| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 22.06.00 03:04l 162 Lines 7158 Bytes #-9426 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_171F
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/171F
Path: DB0AAB<DB0FSG<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<
PI8HGL
Sent: 000621/1819Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:53645 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_171F
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 00 18:52:37 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_171F>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
propose
> would actually be broken down into several Masters and Doctorial levels
for
> partial fullfilment of their degree's, and take 10 years.
But it could be added to their existing gear and make it easier and cheaper
to monitor.
> 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.
I have. I'm doing a Cisco Certified Network Associate course.
> 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.
I would rather develop a whole new range of protocols suited to radio. This
would include a compressed version of HTTP which could save bandwidth on the
network. Would MAC addressing be needed? Couldn't we just stick to logical
addressing. A certain address prefix could be allocated to each country. We
would also need routing protocols as well. Also it would be good to have
some sort of positioning system that could give you your location based on
ping times to various stations.
> 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.
This wasn't what I meant. What I meant is that if such technology exists for
phone lines, we could develop similar stuff for radio.
> You have to start out smaller than a worldwide newsgroup.
I know. I had a look at the aus.radio.amateur.digital newsgroup and they
only seemed to have three regular posters, and one message per fortnight. So
I came here so I could get some answers.
> 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.
I will get my liscence in a month or so. Then I will build my gear. I am
going to see if I can get the Brisbane Storm Chasers group to join because
they would have a real use for it that would get it off the ground. I am
going to establish an automatic weather station and lightning tracker system
that would be accessable via the network. This would be of use to them,
because it would allow them to get the data while they are out chasing,
instead of having to use mobile phones. I also know that some of them are
Hams so they would be interested. Once I get it going around my area, we
could start extending the network.
> 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.
No good for me. I'm in Australia. I need one in geostationary orbit above
the pacific, then I could transmit to the USA. Maybe if the network takes
off, someone will put one up for the task.
> 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.
Use lower frequencies. Then we might be able to get enough skip to relay
signal from router to router across the country. If we had a high enough
density of users in a urban area you could still use VHF and then use sat or
HF for the long-distance links.
David Finday
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:24:52 +1000
From: "David Findlay" <nedz@bigpond.com>
Subject: Packet Radio
Well i'm still going to build my segment. at least I can use it.
"Gary Coffman" <ke4zv@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:2qiskso424b656kbs31vhscfll5tdh4sap@4ax.com...
> 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
> found wanting for one reason or another. There's plenty of detail, plenty
of
> documentation of the nature of the radio environment (hidden terminal
> problems, exposed terminal problems, multipath, noise, legal proscriptions
> on bandwidth or content, site acquisition problems, routing in a sparse
> network, etc, etc, etc), and the amateur radio social, demographic and
> economic environments, and how they have shaped what is feasible with
> regard to amateur radio digital networks.
>
> Hank makes much of the old message passing system of BBS's loosely linked
> together by various tenuously maintained slow radio links. But it was
never a
> network in the sense you or I (or anyone else seriously connected to
networking
> in the last 10-15 years) mean when we talk of digital networks. It is most
similar
> to the old dial up uucp usenet distribution, but with the dial ups
replaced by less
> reliable and slower radio links.
>
> The sort of real packet switched end to end digital network that you or I
would
> mean when speaking of digital networking has only existed in amateur radio
in
> a few limited areas where careful network engineering, and a hell of a lot
of hard
> work and politics, have been practiced to get it built and maintained.
Technical,
> social, demographic, geographic, and economic factors have prevented any
real
> amateur radio digital network from expanding to become the worldwide
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_171G
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
