| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 25.09.99 03:25l 219 Lines 7867 Bytes #-9766 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_239K
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/239K
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0HOT<DB0ERF<DB0HSK<PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<
PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990924/2113Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:2301 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_239
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19778 ; Fri, 24 Sep 99 20:33:49 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015865 ; Fri, 24 Sep 99 21:08:24 MET
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 99 21:01:33 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_239K>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/239K
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
timidly worried about whether we should change the Rules to allow it.
Hank, don't give me that "crap". I know better. I hung out on the NTS CW
traffic nets for years handling messages by hand.
Face it! Ham's are generally just a bunch of "old fogies" to old, tired,
and mired in ancient traditions to take a chance on something new like their
forefathers did with short waves back in the early days of radio!
I say we need "new think" for the new millenium! Hello ! ! The year 2000
is only 4 months away. Let's build a modern packet network.
Let's change the Rules, heck if we can't change em, then maybe we should get
reckless and break em! [I'll bet Wayne Green loves this, heh, heh.]
Don't tell me that ham's can take credit for amateur packet radio, it was
that unlicensed computer scientist, MerCado in Canada who changed the Rules,
deregulated to get it all started! Where were the Ham Pioneers then? Bah,
humbug!
Now if only we could get Charlie Brabbam to stop bitching and get off his
ass and do some "new think" and stop spreading misinformation and half
truths, then we could just begin to get somewhere!
If TOM were still around he would probably apply both the Wouf Hong and the
Rettysnitch to Charlie.
Thoughts anyone?
Peter AB4BC
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 18:49:33 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: The Aplication Mantra
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7sai0a$7no@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com...
<snip/chop>
> I say we need "new think" for the new millenium! Hello ! ! The year 2000
> is only 4 months away. Let's build a modern packet network.
Yup.
> Let's change the Rules, heck if we can't change em, then maybe we should
get
> reckless and break em! [I'll bet Wayne Green loves this, heh, heh.]
Not a problem.
> Don't tell me that ham's can take credit for amateur packet radio, it was
> that unlicensed computer scientist, MerCado in Canada who changed the
Rules,
> deregulated to get it all started! Where were the Ham Pioneers then?
Bah,
> humbug!
Credit for getting packet started certainly goes to the Canadians!
Took us Yanks to actually DO something with it though.
> Now if only we could get Charlie Brabbam to stop bitching and get off his
> ass and do some "new think" and stop spreading misinformation and half
> truths, then we could just begin to get somewhere!
I see a problem here: Charles is mainly right.
> If TOM were still around he would probably apply both the Wouf Hong and
the
> Rettysnitch to Charlie.
And to certain unnamed ARRL officials who dropped that ball ...
> Thoughts anyone?
How to get things moving?
Needs volunteers.
> Peter AB4BC
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 21:26:50 -0400
From: Tony Giroux <agiroux@cvn.net>
Subject: Those Wide, Open Spaces
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------5DC78F4EB9284BD63806FCE2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hank Oredson wrote:
>
> Tony Giroux <agiroux@cvn.net> wrote in message
> news:37E81A6A.E3B69A49@cvn.net...
> >
> > Some dumb questions from the peanut gallery, here:
>
> Um ... not so dumb. Nobody has mentioned the architecture of the
> store and forward network on HF.
>
> > What HF frequency has the most reliability for what distance at
> > all hours of the day? When we find that answer we would know how far
> > apart HF Gateway/BBS nodes should be. Or can we have the software
> > determine the MUF for a given time period? Then we can have primary
> > and secondary frequencies for the node to use without a lot of time
> > used scanning for DX. Can we have the network house keeping routines
> > keep each node aprised of the distance or locations of the other nodes?
> > MUG/LUF stats are available all the time and normally predictable. There
> > should be an easy way to get them into the HF node software.
>
> On HF most systems are frequency agile. i.e. the recievers scan a list
> of frequencies when waiting for incoming connections. For outgoing
> connections, different frequencies are attempted until a link is
> established.
> The order of frequencies attempted for a given path changes during
> the year and during the sunspot cycle, so the sysop needs to make occasional
> changes. Some systems are point to point. Examples:
>
> I have one radio on 7.087 (LSB CLOVER) full time. It is used to link
> the Pacific NW to Central and Southern California. The 40M band is
> open between these locations nearly 24 hours per day.
>
> My other radio scans various frequencies on the 10/15/20 meter bands.
> It is mainly used for a CLOVER link with WB1DSW in New Hampshire.
> Optimal conditions might be on any of these bands. During daylight, the
> attempt is first made on 10M, then on 15, and last on 20. At night the
> 10M attempt is not made.
>
> Another example: if N0IA in Florida has NTS traffic for the Pacific NW,
> he has the choice of 3 or 4 stations using CLOVER, and another 5 or 6
> using PACTOR. Between us we cover "most" bands 100% of the time.
> I do not know what N0IA has as his list of attempts, but I do notice
> him connect here on 20M most often.
>
> > Please understand that I ask these questions as a systems guy, not a
> > programmer. I hope I haven't gotten to far off the track.
>
> The systems implications are "interesting". There need to be lists of which
> station scans what frequencies with what capability. Sysops need to
> discuss routing changes from time to time. Stations drop out of the net,
> new stations arrive. Propagation changes, making some links useless
> and other links improve. Example: with 10M now open most days, I
> can move a LOT of traffic to/from WB1DSW because the link is very
> good; we often get actual data rates well above 300 BPS for hours at
> a time.
>
> We need more participation in these HF nets. Many sysops have shut
> down because the traffic into and out of their area was grabbed off
> the ham radio nets and moved to the internet instead. To a large extent,
> those sysops have not been replaced, and the HF nets are rapidly dying.
>
> ---
>
> ... Hank
>
> http://horedson.home.att.net
Thanks for the info -- between you and Cathryn, I'm learning some really
neat stuff.
I read ahead a couple of messages before responding, this time.
Unfortunately, more questions. I can understand how the software should
be controlling what the TNC does. Can software determine, through the
TNC, what are the best frequencies to use? Does the
average Clover or Pactor controller have the capability of relaying that
kind of data to the software?
Also, what are the requirements for power & antennas for the HF Node?
I, like Cathryn,
am limited in what I can fit into a small backyard without iritating
spouse and neighbors. I do have one radio (IC-746) that is software
controllable and one DX-70T that isn't. I don't have any amplifier to
get past 100 (+change) watts output. I, also
have a TS-520, but the requirement for retuning the finals sort of
eliminates automated
frequency changes.
I think the next one is for Cathryn -- I use Linux at home. I am
working on the Ham net
AX.25 routines for VHF/UHF packet. Is there software available for Unix
Based machines?
As I said, I'm not a programmer. I know some C & assembly, but mostly
To be continued in digest: hd_99_239L
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
