| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 24.09.00 01:19l 241 Lines 7725 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_257C
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/257C
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0GOS<DB0PKE<DB0ACH<DB0OVN<PI8JOP<
PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 000923/2114Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:17315 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_257C
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 00 19:42:12 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_257C>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 01:13:07 GMT
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Software for Packet
"Dana H. Myers K6JQ" <Dana@Source.Net> wrote in message
news:39C7FA99.9BEB3E03@Source.Net...
>
>
> Hank Oredson wrote:
>
> > <helpfull@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8q8ahi$4o0$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >
> > > What trans delay do I need? About what speed in ms, I mean? It seems
> > > most fairly new rigs are quick. Let me find a spec. Didn't find it but
> > > I think it's about 200ms.
> >
> > At 9600, you would like 80 ms. or better. The little TEKK rigs can
> > do 50 ms. I find that many synthesized radios can actually manage
> > 100-120 ms. without problem (e.g. tm-421).
Clarification perhaps?
"can do" means "I have links using TEKK radios
running with txd of 50 ms."
"can actually manage" means "I have one link using said radio
running at said txd".
> Crystal-controlled rigs tend to be faster than PLL synthesized in general,
> but even crystal-controlled transmitters run into T/R and R/T turn-around
> time limitations in the audio chain. Just because the radio is spewing RF
> doesn't mean it can actually modulate it properly, and sometimes the radio
> will be deaf long after it stops transmitting.
Very true. The Kantronics D4-10s can run a bit faster. With very good
paths we have been able to go as low as 40 or sometimes 30 ms. at
9600 baud. Have not had good luck at 19200 though, even with very
good paths.
> I found the UHF Motorola Flexar/Maxar series work well at 70mS with no
> modification.
They hold up better than the TEKKs at remote sites ... and have less
intermod problems ...
> Dana K6JQ
> dana@source.net
> aka k6jq@pacbell.net
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:45:29 -0700
From: "Dana H. Myers K6JQ" <Dana@Source.Net>
Subject: Software for Packet
Hank Oredson wrote:
> <helpfull@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8q8ahi$4o0$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> > What trans delay do I need? About what speed in ms, I mean? It seems
> > most fairly new rigs are quick. Let me find a spec. Didn't find it but
> > I think it's about 200ms.
>
> At 9600, you would like 80 ms. or better. The little TEKK rigs can
> do 50 ms. I find that many synthesized radios can actually manage
> 100-120 ms. without problem (e.g. tm-421).
Crystal-controlled rigs tend to be faster than PLL synthesized in general,
but even crystal-controlled transmitters run into T/R and R/T turn-around
time limitations in the audio chain. Just because the radio is spewing RF
doesn't mean it can actually modulate it properly, and sometimes the radio
will be deaf long after it stops transmitting.
I found the UHF Motorola Flexar/Maxar series work well at 70mS with no
modification.
Dana K6JQ
dana@source.net
aka k6jq@pacbell.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 21:08:42 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Software for Packet
Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>At 9600, you would like 80 ms. or better. The little TEKK rigs can
>do 50 ms. I find that many synthesized radios can actually manage
>100-120 ms. without problem (e.g. tm-421).
The modified trx I described in the other message (AEG Telecar TE) is
routinely operated at 30ms. Just to give the average receiving station
a bit more to work with. I tested it and it worked fine at 10ms Txdelay.
The TEKK should be capable of the same.
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: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:24:30 GMT
From: helpfull@my-deja.com
Subject: So no APRS for Linux with SOUNDCARD?
Am I wrong? Does a Linux APRS program not work with Soundcard Linux.
I any case how is Soundcard Packet in Linux?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: 19 Sep 2000 18:50:47 GMT
From: nielsen@oz.net (Bob Nielsen)
Subject: So no APRS for Linux with SOUNDCARD?
Xastir has soundcard support. You can get the latest version at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~fgiannan/xastir/
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:24:30 GMT, helpfull@my-deja.com wrote:
>Am I wrong? Does a Linux APRS program not work with Soundcard Linux.
>
>I any case how is Soundcard Packet in Linux?
--
Bob Nielsen, N7XY nielsen@oz.net
Bainbridge Island, WA http://www.oz.net/~nielsen
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:40:24 GMT
From: marsgal42@hotmail.com
Subject: So no APRS for Linux with SOUNDCARD?
In article <8q87fj$ll$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
helpfull@my-deja.com wrote:
> Am I wrong? Does a Linux APRS program not work with Soundcard Linux.
Yes, you're wrong. Why wouldn't it work? How would it even
know what the hardware interface was, since AX.25 and the
drivers that go with it are a fully-integrated part of Linux?
It sometimes sounds like people don't really understand how
real operating systems do this stuff...
I had a look at the source for xastir, and all it does is open
an AX.25 socket and use it. Which is exactly what it should
do. It has some sound alert facilities that will fight with
the sound card modem code, but that's another matter.
> I any case how is Soundcard Packet in Linux?
Written by the same folks who did FlexNet with sound cards.
Same algorithms, same hardware.
Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre
Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..." - Hospital/Shafte
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:57:53 GMT
From: marsgal42@hotmail.com
Subject: So no APRS for Linux with SOUNDCARD?
In article <8q8u1o$soh$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
helpfull@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hold on there bobalouie. I'm hope Linux overtakes. I'm glad to hear it
> works AND someone is actually doing it. The thing is, I have Flex
> working in DOS/WIN but can't find a APRS program fer it. What better
> than to hear someone actually using it. The combo I am asking about is
> Linux AND Soundcard AND APRS. If we can an easy to use home install
> with Linux, it will fly. I like is robustness yet it needs to work for
> mom too. :)
The situations are completely different. Since DOS/Windows
has no native AX.25 support, there is no standard, and every
software package must do it more-or-less monolithically,
from scratch.
The FlexNet API is published, so you could write your own
FlexNet APRS program if you wanted to. This would be one
way of getting the application you want. Building on the
FlexNet drivers, it would be oblivious to the underlying
network interface. Just as all FlexNet apps are.
You get this for free under Linux. The question is not
"APRS + soundcard + Linux", but "APRS + Linux", because
the network is already there, the interface to the
outside world is in place, provided by the OS, and
applications simply use it. The interface is well
known - BSD sockets, with AF_AX25 as an available
address family.
Applications don't know whether they're talking to a
KISS TNC or a sound card or an SCC card or a Baycom
modem, and they don't care. It just works.
Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Que les nuages soient notre
Grid: CN89mg pied a terre..." - Hospital/Shafte
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_257D
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
