| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 16.03.00 15:17l 236 Lines 7542 Bytes #-9546 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_72B
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/72B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0GPP<DB0OFI<DB0LEL<DB0TTM<DB0FP<DB0GV<DB0SIF<DB0AIS<
DB0ME<ON6AR<PI8HWB<PI8HGL<PE1MVX<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000314/0537Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:55983 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA31382 ; Tue, 14 Mar 00 05:09:01 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00018339 ; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 19:28:10 MET
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 00 19:26:09 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_72B>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/72B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
There is no guarantee that an email message sent via Internet is ever
received either! The Internet email system operates on exactly the same
principles as the packet radio one: accept a message from a client, then
do your best to deliver it to a system nearer to the recepient. When you
detect a recoverable error, retry. When it seems to be fatal or too
many attempts fail, generate a message back to the sender and attempt
to deliver that error message using the same principles.
Messages can get lost between store and forward, information "in the
routing tables" (MX records on Internet) can be (temporarily) wrong causing
loops, and receivers can lose messages before having read them.
The fact that you may see more messages fail on packet than on the Internet
is solely an indication of a better reliability of the average system on
the Internet than on packet, not of an inherently more reliable protocol
on Internet. The fact that the Internet usually uses less intermediate
hops to store-and-forward your message also contributes.
But there certainly is no "guarantee".
Delivery confirmation is just as optional as it is on packet: there even
are several different protocols, and most mail clients don't implement all
protocols. Some of the earlier protocols (still in wide use) are no better
than the //ACK method used in F6FBB BBS.
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: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 08:03:42 -0600
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Digital Amateur Radio License
<horseshoestew@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8abv3c$784>
> I expanded newsgroups, because I think it relates to policy, and ham
> radio in general. If we can't hook amateur radio into the Internet, we
> might as well fold up the tent. If we CAN hook amateur radio into the
> Internet, we are in for another GOLDEN AGE OF HAM RADIO.
>
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but we've been able to hook Amateur
Radio into the Internet for a little over ten years now, Einstein.
What followed was not a "GOLDEN AGE". In fact, the general level of interest
in Packet Radio took a nose-dive about the same time that Amateur tcpip came
into it's own. Figure it out for yourself. Can you say, "LandLine Lids"?
"Golden Age".... That's really funny!
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 2000 12:45:32 -0600
From: tjs@garnet.tc.umn.edu (Timothy J Salo)
Subject: Digital Amateur Radio License
In article <01bf85f3$7a4ce4b0$1500b42c@yt7mpb-9>,
Miroslav Skoric <skoric@ptt.YU> wrote:
>Some suggestions for the new Millenium, but I wouldn't like anybody thinking
>this is another Morse/No-Morse topic. You'd better don't read it.
>
>While reading QST I've noticed that there is no one packet-radio (or any
>other ham-digital mode) email address. The ARRL officers, HQ emloyees,
>directors - no one has put his or her packet or similar address to be
>contacted. Even I can remember some years ago, a couple of section managers
>had their packet addresses printed in QST, but they disappeared. Why? For
>the reason of speed, security on the Internet or something else?
> [...]
Probably for the same reasons you sent your message via the Internet, rather
than packet: ubiquity and reliability.
-tjs
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 21:52:54 -0800
From: "Dana H. Myers K6JQ" <dana@source.net>
Subject: Digital Amateur Radio License
Charles Brabham wrote:
> What followed was not a "GOLDEN AGE". In fact, the general level of interest
> in Packet Radio took a nose-dive about the same time that Amateur tcpip came
> into it's own. Figure it out for yourself. Can you say, "LandLine Lids"?
Charles, I believe your analysis is either flawed, biased, or both. While you
rail against "Amateur tcpip" (sic) and "LandLine Lids" as the cause of the
demise of amateur packet radio, you're completely oblivious to a number of
more relevant issues.
What snuffed interest in amateur wireless networking was the combination of
rapid Internet growth (via wired connections), the virtual inability of
amateurs
to deploy infrastructure even remotely competitive with what was happening
in inexpensive commodity modems, and the absolute fixation of most amateurs
with just shuffling bits around, rather than thinking about the *services*.
Packet Radio nose-dived when people figured out is was a square peg being
driven into a round hole. The users wanted Internet; packet radio could not
compete with the alternatives.
--
Dana K6JQ DoD #j
Dana@Source.Net
>.
------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 2000 13:42:54 GMT
From: yu238956@yorku.ca (Samuel Krausz)
Subject: dosAPRS and BayPac
Anyone know how to get a Tigertronics BayPac BP-1 to work with the dos
version of APRS?
Thanks,
Sam
VA3KES
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2000 16:19:25 -0700
From: Tate <73KC7ZRU73@cyberhighway.net>
Subject: dosAPRS and BayPac
Nope, sorry.
Not finding an answer for that question is why I've stayed away from the
Baypack type modems. Ran into that problem with many of the packet progs I
wanted use back then. Maybe just didn't look in the right places, never found
the answer.
HOWEVER, if you can run Win9x (98 is best choice), WinAPRS will work with a
Baypack type modem if you use the AGW packet engine.
Good luck!
73
Samuel Krausz wrote:
>
> Anyone know how to get a Tigertronics BayPac BP-1 to work with the dos
> version of APRS?
>
> Thanks,
> Sam
> VA3KES
--
KC7ZRU | In Laramie Area
Laramie, WY | UARC Repeater
DN71eh | 146.610
"The Dungeon" online at http://www.cyberhighway.net/~tateb
Remove 73s from addy to send email
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 09:05:51 -0100
From: "Jesús Rios" <jrios@argen.net>
Subject: hammcom
No quiero que aparezca la hora al principio de cada linea cuando edito un
fichero.log
¿Cómo puedo hacerlo?
He entrado en el fichero de CFG, pero solo quito la palabra UTC
Gracias
jrios@argen.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 07:02:38 -0600
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: May QEX digital voice article
"Brian Kelly" wrote
> I went out on the net to find out what your callsign was just for
> openers and QRZ.com came back "There are 0 records matching STEVE
> SAMPSON". Whatta huge surprise. 10-4 Good Buddy?
Like I said, your brain is all shriveled up. SSB and Morse forever eh?
Using the same exact tool, I found two Stephen's and two Steven's.
Pull your head out.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 09:59:13 -0500
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv@bellsouth.net>
Subject: May QEX digital voice article
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_72C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
