| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.02.00 07:47l 158 Lines 6576 Bytes #-9567 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_56B
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/56B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MAK<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<OK0PHL<OK0PBB<OK0PAB<HA5OB<
HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000226/0306Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:54484 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA31007 ; Sat, 26 Feb 00 01:19:00 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00018108 ; Fri, 25 Feb 2000 20:57:29 MET
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 00 20:53:04 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_56B>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/56B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
the mountain after two weeks(if it had worked, it would have been COOL).
I tried desparately for three weeks to configure it in a way to get it
reliably working in a high-stress environment, without luck(it was a
hopeless abortion). So, I started working on a Linux AX.25-TCP/IP based
solution after this, with the idea of putting a rugged laptop up on the
mountaintop - but this was ANOTHER exercise in futility(in the
Linux world, I have learned that the "working" release was always "just
around the corner"). I finally gave up on this amateur stuff in about
1995 and went off the air(with a brief respite in 1997 to check out the
fledgling(read buggy) GPS and APRS). This was about the time that
telephone modem technology SHOT past ham radio modem technology.
Nowadays, you hear of 56kbps connections, and cable modems at 1Mbps and
above, etc. - but hams are STILL transmitting at 9600bps max, and are
just now getting some decent little toys to take advantage of that
sickly data transfer rate(the new Kenwood TH-d7a radio looks cool).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 06:29:25 +0000
From: Ian Wade <Ian.Wade@care4free.net>
Subject: AX.25 with TCP/IP routing?
In article <894ni6$pcd$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, horseshoestew@my-deja.com
writes
>Let's say you wanted to
>plug your laptop with an ethernet card onto a TCP/IP ethernet network at
>any random job site - you wouldn't expect to be able to just plug it in
>without getting an IP address coordinated - WOULD YOU?
Yes you certainly would, with DHCP. The DHCP server allocates you an
address and away you go. In everyday use for years.
73
Ian, G3NRW
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| APRS on 144.800 [IO91SX] ~55km/35 miles NNW of London |
| email: g3nrw@arrl.net |
| |
| APRS PROTOCOL SPEC: http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/Faprswg.html|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 08:20:18 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: AX.25 with TCP/IP routing?
Daniel Levner <levner@Stanford.EDU> wrote:
>Hello guys, and thank you for all the prompt responses that I got.
>However, I think I phrased my question wrong despite my many attempts. I
>have received replies concerning different dynamic routing protocols and
>different software systems that I may use, BUT, what I'm more concerned
>with is this: is there some protocol or software system that people out
>there USE, which constitutes, in essence, some existing infrastructure?
>If I put up a transmitter somewhere on the globe without making special
>arrangements with people in the area to capture and forward its packets,
>can I count on there being a nearby station that supports one of the
>dynamic routing algorithms that people mentioned, so that it will
>nonetheless receive and forward my packets after my receiver requests it
>to?
No. The closest you can get to that is using the packet satellites, but it
is a store-and-forward operation. So you can send mail (and the mail is
binary transparent, so you can use it to send files too), but not
individual packets that travel directly to a destination.
On the land networks, there is no globally agreed standard protocol. Not
even for routing AX.25, let alone TCP/IP.
(node software designers misjudge IP as a "level above AX.25" to be
routed "over the AX.25 routing mechanism in use", instead of the other
way around)
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWW: http://www.knoware.nl/users/rob |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 12:47:34 -0600
From: W6RCecilA <Cecil.A.Moore@IEEE.org>
Subject: Data rf frequency...which one?
pmarkham wrote:
> If someone can provide an authorative reference, I would appreciate it.
Maybe not authoritative, Pete, but a just a data point for you. My SCS
PTC2e manual says Low tones, 1400Hz mark frequency, 1200Hz space frequency
is used with USB operation. High tones, 2100Hz mark frequency, 2300Hz
space frequency is used with LSB operation. From the developers of
PACTOR, mark is obviously the *higher* frequency.
--
73, Cecil, W6RCA http://www.mindspring.com/~w6rca
>.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Feb 2000 17:37:14 GMT
From: pmarkham@newsguy.com (pmarkham)
Subject: Data rf frequency...which one?
I was told by Cliff Buttschardt, K7RR, after a long wrangle on APRSSIG some
years ago, that mark was the lowest EMITTED rf frequency. He asserted that the
definition (his/mine, above) was the standard for all commercial hf data
stations. The definition he provided made all variations of radios, tncs,
modems, etc. irrelevant regarding discussions of rf frequency of operation
relative to typical amateur operations, and commercial?
I did not research his assertion, then, as it was unequivocable, from high
authority, and given all the other options I heard, read or considered; made
the most sense ;-) It is possible that he, and consequently me, got it
backwards. But....
The definition that Cliff provided and I embraced, wholeheartedly, requires
technical knowledge of the mode and equipment used. That technical requirement
is inconsistent with most folks current view of the world that they can be or
do anything with little to no knowledge. To foster the current view, specific
instructions are often given for a specific activity with little concern of
"universal" definitions given to the jargon used. Consequently, confusion
reigns, and apparently, relative to the topic at hand, as far as I am
concerned, still does!
This morning, I spent a few hours searching the internet for a definition with
authority, and failed. I did find several that referred to the mark rf
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_56C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
