| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 11.06.04 10:17l 813 Lines 30505 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3429-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jun 05, 5/8
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0EA<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 040611/0700Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:25630 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3429-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: OPENtrack incompatibilities
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:32:33 -0400
X-Message-Number: 68
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 06:25:46 -0400, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>>>>Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> 06/05/04 12:41 AM
>>>OpenTrak still uses CSMA.
>>OpenTrak sends positional reports Bob, in a manner very similar to
>>APRS. Smells like a duck to me.
>But APRS is a distributed NETwork designed for everyone to share the
>data for the mutual benefit of all. APRS is a one-to-all NET.
>Everyone participates, everyone expects to see the data.
So too OpenTrak. Now it is really starting to look like a Duck
>Adding incompatible OPENtrack packets to that network at the expense
>of collisions
Nope, sorry, CSMA is fully supported in OpenTrac, like I said, basic layer 1
stuff.
Darn.... is that Duck poop on my antenna?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [APRS_HF] 30 Meter Policing needed.
From: Glenn Wiebe <gswiebe@mb.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:56:49 -0500
X-Message-Number: 69
Some interesting observations, Scott. I've been running a 30m>2m gateway
station for a number of years now. Two questions.
#1 Did you see me and if so, was I on frequency?
#2 Does anybody see me?
I've got a lousy antenna for 30m and sometimes wonder if anyone sees me.
After several days of continuos operation I may see up to 15 stations.
73 de Glenn...VE4GN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Solar tetroon Sky Diamond - signal loss????
From: "hasan schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 12:36:37 -0500
X-Message-Number: 70
Wes,
That's perfectly fine with me, as long as you differentiate aprs spots from
the satellites, which are perfectly fine. Non-aprs, sure get rid of them.
....hasan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Packet Segregation
From: "Bill Vodall" <wa7nwp@jnos.org>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 10:46:15 -0700
X-Message-Number: 71
----- Original Message -----
>It isn't aprs, it doesn't belong on 144.39.
Segregating packet applications by channel severely limits our potential.
Applying "common sense and courtesy" we can accomplish even more with the
resources at hand then by limiting ourselves with artificial restrictions.
73,
Bill - WA7NWP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Solar tetroon Sky Diamond - signal loss????
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:48:46 -0400
X-Message-Number: 72
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 06:42:31 -0500, hasan schiers wrote:
>Not the point Jeff. It isn't aprs,
It is not in the spec from year 2000, that is true, but there was supposed to
be a process in place to allow it to have the chance to be in the spec. That
was called the APRS-WG charter, which is an integral part of the spec. Yet,
apparently, that group has ceased to exist. The parrot is dead.
I guess where I disagree with you is I don't feel innovation in amateur radio
is dead. Hansen, you'll have to pry my dead hands off the soldering iron,
MPLAB and CodeWright to get me to change my mind.
>it doesn't belong on 144.39. It
>is, from an aprs point of view, a minor parasitic infection (at this
>point). Go somewhere else.
Give me the location and calls of your digipeaters, and I'll make my best
effort never use them. Even so, understand that I live in a free country,
where captailism is encouraged. I have the right to do what I want with my
equipment as long as I don't hurt someone else. Which is exactly why I asked
you what problem it caused you, yet you and every other reactionary has yet
to say.
If you don't like what someone looks like, you have the right to not allow
them to use your equipment or even not to allow them in your home. Fact of
the matter is, you don't need to give a reason. But when you enter the public
arena, a different set of rules apply.
Your venue for compliant, at least in the U.S., is the Federal Communications
Commission. Make use of that, and not the SIG.
Thanks
Jeff
p.s. Feel free to send my name to the FCC, but do note at this point I have
only received OpenTrak packets on 144.39. Typically the FCC doesn't have
alot to say about SWL's, which is not to say I adverse to sending a OpenTrak
packet on 144.39, just haven't done it yet. And after Thursdays test, I don't
see any harm what-so-ever in doing so. NON ISSUE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: OPENtrack DIGIpeater Objects
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 10:51:13 -0700
X-Message-Number: 73
>My point was that APRS protocols fully support your idea already.
Here's my IGATE's beacon text:
!3457.54NI12025.44W& SMX IGATE N1VG.NET
Show me how I can format it to request my local digipeater to cache it and
have it retransmitted every 15 minutes for the next 10 hours. Keep in mind
that the digipeater most likely has no time-of-day clock, and that the
decaying rate algorithm is meaningless in this case. The system has been up
for 165 days since its last reboot and hasn't moved - what would your
decaying rate be at now?
>is a good idea, just DO it, but dont then wreck the system by
>doing it with new protocols that are not compatible with everyone
>already.
I'll offer one final proposal to bring OpenTRAC in line with APRS. I'm
willing to modify the spec and all existing implementations such that all
packets carried over AX.25 will be prefixed with a comma. According to
chapter 19 of the spec, this explicitly flags them as not conforming to any
APRS format.
