| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 16.03.00 14:03l 152 Lines 5705 Bytes #-9547 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_70A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/70A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0ME<ON6AR<
PI8HWB<PI8HGL<PE1MVX<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000313/2042Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:55973 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA31374 ; Mon, 13 Mar 00 18:51:17 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00018315 ; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 19:26:19 MET
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 00 19:25:38 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_70A>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/70A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Fri, 10 Mar 2000 Volume 2000 : Issue 70
Today's Topics:
**NEW VERSION** MindBender v1.2 9247
Digital Amateur Radio License (2 msgs)
Formula to determine throughput (2 msgs)
May QEX digital voice article (2 msgs)
MFJ 1278B INFO PLEASE
Pk-232 and Hamcom?
QST Hams with Macintosh Computers
trade kenwood
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Digital@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Digital-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the Ham-Digital Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
Loop-Detect: Ham-Digital:2000/70
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Mar 2000 09:39:50 GMT
From: tmartin831@aol.com (TMartin831)
Subject: **NEW VERSION** MindBender v1.2 9247
Do NOT click on this file...could be another virus. This person has been
posting this same message in many newsgroups.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:54:15 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Digital Amateur Radio License
Cathryn Mataga <cathryn@junglevision.com> wrote:
>Is there currently a legal issue with ampr.org+internet, as far as emergency
>and disaster communications are concerned? I assumed that setting up,
>'emergency internet' or something like this would be completely legit'
>according to current rules.
Do you really think radio amateurs would be able to setup an "emergency
Internet" that would be capable of providing even the very least usable
service in the case of a diaster???
The traffic on any Internet "backbone" link is several orders of magnitude
above the links that radio amateurs have constructed.
You won't stand a chance when Internet traffic is routed via your link.
Packet loss will be 99.999%.
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: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 10:54:09 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Digital Amateur Radio License
Carl R. Stevenson <wa6vse@fast.net> wrote:
>> Do you really think radio amateurs would be able to setup an "emergency
>> Internet" that would be capable of providing even the very least usable
>> service in the case of a diaster???
>> The traffic on any Internet "backbone" link is several orders of magnitude
>> above the links that radio amateurs have constructed.
>> You won't stand a chance when Internet traffic is routed via your link.
>> Packet loss will be 99.999%.
>> Rob
>Rob ... two points ... first, only selected traffic would be routed to an
>amateur "patch" link,
How are you (in practice) going to select that traffic?
> second, I believe that IF we were allowed to
>connect to and pass traffic to/from the internet much higher bandwidth
>links would become more common, since they would be more useful
>with more content to access.
I don't think so. Yes, you would probably see a lot of "fast local access"
systems, where a group of local amateurs are using it as a free access to
Internet. Most likely they will attach an outdoor antenna to a wireless
LAN adapter.
But I fail to see why there would suddenly appear many high bandwidth links
in these circumstances, links that would be useful as backup links for the
Internet. More likely, even more radio links will be dismantled
"because you can route via Internet", just like it happened with the
BBS forwarding.
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: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 10:50:02 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Formula to determine throughput
Steve Sampson <ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote:
>1 Start Bit, 1 Stop Bit, and 8 data bits, or 10 bits total.
>28.8 kbps / 10 bits = 2.88 k Bytes per second (full duplex).
Wrong. Both 28k8 modems and packet radio don't use the ASYNC format,
they use HDLC. So 8 bits per byte plus a few percent overhead for
bitstuffing and flags.
Besides that, it doesn't answer the question he asked.
(which is not so simple to answer because it depends on many more variables)
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 |
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_70B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
