| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.09.00 23:41l 199 Lines 7377 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_252B
Read: DC1TMA GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/252B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0BRI<DB0HAG<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000920/2018Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:16303 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_252B
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 00 16:38:13 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_252B>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 07:56:42 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@swb.net>
Subject: internet repeater linking
"J. Hoffa" <J.Hoffa@underground.net> wrote in message
news:ss0bj4qbct653@corp.supernews.com...
> What messages?
The messages and bulletrins Hams sent to each other via digital Amateur
Radio, just as they still do today. (In parts of the world where "LandLine
Lids" are outlawed.)
>
> Out of band mods, and scrotum scratchings from Brazil and West Africa?
Yes, all that and more! The message content is determined by the thousands
of Hams who send those messages. It's not really any of your business,
unless a specific message is addressed directly to you.
>
> Ham radio is a real-time communications medium. The stored message
> with email like features has been a complete failure.
>
Nope. It's working just fine - Where "LandLine Lids" such as yourself are
legally restrained from vandalizing the system.
> Get over it.
Don't worry; We (Hams who use Radio) will "get over it"... With the US as a
great example of the damage that "Amateur Telephone" does and with Europe as
a great example of what can be accomplished when "Amateur Telephone" is
outlawed, new, effective regulation of "Amateur Telephone" activity here in
the states is pretty well inevitable. The issue is getting International
attention, and not just on these news groups. The "movers and shakers" are
starting to wake up and smell the coffee.
> > So lets stop the forwarding of packet messages by internet.
> > Let's maintain and increase our radio network for the TRANSPORT of
> > messages. Let's INTEGRATE the technology by using the internet as
> > a vast assemblage of data resources, not as a REPLACEMENT for
> > radio forwarding.
That's the right approach, and since the "LandLine Lid" types have made it
apparent that nothing short of new regulation will stop them from disrupting
the hobby, we are not left with much choice except to regulate their
activities, ENFORCING the common decency and regard for their fellow Hams
that they lack within themselves.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
n5pvl@swbell.net
http://home.swbell.net/n5pvl/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:15:59 -0400
From: "Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com>
Subject: internet repeater linking
Rob,
30 messages is an unrealistic expectation. If only 1% of the Amateurs sent
only one message a day, that would result in over 500 messages per day. And
that's not really enough to support the infrastructure needed . The BBS
message passing concept was doomed from day one, just because of how it was
designed. It wasn't really designed bad, it just wasn't designed to support
the numbers of users that it needed to support.
As to Junk Mail? One person's junk is another's treasure. Comparing to the
Internet Spam, what most people don't realize is that Spam is profitable, if
it wasn't, why would so many people be doing it?! It's part of any messaging
system and you have to design for it and live with it.
Ed
"Rob Janssen" <nomail@rob.knoware.nl> wrote in message
news:slrn8s109v.qs.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
> Ed_Woodrick <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com> wrote:
> >And I've delivered 35,000 message in 4 hours across the Internet. And
that's
> >message about 10k long. To destinations around the world. And the server
or
> >circuits weren't working hard.
>
> >And that is the issue!
>
> >The Amateur Packet System showed most folks, years ago, that it was not
> >capable of handling the amount of traffic that was needed of it.
>
> Of course it can be questioned if high traffic capacity is needed.
> Usenet shows that no matter how far you increase capacity, people will
> always use it up. The average quality of the messages will just decrease,
> and their average size will increase.
>
> In the early days, both on terrestrial packet radio and on pacsats, one
> would come home and eagerly connect to see what interesting bulletins
> there were. Maybe 30 of them on a good day.
>
> Over time, their number increased but the fun reading them decreased.
> Kill filters were required and built. But it became increasingly
difficult
> to receive content interesting enough to warrant the effort to weed it out
> of the junkpile.
>
> And so, a year or two, I (and many, many others) just quit connecting to
> the BBS. My personal messages are forwarded to my station, and the
> bulletins I just skip.
>
> Of course there will always be enough users to send junk around, but the
> good days of discussions and useful information are gone. You won't fix
> that by increasing capacity. That will just make it worse.
>
> 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: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 10:26:18 -0400
From: "Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com>
Subject: internet repeater linking
"Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net> wrote in message
news:GESv5.5666$6i1.519969@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>
> "Ed_Woodrick" <Ed_Woodrick@email.msn.com> wrote in message
> news:#dX7VScHAHA.316@cpmsnbbsa09...
> > And I've delivered 35,000 message in 4 hours across the Internet. And
that's
> > message about 10k long. To destinations around the world. And the server
or
> > circuits weren't working hard.
> >
> > And that is the issue!
> >
> > The Amateur Packet System showed most folks, years ago, that it was not
> > capable of handling the amount of traffic that was needed of it.
>
> "... was needed of it."
>
> > And nothing
> > has been done to make the situation better.
>
> Please read what I've posted.
I have read what you've been posting, many times. I don't remember hearing
where you've created a solution to move messages across the country at more
than 1200 bps. And no one else has either. The DSY modem is about the
fastest in general use, that's only 56kb.
>
> > Maybe some protocols have been
> > tweaked to double the effective throughput, but we're talking orders of
> > magnitude that are needed for packet to be competitive.
>
> "... be competetive." With what? RTTY? PSK31? Morse?
> Explain what radio protocols and networking you are talking about.
Competitive = providing near the same or greater capabilities as others in a
similar business. And since you have a corncob about people including the
word RADIO in their response, I'll play to your game.
With all o fhte microwave frequencies that we have available to us, I don't
know of a single network that is using these to transfer data at modern
speeds. A DS0 at 64kb is trivial for a microwave shot. Something along the
lines of a T1 or even a T3 are easily possible.
But the general user doesn't give a crap if the word radio is used in
solving their problem or not. Walk up to a Red Cross shelter where you have
Hank on his radio solution, and me on any variety of other solutions and
which one will the public want to use?
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_252C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
