nodes between the networks.
>
>Then you have "destroyed" the network, dividing it to 2 networks with
>flexnet as a bridge that you have to cross manually.
The net/rom network would destroy the flexet network.
From the net/rom point of view cxan this be solved by using a node capable of
both net/rom and flexnet.
But it will possible cause problem for the flexnet network users.
But since the net/rom would be so bad that it wouldn't let anyone connect any
nodes very far away anyway would the users be used to have to do manual hops
often any way.
>If you get a timeout in the out-channel, the program reports that to
>the in-channel, no disconnect is done until the calling station
>requests it, or timeout occurs on the in-channel.
Whas this during connection.
Flexnet does a ordinary ax25 connection via the network, before any
connection with the flexnet routing protocoll is used.
I donät really understand what the problem was still.
>The problem was solved however, by doing a special forwardsetup for that
>special forward-link, but the problem still exists in the flexnetstation
>so other stations may still have problems.
I don't know of any other link config, than the one usually used for a link to
a net/rom node making that all ssids can be used.
>>I also like to cut and paste!
>>About rmnc and what makes it good:
>...snip... (german quote deleted)
>
>Do you have that in a language we can understand ?, like english.
The major packet language is german!
>English is, without competition, a better language to use in international
>messages if you want the most of us to understand you.
Yes, but the text was in german.
Cut and paste!
And I thought that it could be read by you, since it was of technical nature,
the words are rather similair to other languages.
>Any other language should only be used in national messages, addressed to
>amateurs that speeks that language.
I know that!
>Would you understand a finnish, french, or spannish qoute ?.
Possible spanish.
>My answer is still the same; processortime for a hd is the same regardless
>of the application used, as long as comparison is made with the same OS
>and the same hd.
There is a difference to a system with hd using applications like bbses or
only running a node.
>>>AX25-daemon: ax25d (ax25-utils-2.1.42a)
>>>NET/ROM-daemon: netromd (ax25-utils-2.1.42a)
>>>Userfrontend of the node: LinuxNode v0.2.4 (ax25-utils-2.1.42a)
>>>BBS-software: LinFBB v7.00g
>>Get rid of net/rom node and take a look at x-net (linux ent) or flexnet!
>>Much better routing!
>
>Why should I, it is working, and it works very well.
Net/rom don't work well compared to other systems, And I'm not jsut talikg
aobut your node, it is probably very stable.
I guess you know what the difference between net/rom and ote modern systems is
by now!
>I have no flexnet-nodes for a very long distance to connect to.
>When, and only then, a flexnetstation is setup in the neighbourhood I
>might consider to start using flexnet-routing, but _only_ then.
Set up a linux net node!
It can be connected to a net/rom or flexnet node.
And a network of such x-net nodes is much better than any net/rom network.
>>Fbbs compressed forward shrinks this signature in to nothing!
>Not every BBS uses FBB-compression.
>AA4RE, MBL, RLI, MSYS, NNA, CBBS, etc.. -types of BBSes that don't use
>FBB-compression is still in use on several places.
Most bbses does today.
>(some of them might actually do it now, but not all)
The have him self to blaim for the extra traffic load it results in for him.
To use compressed forward is good, or it is maybe a to modern invention for
you to use?
.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$$$$$$ý $$$$$$ E-mail: sm7uzi@qsl.net
$$$$$$a$$s,s$ a$$$' `$$$$$$&a. $$$$$$ ICQ#: 5161379
$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$s,s$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$ Homepage:
`ý&$$$$$$$$ý' `ý&$$$$$$$$$$$ý' `ý&$ý' http://zap.to/sm7uzi/
o==|=====-
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
