| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 04.02.00 21:32l 219 Lines 6428 Bytes #-9591 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_34C
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/34C
Path: DB0AAB<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<F6KFG<DB0PSC<DB0ACH<DB0WST<DB0AIS<DB0ME<ON6AR<
PI8HWB<PI8HGL<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000204/0216Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:48685 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA29604 ; Fri, 04 Feb 00 01:07:31 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00017784 ; Thu, 03 Feb 2000 21:01:43 MET
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 00 20:58:35 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_34C>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/34C
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
once the memory is full. This behaviour is WRONG. Flow-control means
"control the flow" of data, not "hey, I=B4m fed up". So as long as the
data flows, everything is fine: if the TNC etc. has enough data to
process it would lower CTS, not when the buffer is actually already
full! Usually the bit rate of the RS232 between computer and TNC is a
lot higher than the bit rate of the transmission. Here flow-control has
to reduce the speed of the RS232 connection.
Conclusion: if the KAM really has a problem with some bytes received
after lowering CTS, than this is a big design flaw/bug in the firmware!
73=B4 Alexander DL8AAU/AB0CF
-- =
*----------------------------------+-------------------------------------=
--*
| Alexander F. Kurpiers | Voice:
+49-6151-162369 |
| Institut fuer Nachrichtentechnik | Fax :
+49-6151-165545 |
| Merckstrasse 25 | EMail:
a.kurpiers@uet.tu-darmstadt.de |
| D-64283 Darmstadt (Germany) | Hamradio:
dl8aau@db0ais.#hes.deu.eu |
*----------------------------------+-------------------------------------=
--*
--------------88B5B896161F059E369B6099
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
name="a.kurpiers.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Alexander Kurpiers
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="a.kurpiers.vcf"
begin:vcard
n:Kurpiers;Alexander
tel;cell:+49-177-2347676
tel;fax:+49-6151-165545
tel;work:+49-6151-162369
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
org:TU Darmstadt;Institut f. Nachrichtentechnik
adr:;;Merckstr. 25;Darmstadt;;D-64283;Germany
version:2.1
email;internet:a.kurpiers@uet.tu-darmstadt.de
x-mozilla-cpt:;-21856
fn:Alexander Kurpiers
end:vcard
--------------88B5B896161F059E369B6099--
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 19:32:37 GMT
From: "Gun Steele" <synertool@dodgecity.net>
Subject: Kenwood D700A arrived
What computer are you using with your D700A? We got ready to use one of our
IBM z-50's and noticed that the data rate between radio and computer was
held to 9600bps @ the radio and the z-50 com port cannot apparently be set
lower than 19200. Don't think it's worth digging up a null modem adapter
that the PakRattCE needs, if there is no chance for a correct connection
speed.
Gun Steele, WØGUN
SYNERTOOL
"Chris Arndt" <carndt@slonet.org> wrote in message
news:%vse4.9$v8.3107@news.callamer.com...
> I don't know, to both questions.
>
> In article <VA.0000034a.0001b8c3@p233>,
> Joop van der Velden <pe1dna@amsat.org> wrote:
> >Chris Arndt wrote:
> >
> >> This is a dual band 200 channel radio, and can do the standard 2m/440,
> >> also 2m/2m, and I think 440/440. There is an integral 1200/9600 TNC,
which
> >> can be used split between bands for PACSAT work.
> >
> >> Post questions and I'll try to answer them.
> >
> >What is the tx <> rx turnaround time ?
> >What is the bit error rate for 9600bd use ? Did they make the classical
> >mistake of modulating the VCO ?
> >
> >--
> >Joop van der Velden
> >pe1dna@amsat.org
> >
> >
>
>
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 00:54:01 GMT
From: dana <dana@randomc.com>
Subject: Pen computer, great for packet
I have a lap top with 4 megs of ram, and a 255 hd, for $150 that will
beat his price
before the bidding even starts.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Joe Leikhim wrote:
> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 22:33:01 -0500
> From: Joe Leikhim <jleikhim@nettally.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc, rec.radio.swap, comp.sys.pen
> Subject: Pen computer, great for packet
>
> look here!:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=247064252
> --
> Joe Leikhim K4SAT
> Jleikhim@nettally.com
>
> "tv dinner by the pool,
> i'm so glad i finished school" -F.Zappa 1967
>
> "The Revolution will NOT be televised" -Gil Scott Heron
>
> Dopeler effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they
> come
> at you rapidly.
>
>
>
>
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 16:15:15 -0600
From: Seth Miller <sethmiller73@email.com>
Subject: What is a good TNC?
There is nothing wrong with Kantronics TNC's, I have owned several and
gotten good service out of all of them. They are competitive and arguably
the best of the non-DSP units. For RTTY/Pactor I/G-TOR use you will be well
served with a KAM PLus or KAM'98.
That having been said, at the high end not much else compares to DSP-based
units like the SCS PTC-II or IIe. Throughput on Pactor II (proprietary mode
supported by the SCS units and the virtual standard of most Pactor BBS
systems) is nothing short of amazing given the limitations of an HF
channel. But, to be fair the cost of these units is around 3x that of a
used Kantronics TNC so this must be taken into account. For
keyboard-to-keyboard chats the high throughput modes such as Pactor II or
Clover are overkill, but for email/file transfers/etc. their performance is
quite impressive. As usual, the value of the high-end units depends on your
intended use, but performance-wise the difference is remarkable. For more
information on Pactor II you can visit their web site at
http://www.scs-ptc.com, a lot of information there, but pumping Pactor II
of course.
Hope this helps,
- Seth N6BMB
(please remove the '73' in the above address in order to send a personal
reply)
Hank Oredson wrote:
> ... or other hardware that one can PURCHASE and connect and use?
>
> There is a long thread complaining about Kantronics TNCs, and how
> terrible they are, but nobody has yet posted any suggestions on what
> one should purchase instead. Something equally easy to hook up.
>
> What is better? Timewave? PACCOM? MFJ?
> In what way better?
> Test results to back up the claims?
> Prices and sources?
>
> --
>
> ... Hank
>
> http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V2000 #34
******************************
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: hd-group@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: hdaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
