| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 22.06.00 02:59l 181 Lines 7132 Bytes #-9428 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_171D
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/171D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<OE2XOM<OE5XBL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<
PI8GCB<PI8WNO<PI8HGL
Sent: 000621/1817Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:53643 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_171D
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 00 18:52:34 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_171D>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
-------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 13:41:39 GMT
From: "Bill and Tracy" <tmbc@nf.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Packet Gateway/BBS Help
I am trying to setup a packet gateway/BBS for my area. Here is what I have
to use;
P133, 32MB Ram, 850MB HD, NIC
386DX25, 8MB RAM, 200MB HD, NIC
2 VHF radios
1 UHF radio
1 Kantronics KPC-9612 TNC
1 Kantronics UTU-XT TNC
1 PacCommTiny 2 TNC
My Internet connection is an ADSL connection running DHCP. I can connect
both PC to the internet via DHCP.
I have a fair amout of experience with computers, mainly DOS/Windows, so I
think I understand the basics. I was wondering if anyone could tell me the
best and easiest way to setup my gateway/BBS. Should I run DOS, Linux,
JNOS, TNOS, FBB, or etc... I would like to setup a TCP/IP gateway, a full
BBS, and possibly a DX cluster. I thought I would run 9600 baud on UHF and
run two 1200 Baud nodes on VHF. Any info or thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks for your help.
VO1BIL
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 07:47:51 -0500
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: Packet Radio
"David Findlay" wrote
> Is anyone here actually interested in stopping fighting and actually
building
a
> non-commercial network to compete with the internet?
First of all, it's not fighting.
"Compete" probably isn't the word. There is room for an alternative as you
describe.
> 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 .com .mil .org .edu and .net are all rather redundant in Ham radio, so
rather
than countries as a domain, you really only need one domain callsign.something
where something is what you decide to use (.ham .ars, etc). There is a Ham
domain already called ampr.org (amateur packet radio) but it uses the current
domain space. The only way that your new network can succeed is if the two
domains are kept seperate physically. If a person can route over the
commercial
domain, and bypass the Ham domain, you will never expand the network.
> The main barrier that I think your network seems to have had is speed.
Bingo. Speed is 75% of the problem, the other 20% is the people, and the
last 5% is legal. We just recently were given access to modern technology
on the Ham bands. Before, you had to do everything with what was
designed before 1985.
> 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.
Yes, alternative to the Internet. The only way things get done historically,
is that a Ham or club will show a solution at Dayton, or in the Ham magazines,
and hundreds of other Hams are excited by that.
> 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.
The uni operates mostly with Government and State grants. What you propose
would actually be broken down into several Masters and Doctorial levels for
partial fullfilment of their degree's, and take 10 years.
> It would require some central group to allocate IP numbers/domains, but it
> could be done if everyone stopped arguing.
Study up on IP Version 6. With 6, there is no need for a group to allocate,
as you can use the Ethernet MAC address (48 bits) as part of the 128 bit
IP adddress. Cisco should be big into this by now, I know all of my AIX
boxes at work do IPV6 now.
But! Do you really want to use IP, or do you want to design a real
alternative? Think of something better than IP. Remember, you are
wanting to design something with new protocols.
> 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.
In the past people wanted symetric speed, while today they want speed
mostly one way. Consumers want it down, providers want it up.
Thus you can take a T-1 line (ordinary phone network) and run it with
an unsymetric speed. Actually, as I understand it, you can order a "dry"
drop of a phone line from one place in town to another, and pay only $20
a month for each site. Then using DSL modems at each end, you get
unsymetric speed levels based on line-length, and there is no switch in
the middle. Just twisted pair direct.
> 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
You have to start out smaller than a worldwide newsgroup. You need to
solicit members who can brainstorm the different parts of what you need
to get where you're going. If you try to brainstorm here, you will get
mostly ideas from 15 or more years ago. While it's true you need to have
a concept of all the networking basics (terminology for one thing), the
real fun is in the experiments locally. When people put netroms together
at 1200 baud, it was fun, it was Now. They didn't care that it would
eventually collapse upon itself (as theory and networking books suggested).
But when it did, it was only then that they could go to the next level
(and higher monetary outlay) that they all petered out.
The thing to investigate for study, is the microwave channels on the P-3
satellite. It's been hopping around in pre-launch the last 10 years waiting
for a ride, but if it ever gets airborne, it will be a big repeater that
covers
the whole country. Hopefully they will have some data channels set aside
for new experiments.
Go out and try to find 10 antenna sites of 200 feet or more. It is very
difficult today. LMR (Land Mobile Radio) is shrinking as technology
expands. What used to take 100's of radio sites, now is done via
leased-line and satellite terminals. Ham radio must go the same direction.
The Cell-Phone types don't put up anything higher than 99 feet, so they
don't have to have a light on top. 100 foot doesn't have much of a
line of sight when you consider all the propagation zones.
Just my meek opinions.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:02:56 -0400
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Packet Radio
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:41:45 +1000, "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>Does any documentation on this network still exist online?
The best source of documentation is the collection of Digital Computer
Network Conference Proceedings published by TAPR and the ARRL.
In those 18 or so volumes you'll find that nearly everything you've mentioned
in this thread, and much more, has been tried, analyzed, and mostly been
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_171E
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
