| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.09.99 10:12l 197 Lines 7803 Bytes #-9758 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_241Q
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/241Q
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0ERF<DB0HSK<PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8APD<PI8WNO<PI8HGL<
PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990926/0252Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:2727 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_241
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19952 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:30:11 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015971 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:10:30 MET
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:04:15 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_241Q>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/241Q
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
I am a member of NEDA, mainly because I like to read the articles in the
NEDA quarterly. I used to edit the (TPRS) Texas Packet Radio Society's
quarterly report a few years ago, so I'm interested in that sort of thing.
The chances of me flying from Texas to New York to attend a NEDA meeting are
pretty slim, but I do what I can to support their efforts from afar.
I'd be most happy to support any other groups who want to upgrade and resume
the growth of their local packet net, and would REALLY be happy to see a
group of Texas hams ready to adopt that same "can do" attitude.
Unfortunately we have TPRS in Texas, and it's chock full 'o LandLine Lids
just like TAPR, so the chances of a packet renaissance in Texas are mighty
slim. They're too busy saying "can't" and making excuses to consider
actually doing anything worthwhile or constructive. What a bunch of losers!
I like to think that most of them came from somewhere else and aren't
actually Texans.
Greg Jones was president of TPRS before he moved on to TAPR, and the Gloom
'n Doom he spread around at that time is still hanging around Texas in a
noxious cloud like a beer fart on a warm, humid day.
Phew! (Waving hand around, to no effect.)
I don't know what the NEDA folks plan... If it were up to me, the next step
would be another large-scale network besides NEDA to upgrade and resume
growth in the same way, then establish the "all-band net" deal I mentioned
earlier, organizing and streamlining the use of HF to communicate between
large-scale networks, that can in turn distribute to/from smaller nets.
I'd also resume testing on the HF multicast stuff. That has more potential
than anything else I've seen in the ham digital world. It would literally
revolutionize digital ham radio, perhaps as much as the introduction of the
TNC, and would be a great advance in the efficient use of HF for non-hams as
well. We have a chance here to make a major contribution to the advancement
of the radio art, if we get off our cans. Wish I was a better programmer.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 18:45:23 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: On the Packet Net:
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7sgrdu$m55@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com...
> Charles:
>
> Bravo . . . good work. Keep it up.
>
> Next steps after FlexNet?
I think you got the wrong impression from that post about the conversion of
the NEDA (North East Digital Association) network from NetRom to FlexNet.
It's the NEDA guys who did all that work. I may have contributed in a minor
way with the "Americanized" FlexNet articles on my web site, but NEDA has
several in-house FlexNet gurus who are much more knowledgeable than I am.
I'm sure they could have gotten along without my support, just fine.
I am a member of NEDA, mainly because I like to read the articles in the
NEDA quarterly. I used to edit the (TPRS) Texas Packet Radio Society's
quarterly report a few years ago, so I'm interested in that sort of thing.
The chances of me flying from Texas to New York to attend a NEDA meeting are
pretty slim, but I do what I can to support their efforts from afar.
I'd be most happy to support any other groups who want to upgrade and resume
the growth of their local packet net, and would REALLY be happy to see a
group of Texas hams ready to adopt that same "can do" attitude.
Unfortunately we have TPRS in Texas, and it's chock full 'o LandLine Lids
just like TAPR, so the chances of a packet renaissance in Texas are mighty
slim. They're too busy saying "can't" and making excuses to consider
actually doing anything worthwhile or constructive. What a bunch of losers!
I like to think that most of them came from somewhere else and aren't
actually Texans.
Greg Jones was president of TPRS before he moved on to TAPR, and the Gloom
'n Doom he spread around at that time is still hanging around Texas in a
noxious cloud like a beer fart on a warm, humid day.
Phew! (Waving hand around, to no effect.)
I don't know what the NEDA folks plan... If it were up to me, the next step
would be another large-scale network besides NEDA to upgrade and resume
growth in the same way, then establish the "all-band net" deal I mentioned
earlier, organizing and streamlining the use of HF to communicate between
large-scale networks, that can in turn distribute to/from smaller nets.
I'd also resume testing on the HF multicast stuff. That has more potential
than anything else I've seen in the ham digital world. It would literally
revolutionize digital ham radio, perhaps as much as the introduction of the
TNC, and would be a great advance in the efficient use of HF for non-hams as
well. We have a chance here to make a major contribution to the advancement
of the radio art, if we get off our cans. Wish I was a better programmer.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 21:37:43 GMT
From: spamhater@ucesucks.nouce.com (Rich)
Subject: Packet modems
On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 14:33:47 -0400, Shawn Upton <supton@eece.maine.edu> wrote:
>What is a packet modem? I see them for sale, but what are they really?
>I thought one only need a tnc inbetween the computer (going into a
>serial port) and the radio. Or is it a device to bypass the tnc, and do
>all the work in software?
A TNC has one or more modems in it. Some TNC's, like the Kantronics
KPC-X products, have the modem so deeply integrated into the TNC that
you can't replace them. Others, like the TAPR TNC-2 and its clones,
have a "modem disconnect header" which allows you to install any
number of different modems. Typically, a TNC-2 style modem will
simply allow you to use different baud rates over the RF
connection.
- Rich
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 15:13:33 GMT
From: marsgal42@hotmail.com
Subject: Packet modems
In article <37EA728B.15FB@eece.maine.edu>,
Shawn Upton <supton@eece.maine.edu> wrote:
> What is a packet modem? I see them for sale, but what are they
really?
> I thought one only need a tnc inbetween the computer (going into a
> serial port) and the radio. Or is it a device to bypass the tnc, and
do
> all the work in software?
In brief: the modem makes the noises to send the bits - tones,
phase shifts, whatever. The TNC handles the protocol.
At one time this was all done in dedicated hardware, because
personal computers weren't powerful enough - with all the
protocol in an external box, all you needed was a dumb terminal.
Which was all many hams had - either in fact, or that was all
their computers could do.
The first development was moving the TNC functions into the
computer software. This allows very simple modems, like the
classic TCM3105/MX614 designs for 1200 baud packet. The modem
is the interface between the computer's bit stream and AFSK
tones, with all the AX.25 functions implemented in software.
With more powerful computers you can move the whole works into
software - all the protocols are in software, and the system
uses DSP algorithms to use the soundcard as a modem.
Sloppy usage often confuses TNC with Modem - especially since
many applications now use the TNC in a raw mode (e.g. KISS),
To be continued in digest: hd_99_241R
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
