| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 12.10.99 20:28l 214 Lines 7729 Bytes #-9721 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_257K
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/257K
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<OK0POK<OK0PAB<HA5OB<HA3PG<PP5BLU<IW9EXL<
SV1AAW<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991012/1359Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:7543 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_257
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA21179 ; Tue, 12 Oct 99 13:39:40 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016366 ; Tue, 12 Oct 99 07:48:18 MET
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 99 07:44:43 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_257K>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/257K
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> implementation and such easily follows. Kill MS-DOS. Kill Windows.
I've done a bit of it using Cold Fusion for the middleware server and
O'Reilly Website as the web server. Could just as well have been PERL
and Apache or Bluestone and Netscape Commerce Server. Not all
that hard really.
> > Disclaimer: Yes, I know the above sounds a lot like the integration
> > of ham radio networking with the internet. That is exactly what it is.
> > I hope everyone can understand the difference between taking ideas
> > and techniques from the internet for use in ham radio, and replacing
> > ham radio with the internet itself. I propose the former, and not
> > the later.
>
> Yes, but what most people seem to bitch about is USING the Internet to
replace
> wireless links - and for emergency communication purposes, they're
correct.
Exactly my point.
> It's interesting that here in Southern California, our local SCDCC
(Digital
> Council) chair (me) is pro-TCP/IP, yet our local SCAPS (packet BBS sysops)
> chair is anti-TCP/IP (at least as far as traffic forwarding is concerned),
yet
> our groups are getting along quite well. [For those in the western
states, the
> members of SCAPS are all part of "Westnet" - the packet BBS network for
the
> western third of the U.S.]
We have a similar situation here. Most of the BBS traffic moves in the
traditional
manner. However, my link with N7QDN is "all tcp/ip" for messages and
bulletins.
We both gate to/from the BBS forwarding network, but exchange all traffic
between our systems using tcp/ip. Nobody cares. The traffic all gets where
it is intended, via ham radio only. This is the SNOS stuff ...
> In fact, on the SCDCC web site (namely, at
> "http://www.qsl.net/scdcc/iprestrict.html"), we have reserved a page for
> traffic restrictions for TCP/IP - classic AX.25 BBS interchange (but are
still
> working on what those restrictions should be). My PERSONAL view of those
> restrictions are as follows:
> - E-mail: None as a result of a TCP/IP source. The AX.25 network may
> already have its own size limits....
No non-ham email handled, other than NTS. No size limits.
> - News: No non-amateur originated bulletins should traverse.
Agree, with caveat above re moderated newsgroups.
> - Callbooks: Single and low volume lookups may occur, but high volume
> lookups (like "all of zipcode 10001") are discouraged.
No limits here. Someone once did a "Gimme all the hams in Oregon
> - Web pages: Only text-only pages of probably no more than 4k should
> be allowed - all others should probably be banned. (size could be
adjusted)
No size limits.
> - FTP: Same - size limit of maybe 10k.
No size limits. As a practical matter, files larger than a couple MB
might never finish <grin>, but .5 MB files have not been a problem.
> - Telnet: Allowed - effectively the same as using Net/ROM nodes.
Exactly. "How can one tell?"
> - All other traffic: Either forbidden or not supported.
All traffic permitted here. Have even run NetMeeting sessions over ham
radio.
Slow, but it works.
> Remember that these are meant for AX.25-BBS to TCP/IP interchange only and
are
> *** NOT *** restrictions to be imposed on a TCP/IP-only reserved
frequency.
We consider the network to be one network. No special frequencies or uses.
Keep everyone together instead of forcing them apart ...
But this last bit is somewhat of a diversion from the topic I suspect.
Thanks for the ax25.* idea ... will play with it ...
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 16:40:31 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
>news:slrn80177q.j02.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
>> Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>> >A couple folks asked that I repost my specific suggestions
>> >on how to migrate the existing BBS network to the model in
>> >current use on the internet. Here they are again. Not well
>> >organized, a bit of babble, but specific ideas. Would they
>> >work in practice? I don't know (yet) but may implement some
>> >of them and find out.
>> This has all been done already. As you write, mail gateways
>> have existed for a long time. Bulletin-to-News gateways also
>> exist. There has been one operating (on a Linux system) for
>> years in the area over here, and I have also seen these systems
>> in Germany. Most likely the system is available as free software.
>> It works like you describe: a separate news (sub)hierarchy is
>> created, with groups named after the SB xxxx field in the BBS
>> message.
>> Besides the usual startup problems (id's being scrambled and thus
>> messages being duplicated when more of these gateways appear and
>> they operate bidirectionally), it seems to work fine.
>> Maybe you should add it to your BBS too...
>I did about two years ago.
>We have been running nntp as a forwarding protocol here.
>(See previous posts).
Then what do you want?
You start out explaining what would be nice to have and how you
would propose these things to be implemented, and then you tell
us that you did these things two years ago (like some others).
Was this just a repost of a historic document?
My own bi-directonal mail forwarder has been working since Feb 1990.
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: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 13:11:17 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:slrn801gbv.m5g.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
> Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>
> >Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
> >news:slrn80177q.j02.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
> >> Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
> >> >A couple folks asked that I repost my specific suggestions
> >> >on how to migrate the existing BBS network to the model in
> >> >current use on the internet. Here they are again. Not well
> >> >organized, a bit of babble, but specific ideas. Would they
> >> >work in practice? I don't know (yet) but may implement some
> >> >of them and find out.
>
> >> This has all been done already. As you write, mail gateways
> >> have existed for a long time. Bulletin-to-News gateways also
> >> exist. There has been one operating (on a Linux system) for
> >> years in the area over here, and I have also seen these systems
> >> in Germany. Most likely the system is available as free software.
>
> >> It works like you describe: a separate news (sub)hierarchy is
> >> created, with groups named after the SB xxxx field in the BBS
> >> message.
>
> >> Besides the usual startup problems (id's being scrambled and thus
> >> messages being duplicated when more of these gateways appear and
> >> they operate bidirectionally), it seems to work fine.
> >> Maybe you should add it to your BBS too...
>
> >I did about two years ago.
> >We have been running nntp as a forwarding protocol here.
To be continued in digest: hd_99_257L
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
