| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.06.00 04:07l 214 Lines 7637 Bytes #-9436 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_170G
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/170G
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8APD<PI8WNO<
PI8HGL
Sent: 000619/2012Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:53021 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_170G
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 00 17:51:24 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_170G>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
about. These are the kind of folks who killed off the networks.
Steve will, of course, reply to THIS post as well. He alway must
have the last word of complaint about anything anyone posts here.
However he was not around when the ham radio networks were
built, nor was he around when they were usable. He, and others
like him, killed off the networks.
It is a bit of a pain, but from time to time I take him out of my
killfile and read and respond to his silly postings.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:43:40 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
> So you see David, you are exactly correct. There are these folks like
> Steve who follow everyone around the ham radio newsgroups to
> post stupid negative comments. He has nothing else to do, except
> to try an annoy people so he will have yet another post to complain
> about. These are the kind of folks who killed off the networks.
I can see what you mean.
> However he was not around when the ham radio networks were
> built, nor was he around when they were usable. He, and others
> like him, killed off the networks.
>
> It is a bit of a pain, but from time to time I take him out of my
> killfile and read and respond to his silly postings.
If these people don't stop being silly they will end up killing amateur
radio too...
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:41:45 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
> Seven years ago the world was covered by a store and forward (BBS)
> network, and extensive connected networks in many areas. For example,
> it was possible, although slow, to obtain a connection from the
southernmost
> part of California to Vancouver, BC ... 1500 miles ... and to chat with
> someone over this connection. That network no longer exists.
Does any documentation on this network still exist online?
> See my posts in the "N0ZO" thread for a bit more commentary on the
> situation, and how it came to pass. The original store and forward
> network was built in less than two years, included over 100 countries,
> all linked via HF radio for the long haul link, VHF/UHF for short haul.
> For a very short period of time, this network had more nodes than
> the internet, but fewer than fidonet.
This was what I was thinking of, except maybe with scientific usage as a
reason to have the network.
> In this newsgroup you will mostly find hams who have no or little interest
> in building or using radio networks. Those that do ... spend their time
> on the radio networks (smile). I'm retired, and can afford the time
> to do both. You can ask some of the others here about my credentials,
> but one clue is that I wrote the software used to build the original
> store and forward network, in late 1983 - early 1984. So I've watched
> the whole growth and (near) death of it.
Does this software still exist? I would love to have a look at it. I am
currently in training for a Cisco Certified Network Associate qualification,
so I have a lot of knowledge about conventional networking. Is anyone here
actually interested in stopping fighting and actually building a
non-commercial network to compete with the internet? I think a lot of people
are starting to get a bit sick of the banner ads, websites that aren't what
they are supposed to be and other problems with the internet(I certainly
am). It would require a whole new suite of protocols, but could include a
www. People could have their name or callsign as a domain, followed by three
letter country code.
The main barrier that I think your network seems to have had is speed. If
you could compress the headers down to just what is required to get the
thing to work, and increase the speed of the links to 1mb/sec it could be a
viable alternative to the internet. Educational and scientific users could
benefit greatly. Say a uni wants to have a network of seismographs they
would just have to link them to the network and they could have free access
to them.
It would require some central group to allocate IP numbers/domains, but it
could be done if everyone stopped arguing. A short while ago, telecoms
thought that the limit of the plain old telephone line network was 56k, but
now HDSL is here and can deliver up to 8Mb/sec on an ordinary phone network.
Who says that such technology couldn't be developed for amateur radio. Sure
you can't buy that gear, but if hams got together and cooperated they could
do it!
David Findlay
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:46:18 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
> 98% of the content having no merit. I know, I read the crap. Also
> 85% of every message (regardless of content) was a header from hell.
> I saw 100:1 header to meat ratios. For every 100 bytes transferred,
> 1 byte was part the message. Hell of a design. And with all that,
> you still couldn't get a reply-receipt.
So what, it *was* a worldwide network. Who says it couldn't have been
improved?
> There was also a communications revolution which had a significant
> effect on the public. So many potential Hams were lost, the ARRL was
> forced to back the FCC no-code license to improve the population. We
> couldn't get anyone willing to learn Choo-Choo era technology.
The problem with you people is that you can't see past your $300 radio and
realize that people can actually build their own gear.
> Networks or store and forward? Most here are very interested in RF
> networks. Not many are interested in a BBS or email engine (S&F).
> We got that already for free.
Okay so store & forward isn't the best, but at least it was better that what
exists now.
David Findlay
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jun 2000 16:01:25 GMT
From: redberd95@aol.comnospam (REDBERD95)
Subject: PSK31 & Icom 706
Does anybody have a ready made interfaces for use with the accessory socket on
an Icom 706MKII?
Does the hf and vhf side use seperate ptt lines? Please reply directly.
Randy KA4NMA
redberd95@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 14:04:51 -0500
From: CAM <W6RCA@mindspring.com>
Subject: PSK31 & Icom 706
REDBERD95 wrote:
> Does anybody have a ready made interfaces for use with the accessory socket
on
> an Icom 706MKII?
I do. It's called an SCS PTC2e. :-)
--
http://www.mindspring.com/~w6rca
------------------------------
Date: (null)
From: (null)
If the phones work, and the internet can be accessed, and commercial
radios work, then there is no need for ham radio. If hams do not build
and use digital radio networks on an ongoing basis, then they will not
know how to build or use one when it is needed in an emergency.
Our national society (ARRL) has fallen down very seriously on this issue.
Even much of the NTS traffic (designed to be training and test for
handling traffic during emergencies) now uses the internet.
This is exactly the result I predicted 7 years ago when the Land Line Lids
began to bypass the radio network.
If it is not used, it will atrophy. It wasn't, and it did.
> Paul OH3LWR
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V2000 #170
******************************
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
| |
