| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 11.12.99 17:44l 237 Lines 7847 Bytes #-9654 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_311B
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/311B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0ROF<DB0ERF<DB0SHG<DB0OBK<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<
PI8GCB<PI8WNO<PI8HGL<PI8VNW
Sent: 991210/2214Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:31571 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_31
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA25844 ; Fri, 10 Dec 99 21:48:10 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00017148 ; Fri, 10 Dec 99 20:11:30 MET
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 99 20:08:32 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_311B>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/311B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
is a little under 1.5MB. You can read it with a PDF reader such as Adobe
Acrobat 3 or 4.
This document is still a draft. There will now be a 15-day public
discussion period in which anyone may feed back comments, criticisms
and suggestions for improvement. Full information on how to do this is
contained within the document.
The final cutoff for comment is midnight U.S. Pacific time on Sunday 19
December (i.e. 0800 UTC on Monday 20 December).
After this date the Working Group will consider all the comments, and
will issue the final approved version of the Specification as soon as
possible thereafter.
John Ackermann, N8UR (jra@febo.com)
Administrative Chair
APRS Working Group
4 December 1999
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 19:00:35 GMT
From: jra@febo.com (John Ackermann N8UR)
Subject: APRS PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION
In article <tb6h28.f3p.ln@server.localdomain.>, g8ecj@abmdata.demon.co.uk
wrote:
>I'm glad that someone has clarified the situation. The problem was also
>that the sources were closed (I gave up trying to get any info on the system
>some months ago so don't know if this is still the case) so the spec couldn't
>be infered from the software either.
>
>If its all open now and the implentations have been opened up so they can be
>implemented on other than a Windows based PC (and Mac and DOS) then I
>certainly welcome it.
>
>We have too many closed systems in what should be just a hobby where surely
>the best chance of learning something is where it doesn't just involve a
>'black box' (hardware or software!!)
The answers that Steve and others have posted are generally accurate, but the
terminology has been a bit off. Here's an attempt to clarify.
The APRS Working Group Charter says that "the on-air [APRS] protocols
themselves should be open to general amateur radio development and not be
restricted by copyright." That means that anyone can develop products that
use the APRS on-air protocols without getting anyone's permission. The goal
of the Protocol Specification is to make it easier for folks to do that.
However, each author (including Bob Bruninga) retains ownership of the code,
documentation, and other materials which he created, and it's up to him to
decide whether, when, and how to allow others to use them. Bob also owns the
"APRS" trademark, which means that you can't use "APRS" in a product name
without his permission.
One goal of the Working Group is to create a verification test suite and a
certification process that will allow qualified products to refer to
themselves as "APRS Certified." It may be awhile before all the pieces are in
place (the Specification is just the first step), but we're working on it.
Hope this helps.
John Ackermann N8UR (jra@febo.com)
Administrative Chair, APRS Working Group
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 16:43:01 -0500
From: "Rob" <NoEmail@NoWay.com>
Subject: Baycomm software with KISS modems
I see that the most recent version of the Baycomm software not only supports
simple Baycom modems but also any TNC with KISS mode.
Has anyone tried the Baycomm software with a KISS TNC? Is it any good?
Or am I better using TXPCX or TFKISS driver for DOS and a good WA8DED host
mode compatible terminal program (eg GP, SP, TPK etc) for my KISS modem??
73's
Rob
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 13:38:12 GMT
From: xpware@home.com (Gary L. Johnson)
Subject: BEST TNC PROGRAM
On Sun, 5 Dec 1999 22:08:04 -0500, "Paul Tait" <ptait@neo.rr.com>
wrote:
>HI...I recently purchased a Hal DXP-38 and I am disappointed with the
>software, so I bought the Easyterm software and it seems to work well in
>windows, Im still disappointed with the contesting side of the program....I
>was wondering if the way to go is the WF1B program or is XPWIN the way to
>go??Any info or opinions would be appreciated...Tks
>
>de Paul **NC8T**
>
Well probably WF1B is the better of the contesting software
for the HAL units. Best bet is to try the programs and find out which
one you like the best. XPWIN can be downloaded at
www.goodnet.com/~gjohnson. Not sure about WF1B, but would guess
a quick check on any of the better search engines will turn up
a few links.
73 Gary KF7XP
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 16:20:18 GMT
From: "KF4OBL" <kf4obl@icharleston.net>
Subject: Call for Submissions
The Worldwide Awards Locator is looking for new awards. We are currently
compiling a list if all awards available to amateur radio operators. If you
know of any awards not listed on the Locator Site
(http://www.icharleston.net/kf4obl/awards.html) then by all means let me
know. This can be a great site with some very useful info if everyone will
contribute. Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.
--
----------------------------------------------------------
KF4OBL
Worldwide Awards Locator
http://www.icharleston.net/kf4obl/awards.html
Email Me if you know of any Amateur Radio Awards
>.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 1999 08:22:48 GMT
From: Hans-Peter Zorn <hpz@gmx.net>
Subject: Decoding packet with a soundcard in Windows
Rob <NoEmail@noway.com> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> I was looking for these Linux programs. All I could find were programs for
> AX.25 and Linux.
> I couldn't find any Linux Programs for RTTY or Pactor. (All I see were
> references that they were TO BE developed)
> Were can I find them?
http://www.ife.ee.ethz.ch/~sailer/ham/linux/hf.html
Hans-Peter
--
Hans-Peter Zorn, Karlsruhe, Germany
http://www.stud.uni-karlsruhe.de/~uhsm/ hpz@gmx.net (preferred)
http://1409.org/people/hp/ hp@1409.org (hamradio stuff)
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 09:32:02 +0100
From: Alexander Kurpiers <a.kurpiers@uet.tu-darmstadt.de>
Subject: German packet radio
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------EC733EFD8943ADAA8450DC07
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nico Palermo wrote:
> MSK performance is worse than BPSK only if demodulated by a coherent
> detector which takes symbol-by-symbol decisions (3 dB penalty), either
> by an incoherent one (6 dB penalty), or by a frequency discriminator. I=
n
> the latter case the optimum modulation index is 1.25 (not 0.5) and ther=
e
> is a ~7 dB penalty over Viterbi decoding.
You can get back a lot if you use a DFE after the frequency
discriminator. This is because the PSD of the noise is not white after
the non-linear demodulator. The DFE can be used to compensate for the
noise correlation. This is not as complicated as viterbi decoding and of
course not as demanding in terms of computational power. The viterbi
decoding becomes only feasable for simple QPSK-type receivers eg. used
for GSM where h=3D0.5 (MSK). If the modulation index is arbitrarily
chosen, the receiver is much more complicated (a bank of correlators in
front of the viterbi). Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with
coding!!! We are talking about the modulation having memory. No coding
used.
I=B4ve done some simulations for 4-FSK using a Gaussian filtered FSK with=
BT=3D0.4 and h=3D0.2. The receiver was a frequency discriminator followed=
by
a T/2-DFE. I gained about 6dB in S/N compared to a "normal" receiver
without DFE and with ISI-free modulation ala G3RUH (BTW: when CPFSK
To be continued in digest: hd_99_311C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
