| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.09.99 23:30l 197 Lines 6906 Bytes #-9773 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_235C
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/235C
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<OE2XOM<OE5XBL<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<OK0POK<9A0YRB<PP5BLU<IW9EXL<
SV1AAW<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990920/1748Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:382 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_235C
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19346 ; Mon, 20 Sep 99 16:48:56 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015706 ; Mon, 20 Sep 99 18:18:11 MET
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 99 18:11:13 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_235C>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/235C
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
North Texas area. I wrote and supported the TNC64 program that probably
did as much as anything to get a few thousand folks started on packet
when it first came out. The proceeds from that program, given to TPRS,
allowed the first TexNet implementation to be funded and to happen.
I left the packet scene when I became literally "tired" of it after my
retirement from TI and when my consulting and teaching activities started
taking all my time. I have no ties with TAPR or TPRS whatsoever. At this
point in my life - 70 years and counting - the political infighting is
something I leave to folks like you and Greg whatever-his-name-is. I do
retain a professional interest in amateur networking activity, though,
and enjoy keeping up via this newsgroup and others. Your postings I
always read in an attempt to keep up with all happenings in this area.
So, when I ask a civil question on the newsgroup or of you personally I
expect and deserve a civil answer without a lot of political posturing or
personal attack. From what I read, you have a lot to contribute to this
topic. And in my opinion it would be much better received and accomplish
more good if you would put some of that attitude behind you and turn down
the personal crusade. "Just the facts, sir!"
Just some advice - unsolicited - from an interested bystander. And thanks
again for taking time to respond to my question to Rob Jannsen. It is
curious that he has not responded with similar information or with any
information at all.
72/73, George AMA 98452 R/C since 1964
Amateur Radio W5YR, in the 54th year and it just keeps getting better!
AutoPOWER Systems, Fairview, TX (30 mi NE Dallas) Collin County
QRP-L QRP-ARCI FISTS NORCAL ZOMBIE ARS 10-X 33.2 N 96.6 W EM13RE
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 14:39:14 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: FullDup RF links, anyone?
George T. Baker <w5yr@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:37E3CE12.38BDB539@swbell.net...
> Interesting, Charles, and thank you for putting this together for me, but
> what was the network aspect of the activity?
You'll have to clarify that for me... I'm not sure what you are wanting to
know there.
It's a listing packet BBS messages, if that's any help.
>
> I seem to recall back in the 80's that the local BBS's in the Dallas area
> would log similar activity, though not in the quantities you report. What
> role did having the network available play in either allowing or exciting
> this activity?
It's all stuff off of the packet net. If the packet net were not there, I
would have had nothing to display. That's the role the network played.
>What locations did the network(s) link up? How does this
> level of activity compare with similar TexNet stats for the same time
> period? What were the prevailing network protocols? What percentage of
> the links were "pure radio?"
That would be a tough one to answer, since the messages came from all over
the planet and used a variety of ways to get here to north Texas. If I had a
listing of every participant of the network on the planet, I guess I could
send you that. - But I don't.
I can answer that the percentage of "pure radio" (is there such a thing as
"unpure" radio?) is much lower today than it was ten years ago, when the A
types got their hooks into the packet radio net in the USA.
In other words, the US packet net has devolved and diminished on their
watch. - The packet network that only the B types were competent to put
together in the first place.
>
> Look, Charles, let's clear up one thing right up front: regardless of
> your personal biases and opinions, which you seem willing to expound
> freely, there is no way that I can be derided as either a Type A or a
> Landline Lid.
Welll, if somebody ever does, be sure and let me know about it. The
following is the sum total in my reply to you that could concievably be
construed (by a rational person) as being personally addressed to you:
----------------------------------------
If you can't figure out what to *DO* with a network, you should regard that
lack as a personal problem... Plenty of other folks are having no trouble
figuring it out at all.
----------------------------------------
I'll stand by that.
Don't you feel silly devoting the bulk of your post to defense of "attacks"
and "name calling" that never occurred?
You sure look silly as hell to me, and you can take that just as personally
as you like.
I don't have much time, patience, or sympathy for whiners. I'm glad to hear
that you are not a LandLine Lid, too. Usually the two go together, but not
always.
Take a chill-pill, OM!
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 14:57:23 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: FullDup RF links, anyone?
George T. Baker <w5yr@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:37E27426.7BAD150@swbell.net...
> Rob, granted that you have excellent radio networking capabilities - and
> are to be congratulated upon the accomplishment! - I still have a
> question in my mind:
>
> What do you *DO* with the networks?
Let me ask you a related question:
What do YOU *DO* with the internet?
That's what I *DO* with the ham radio network.
Except it runs over ham radio instead of the telephone.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 11:03:46 +0300
From: Paul Keinanen <keinanen@sci.fi>
Subject: FullDup RF links, anyone?
On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 09:53:29 -0500, "Charles Brabham"
<n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote:
<long list of bulletin board message subjects deleted>
>Of course these Packet messages are just the tip of the iceberg... Lots of
>APRS activity, keyboard QSO's, Chatting, and even tcpip activity, all going
>on all the time.
What was the distribution between bulletin forwarding and other
traffic (e.g. in terms of AX.25 frames sent or channel loading) ? Does
the bulletin forwarding use the same channels and equipment as the
more interactive applications ?
Composing a single line message in some chat mode might take 10-15
seconds and in order to have some feel of interactivity, the
propagation time should not be more than that. How far, in terms of
hops can you reach in the evening, when people have time to chat ?
The problem is that if the network has been mainly built for bulletin
To be continued in digest: hd_99_235D
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
