| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 18.09.99 01:10l 186 Lines 7547 Bytes #-9778 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_233G
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/233G
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<OE5XBL<OE2XOM<OE2XUM<OE5XBR<OE3XBS<S50BOX<S50MBL<
IV3AVQ<IW3EFI<IW9EXL<SV1AAW<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990917/1855Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:63707 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_23
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19177 ; Fri, 17 Sep 99 18:30:04 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015662 ; Fri, 17 Sep 99 18:51:21 MET
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 99 18:47:37 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_233G>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/233G
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
a bigger place later, but it is not the only system we have at our disposal
and is not always the best thing to use.
An A guy will tell you that anything not useful for tcpip is not useful at
all, and so they dismiss what can be done on HF at 300 baud , and what can
be done with no-brainer, plug 'n play equipment at 1.2kb and 9.6kb. Fact is
though, that the slow stuff is needed for long-haul communications on lower
frequencies, and for use by the great unwashed masses of appliance operators
who make up better than 90% of the packet community. (And who provide the
bulk of the revenue for the development of better equipment and software.)
B guys will tell you that communication is the goal, not just communication
with a particular brand name, data transfer speed or protocol. By all means
use tcpip for any sections of high frequency, high-speed network you may
currently have if you like, but don't discount what can be done at slower
speeds on lower frequencies with different protocols.
I'll go a bit further here and say don't discount what can be done by other
systems at all speeds. In particular, don't discount the possability of Hams
developing their own protocols, tailored specifically to the RF networking
environment we find with Ham Radio.
An existing 1.2 kb network is infinately easier to upgrade to higher speed
than an nonexistant network, wouldn't you say? The node sites and feedlines
are already there, and those are the parts that are hard to come up with.
When stuff like that is disparaged and allowed to stagnate simply because it
is not suitable for tcpip, it effectively keeps it from ever BEING useful
for tcpip. You can't easily upgrade a dead network or abandoned node sites.
>
> How can we make it so?
Don't abandon tcpip and high-speed packet, but don't be unwilling to look
beyond it either. Don't forget where the money comes from.
> Heck we have the frequencies, we have the bandwidth. . . if we don't use
it
> someone else will.
High-speed packet (and tcpip) is only likely on UHF freqs and higher. If you
reject or neglect low-speed, long-haul digital communications, you are also
rejecting the use of most of the spectrum available to us, and neglecting
the ability to communicate at long distances via radio.
> We just don't seem to have the plug and play radio solutions for the tens
of
> thousands of appliance operators/packet application users to plug in and
> operate.
Not at high speed. This will happen someday, but not right away and we need
to plan accordingly.
>
> How can we make it so? Fix the radio problem that is!
Build a network infrastructure back up, boot out all the A types in TAPR and
the ARRL, and then DEVELOP the and EXPAND that network, the way the NEDA
guys are doing right now.
That's what the Europeans did to get their fancy high-speed, large-scale
network. They respected, maintained, developed and improved the same old
1.2kb network we also had ten years ago. We spit on ours and abandoned it,
so now we have nothing.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 07:38:52 +0300
From: Paul Keinanen <keinanen@sci.fi>
Subject: The Applications Mantra
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 10:03:20 -0500, "Charles Brabham"
<n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote:
>If there were such a crying need for new Packet applications, where are the
>practical suggestions for just what these new apps would be? If the need
>were real, we would be flooded with demands and suggestions, but what really
>happens is an uncomfortable silence when the subject is brought up. Nobody
>can think of a single new thing to suggest. - They just like to chant the
>comforting mantra and make excuses.
After observing how popular among teens the SMS (Short Message
Service) in the GSM cellular network really is over here, it is quite
strange that nothing similar is used in packet radio. These messages
(up to 160 characters) are entered using the numeric keypad (in a
somewhat awkward way :-). In addition to sending messages to each
other, there are information servers that sends data over SMS messages
and even other types applications built around SMS.
The amateur 1200 bit/s packet network would be quite sufficient for
similar applications in addition to the current packet cluster or APRS
applications. The problem seems to be the lack of suitable
"peripherals". It is far too cumbersome to carry around a PC and an HT
in order to be able to communicate with packet. There are some HTs
with built in TNCs, but I do not know, if text messages can be entered
autonomously without a PC. Anyway, if autonomous HTs with built in
TNCs and some sort of text entry method become popular, this would
make it possible to develop many types of information service, remote
control and messaging services. Such informational services are very
usable, when you are on the move, but not very usable when you are at
home at your fixed station, when you have easier means of accessing
the data e.g. from your books or computer.
The problem is that there are only a few applications, since there are
very few lights weight autonomous HTs with built in TNC, display and
data entry and on the other hand there is not much interest among HT
manufacturers to build such devices, since there are no applications
for these devices.
Paul OH3LWR
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 07:09:41 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: The Applications Mantra
Paul Keinanen <keinanen@sci.fi> wrote:
>After observing how popular among teens the SMS (Short Message
>Service) in the GSM cellular network really is over here, it is quite
>strange that nothing similar is used in packet radio. These messages
>(up to 160 characters) are entered using the numeric keypad (in a
>somewhat awkward way :-). In addition to sending messages to each
>other, there are information servers that sends data over SMS messages
>and even other types applications built around SMS.
Instead of trying to use packet technology for the last hop, it seems more
logical to me to use paging devices. When there is a possibility to
convert certain surplus POCSAG pagers to amateur frequencies, and
descriptions for that conversion would be published, it would be possible
to add a POCSAG transmitter to packet radio network nodes. The packet
network could be used to distribute the messages, and the POCSAG
transmissions can be used for the last hop.
(of course the disadvantage is that the mobile party cannot reply)
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/ |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V99 #233
******************************
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: hd-group@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: hdaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
