| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.09.99 07:09l 199 Lines 7867 Bytes #-9762 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_241G
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/241G
Path: DB0AAB<DB0FSG<DB0PV<DB0MAK<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<OK0PHL<OK0PBB<OK0PAB<
HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990926/0104Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:2702 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_241
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19930 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 00:15:10 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015941 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:08:37 MET
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:03:33 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_241G>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/241G
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
link distances you're talking about. That's going to cause all sorts
of multipath problems due to all of the reflections the receiving
end is going to have that are above its noise floor. (It may also
cause problems for others using the same, or adjacent, frequencies
for other links.)
The correct answer is not to just try to "bull through". The correct
answer is to properly engineer the path so that it will work at a
power level where multipath will fall below the receive site noise
floor.
>I guess my bottom line is that I'm not at all interested in why
>this cannot be done. I'm only interested in how to go about
>doing it. Where there are no links, a not-quite-perfect link
>is a huge improvement.
I've told you how to do it. Do the RF path engineering properly.
There are well established procedures and formulas for doing
this. AT&T Long Lines, and others who've needed RF links of a
specified quality, have been using these procedures for over
half a century. They are well proven.
>Have begun gathering the needed test gear, which I need in any
>case to be able to get some existing 9600 baud links working
>properly. But I still need someone for the "other end" of the
>high speed link
That's always the case. Networks are by nature cooperative
efforts.
Gary
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it |mail to ke4zv@bellsouth.net
534 Shannon Way | We break it |
Lawrenceville, GA | Guaranteed |
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 21:37:19 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
>
> That's one European country heard from. Any others???
Not many Europeans hang out here. Maybe Steve's nasty, ignorant comments
about Europe might give you a good hint why. Also, I imagine they get bored
pretty quickly as US hams debate the possibility of doing things with packet
that the Europeans have already been doing for several years. When you were
in high-school, did you hang out a lot with 4th-graders, or enjoy
overhearing their conversations?
>
> Hopefully, other Europeans are following this thread and testify as to
> whether Internet access is expensive in their country, and whether it's
> permissible to have Internet/packet gateways there. Either Charles is
> right, or he's wrong. Word from more Europeans will finally put that
> matter to rest.
I'm right or wrong, depending on what area you choose to examine in detail.
If you look at the overall picture over there, concentrating on those places
where the European net has developed the most, you will find that I am
right.
Most of my information comes from Germany, but I know some folks in the
Netherlands, France, Switzerland and England too.
All of my information concerning this has come directly from the packet ops
and sysops over there, not from some group of provincial geeks here in the
US who dunno squat about the rest of the world but do not let their lack of
knowlege keep them from spouting off "expert" opinions.
There is an extremely active CB community over there, who normally run the
JNOS/FBB combination and run high-speed non-ham links like Steve is playing
with. I wasn't kidding when I suggested that those who wish to set up radio
access to the Internet in the US without those pesky Ham regulations should
seriously consider CB. It's not just 11 meters anymore, and would probably
do just fine for the purposes of US LandLine Lids, just as it has for the
European ones for years.
A lot of times you will see European CB stations running gateways in places
where it is illegal to do so with ham radio. These stations get along well
with US LandLine Lid stations, sometimes going so far as to swap "mail" with
them across networks. For this reason, they are somertimes mistaken for hams
by US amateurs who are not used to CB'ers going digital.
>
> Incidentally, I *have* noted that packet/Internet gateways do exist in a
> number of European countries, including Slovenia, which boasts a
> very high speed packet network.
That's the 1 MB stuff we heard so much about year before last, isn't it? The
story I got was that it is fairly cheap 'n easy to build... Is there some
fatal flaw that has kept it from storming the packet world? Seems to me that
if you're going to use the complicated, expensive stuff that requires test
equipment, why not go whole hog and shoot for the best speed you can get?
I really kind of expected to see a kit for something like that, by now.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 12:16:32 -0500
From: "Peter O. Brackett" <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Charles:
You are missing the whole point.
Don't be so paranoid! There is not some big conspiracy of tcp/ip linux
zealots out there. They honestly want to help ham packet radio.
I have seen and read your many missives on this NG about the difficulty of
making long haul radio trunking systems for amateur packet radio. Everyone
recognizes that fact.
So the main point and the question is how best to make use of radio on the
access network not on the long haul network. That is/was Phil's (KA9Q)
point in the email that you quoted. Let the big pipe long haul be done by
fiber. Hams should still keep some small bandwidth HF applications, call it
Internet backup if you like, for such as H&W messages on the xTOR's.
But Charles please, please. . . let's not have others steal all of our
oceans of UHF and uWave bandwidth, just because we are too slow to use it!
Use it or loose it! We really need to fill up our frequencies with wide and
broadband applications and attract a whole new generation of kids in junior
and high school to our grand hobby. Otherwise all of us "old farts" will
wither and die and take ham packet radio with us!
The only place we can reasonably use all of that bandwidth is on the
access. You have admitted yourself many times, recently on the "wide open
spaces" thread, that hams will never be able to build a big pipe long haul
radio network.
Charlie get with it!
Hello ! ! ! The Internet is here! The kids are on fire with interest, when
I bring the local neighborhood kids into my shack to hear me talk on short
wave, they go to sleep! Face it the generation that you grew up in was
interested in radio, radio was hot, hot, just like the Internet today,
Today the kids, they are not building crystal sets and listening to CB any
more, they are on the net.
Let's try to develop ham packet radio systems that will be interesting to
them and attract those young folks.
Comments, thoughts,
Peter AB4BC
Charles Brabham <n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote in message
news:7sg37l$hbl@enews3.newsguy.com...
>
> Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
> news:slrn7umcuj.ar4.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
>
> >
> > Still, most of the network is operating via radio here. You see, the
> > hobby is amateur radio. Of course there are *a lot* more people on the
> > Internet than on amateur radio, probably there are even more amateurs
> > on Internet than on packet radio. But that is just a different hobby.
>
> Careful, Rob... That kind of talk will get you nowhere in a hurry with
the
> TAPR goons and LandLine Lids here in the US.
>
> If you start talking about using radio instead of the Internet, they'll
To be continued in digest: hd_99_241H
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
