| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.09.99 09:55l 210 Lines 7805 Bytes #-9759 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_241N
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/241N
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0ERF<DB0HSK<PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8APD<PI8WNO<PI8HGL<
PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990926/0241Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:2716 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_241
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19946 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:06:03 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015962 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:09:56 MET
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:04:04 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_241N>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/241N
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
and only cover a very small part of it?
Are your network's users so isolated and insulated from the rest of the
packet world that they NEVER communicate with that outside world?
Are you claiming that all of those communications with "the rest of the
world" are strictly via Amateur Radio, and that no Internet links are used
to, let's say, communicate with and within other tcpip LANS, download packet
bulletins via telnet, or perhaps telnet to join in on distant ham radio
converse servers? Hmmm?
Come on, now, Gary.... 'Fess up!
Caught you, old boy. I knew I had you by the short 'n curlies when you
started sounding desperate and substituted name calling for rational debate.
You may be the only tcpip guy in the states with the stones to ignore Greg
Jones' pronouncement of the death of large-scale packet networking, but you
are still a tcpip guy nonetheless, and I think we all know by now how tcpip
LANS communicate with each other, and it sure ain't ham radio.
You can call me names until you are blue in the face, but that won't change
the facts.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 07:11:22 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Rob:
>I take it that you don't like to shop!
>Heh, heh. Monopolists really love folks who hate to shop.
>Anti-shoppers always get the products and services they deserve.
Most people here like to shop for fun. Shopping for infrastructural
items they don't understand is not considered to be fun.
We like to use the telephone for the purpose we got it, not to answer
sales calls from the company that provided it and from all its competitors.
Especially not when these calls are all made at dinnertime.
I know you US people love such disturbances, and really like to spend a
night to figure out which phone company will be the most cost-effective for
the upcoming quarter, and to memorize all the carrier-select codes.
I appreciate that you are happy with such a lifestyle, only I don't
understand it...
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 |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 06:55:41 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>news:7sgblm$mlr@dfw-ixnews19.ix.netcom.com...
>> 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 would be most interesting in meeting one or two of them
>... those that want to do something with RF and tcp/ip that is.
>I only know of one other within a 100 mile radius.
Apparently your region is not well developed in that area... there
are many hams using Linux on packet radio over here. Usually they used
xNOS when they had a DOS system and found that Linux does these protocols
natively.
Our small country with less than 20.000 radio amateurs has 2450 ampr.org
IP addresses assigned.
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 |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 04:06:54 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7sgblm$mlr@dfw-ixnews19.ix.netcom.com...
> Charles:
>
> You are missing the whole point.
Which one is that? The one about Hams using Radio to communicate?
>
> 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.
Actually I am more concerned about people with strong connections to the
telco industry going around trying to convince hams that they should
depopulate the bands most useful for packet (440MHz on up) and use the
Internet instead for the bulk of our "ham radio" communications.
I strongly suspect the motives of these people.
I suppose it slipped by you, but when the LandLine Lids undercut and tried
to destroy the US packet network, they also sharply reduced the number of
Hams using those bands at the same time that they decimated the US packet
population that our manufacturers relied upon in order to stay in business.
AEA went belly-up, as did DRSI and a few others. None of these things
happened in Europe, where "LandLine Lids" were not allowed to destroy the
network, or it's base of users and manufacturers.
We need the same legal protection here in the US. Let's outlaw the use of
non-ham means as the primary transport of Amateur Radio traffic. Secondary,
final delivery stuff to non-hams as in autopatches and NTS is just fine.
It worked in Europe, and it will work here, too.
>
> 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.
But not everyone else is willing to consider any alternative beyond throwing
up their hands, giving up, and deciding that if they are not clever enough
to figure out a solution, then no other ham could possibly ever do so in the
future either so we might as well just give up now and go over to the
Internet.
Nope, I'm not a "quitter", and I realize that what cannot be figured out
today will sure as heck not be figured out tomorrow either, if we just give
up and quit now.
The main difference between me and a LandLine Lid like Greg Jones is that my
ego allows for the possibility that others may figure out things in the
future that I cannot see the answer to now. I express this confidence in
myself and in my fellow hams by not going for the "easy out", and giving up
simply because I am facing a difficult problem.
Also: I am not limiting myself to tcpip. I don't believe in artificially
handicapping myself in that manner. I'll use whatever works best, and folks
who insist that I be "politically correct" in this matter will have to take
a place in line with all the other folks who can kiss my hiney.
>
> 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.
Those of you who choose to give up and quit rather than take the thorny road
to excellence and accomplishment are quite welcome to do so, as long as your
activities do not interfere with those of us who are NOT quitters.
>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.
To be continued in digest: hd_99_241O
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
