| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.11.99 06:39l 251 Lines 7761 Bytes #-9671 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_302D
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/302D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0ROF<DB0MW<DB0NHM<
DB0SHG<DB0OBK<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PI8VNW
Sent: 991126/0150Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:24889 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_30
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA24384 ; Fri, 26 Nov 99 01:15:02 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016998 ; Fri, 26 Nov 99 00:52:16 MET
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 99 00:51:37 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_302D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/302D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> > into this, since
> > > >my understanding is that TCP/IP doesn't really work that efficiently
> > either if the
> > > >underlying protocol provides reliable connections, or if the channel
> > drops packets
> > > >do to random errors, and not due to congestion.
> > >
> > > Right. So just fix that.
> > >
> > > 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, 21 Nov 1999 12:39:43 -0800
From: "Cathryn Mataga" <cathryn@junglevision.com>
Subject: JNOS vs TNOS??
"Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com> wrote in message news:8HX_3.193291$5r2.446860@tor-
nn1.netcom.ca...
> Well I am just learning NOS -- Read NOSIntro and understodd 99% of it.
>
> I will play with JNOS -- Sounds like it is still supported. And I have an
> old 386 collecting dust that would be perfect for JNOS.
>
> When you say CONVERSE I assume it is different that the CONVERSE mode in
> AX.25.
Yeah, it's called wwconvers, I guess. It's really just a set of chat rooms,
and it runs
mostly over the internet, though everyone on the system is from 44.xx.xx.xx or
ham radio ip addresses. And, there are people who do have some ip
RF networks. I talk on converse by one hop to a gateway in Palo Alto --
about 30 miles away. Actually, I think converse has a pretty good crowd
mostly -- and doesn't have the density of 'little hacker kids,' that irc has,
which
I find sort of refreshing.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> "Cathryn Mataga" <cathryn@junglevision.com> wrote in message
> news:Z9X_3.1372$LK3.54900@nuq-read.news.verio.net...
> > Oh, I don't know. I'd say around here, that there are as many people on
> ip, as
> > there are on netrom type stuff. Around here, net connections are cheap,
> so
> > everybody is one hop away from a gateway, basically, and on one hop
> > not many of these issues come up -- really. There's not much of a
> 'network'
> > for ip stuff. And the netrom network is practically, too slow for ip
> stuff. Really
> > the hard answer to all of this is to never drop packets -- ever, and then
> things
> > run pretty smoothly.
> >
> > The thing that keeps ip going, is that converse, seems to finally have the
> last bugs
> > killed in it, and there are actually quite a few people on converse pretty
> > much 24 hours a day -- from what I've seen. Or at least if you want to
> chat
> > ham radio stuff on keyboards, it's better than IRC or any of the internet
> chat rooms.
> > (I'm kind of a jammer magnet, so I tend to stay off of repeaters.)
> >
> >
> >
> > "Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com> wrote in message
> news:g6U_3.193228$5r2.446122@tor-nn1.netcom.ca...
> > > It sounds like IP/TCP is dying and most hams are turning back to NETROM
> (or
> > > KNET etc)
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> > > "Rob Janssen" <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
> > > news:slrn83nj06.ue2.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
> > > > Cathryn Mataga <cathryn@junglevision.com> wrote:
> > > > >I believe there's an advantage to running NOS over internet based IP
> > > stacks
> > > > >like with Linux and WIndows, that you can specify that the retry
> timers
> > > backoff
> > > > >linearly, rather than exponentially.
> > > >
> > > > That is actually a disadvantage. It causes congestion collapse, and
> > > > makes outside observers judge TCP/IP as a bad protocol that jams
> > > > everything else.
> > > >
> > > > >Apparently, this is considered extremely
> > > > >evil from the internet perspective, but it's a fast kluge to get ip
> to
> > > work
> > > > >a little better when the connection is dropping packets due to noisy
> > > links--
> > > > >rather than congestion. (There's a linux Kernel hack, I thought
> someone
> > > posted
> > > > >to do this, though I haven't seen anything like this for Windows.)
> > > >
> > > > Actually, when your links drop packets you should not attempt to
> > > retransmit
> > > > them from the endpoints, but you should adjust your links
> (individually)
> > > > to use a virtual circuit rather than a datagram technique to send the
> > > > packets over that hop.
> > > >
> > > > Most NET and NOS versions support this.
> > > > My version of NET even allows you to setup automatic selection of VC
> or
> > > > Datagram mode based on the independently measured packet loss rate on
> the
> > > > connection, separately for each direction.
> > > > This works very well, without requiring inefficient retransmissions
> from
> > > > the endpoints that yield TCP/IP a bad reputation.
> > > >
> > > > >It's actually, just a hard situation all around, the more I've looked
> > > into this, since
> > > > >my understanding is that TCP/IP doesn't really work that efficiently
> > > either if the
> > > > >underlying protocol provides reliable connections, or if the channel
> > > drops packets
> > > > >do to random errors, and not due to congestion.
> > > >
> > > > Right. So just fix that.
> > > >
> > > > 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: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 22:41:58 +0000
From: Ian Wade <ian@dowrmain.demon.co.uk>
Subject: JNOS vs TNOS??
In article <8HX_3.193291$5r2.446860@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>, Rob
<NoEmail@NoWay.com> writes
>Well I am just learning NOS -- Read NOSIntro and understodd 99% of it.
>
Only 99%? Ohmygawd, I've failed again .... :-))
73
Ian, G3NRW
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| APRS on 144.800 [IO91SX] ~55km/35 miles NNW of London |
| email: g3nrw@arrl.net |
| |
| INTRODUCTION TO APRS: http://www.netro.co.uk/whitepaper.htm |
| APRS PROTOCOL SPEC: http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/aprswg.html |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 19:08:19 -0500
From: "Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com>
Subject: JNOS vs TNOS??
Hi Ian,
Great book. I learned a lot! But it seems that the enthusiasm over NOS has
died down quite a lot - at least here in Canada. Many NOS nodes/stations
have disappeared. I should have tried it a few years ago! But the Net is
still around.
Do you still run NOS?? If so, do you use JNOS, TNOS etc?? Perhaps SV2AGW's
IP/TCP packet programs for windows.
There seems to be many choices these days to try IP/TCP over packet radio.
I am curious what are your thoughts on NOS these days.
73's
Rob
"Ian Wade" <ian@dowrmain.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:zScsnUA2mGP4EwHO@dowrmain.demon.co.uk...
> In article <8HX_3.193291$5r2.446860@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>, Rob
> <NoEmail@NoWay.com> writes
>
> >Well I am just learning NOS -- Read NOSIntro and understodd 99% of it.
To be continued in digest: hd_99_302E
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