Chapter 19 already specifies that non-conforming packets are assumed to be
non-APRS and "must be able to process them without ill effects." However,
I'm willing to concede that filtering may eliminate values from an OpenTRAC
packet that would indicate that it's not APRS, and the comma insertion
addresses this.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Digi objects
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:01:20 -0700
X-Message-Number: 74
>Any objections that you may have detected on my part is that
>of your plans to make it apply to ALL stations! Stationa transmit
Did you read my proposal? It'd require a specific request from the station
to be cached.
>their APRS postions to indicate they are on the air and a LIVE
>participant of the net. If you have digipeaters putting everyone
So all of those eyeballs, PBBSs, NWS sites, fire stations, lighthouses,
restaraunts, VORTACs, hospitals, ham stores, restrooms, EOCs, and work zones
you've seen fit to include in the spec are LIVE participants of the net?
>on the map based on data from yesterday, then the network
>as a real-time network becomes a sham... inconsistent, and
>loses all integrity for a real time system.
If I request that my station be announced for the next 10 hours, I'd better
have good reason to expect it's going to be there for 10 hours. Since my
home station hasn't been down for more than a couple of hours over the last
18 months, I'd say that's a fairly safe bet.
But again, if you'd read my proposal, you'd see that it's applicable even to
my car. I could use a 'stopped' setting in my OpenTracker with a beacon
interval of 10 hours, and have it request announcements every 30 minutes.
As soon as it switched back to moving mode, the digi would see a packet
without the cache request, and would purge its cache. Not that seeing
parked cars on APRS is a terribly useful thing, but it's an example.
>Like I said above. The concept has been in APRS since about
>1994. Every APRSdos station can already do it. The protocol
I've given you an example. Show me how it's done.
>So there is nothing to do other than simply write the digi code.
>There are no changes to the protocol required, absolutely nothing
>preventing you from doing this... and within the existing protocol!
I don't think that's true, to accomplish what I've presented. Prove me
wrong, and I'll start coding.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Solar tetroon Sky Diamond - signal loss????
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:06:40 -0700
X-Message-Number: 75
Hacked CTCSS codes? A better example might be a group of local users who
start practicing their Esperanto on the repeater for five minutes a day.
-----Original Message-----
I second that. That will make 3,001.
Here's my take on this situation:
Bob and his buddies have put up a 2m repeater system.
Scott and his buddies hacked the CTCSS codes and have started using it for
their own purposes, against Bob's wishes and refusing to change their
operating practices to comply with the repeater system guidelines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: DIGIpeater OBJECTS
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:12:50 -0700
X-Message-Number: 76
>>It's not just a format change, it's a digipeater behavior change.
^^^^
>1) we both now agree is "not an APRS protocol change".
It most certainly is.
>2) is noted that it has been built into all copies of APRSdos since 94
Your interpretation. I've given you an example of what I want to do, I
waiting for you to show me how to do it.
>3) And it does not need OPENtrack to do it.
This has nothing to do with OpenTRAC, aside from being one of the things I
plan to build into the protocol.
>4) it's something to be implemented at the digis
Yep, but it needs to be clearly defined first.
>5) It can be done at any time by anyone by a simple additon to
> digipeater code without any impact on APRS, the APRS
> protocol, or me.
Spec references, please. Show me where it's defined.
>1) APRS is real time. When I get a packet from a home
>station, it tells me his is LIVE and avaialble now, and an
>active participant of the real-time net.
See my previous message about EOCs, fire stations, and so on. They're never
participants in the net.
>or who are no longer an active ON-THE-AIR live station
>and can no longer receive messages is BAD.
If you're a message-capable station, then you don't need to be using this
feature. It's for EOCs, fire stations, unattended systems...
>3) In order for it to work would require a modification to
>EVERY ONE's home station code, so it probably wont
>happen.
Only if you want to use the feature.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Solar tetroon Sky Diamond - signal loss????
From: "hasan schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:16:04 -0500
X-Message-Number: 77
My last comments on this issue are interspersed.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff King" <jeff@aerodata.net>
>On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 06:42:31 -0500, hasan schiers wrote:
>>Not the point Jeff. It isn't aprs,
>
>It is not in the spec from year 2000, that is true, but there was supposed to
>be a process in place to allow it to have the chance to be in the spec. That
>was called the APRS-WG charter, which is an integral part of the spec. Yet,
>apparently, that group has ceased to exist. The parrot is dead.
>
>I guess where I disagree with you is I don't feel innovation in amateur radio
>is dead. Hansen, you'll have to pry my dead hands off the soldering iron,
>MPLAB and CodeWright to get me to change my mind.
First of all, Jeff, you could at least get my name right. I'm not
Scandanavian.
Secondly, stop playing straw man games with me. I have praised the
innovation. It just doesn't belong on 144.390.
>>it doesn't belong on 144.39. It
>>is, from an aprs point of view, a minor parasitic infection (at this
>>point). Go somewhere else.
>
>Give me the location and calls of your digipeaters, and I'll make my best
>effort never use them. Even so, understand that I live in a free country,
>where captailism is encouraged. I have the right to do what I want with my
>equipment as long as I don't hurt someone else. Which is exactly why I asked
>you what problem it caused you, yet you and every other reactionary has yet
>to say.
If you are running OT, don't worry, it will function automagically, and
spare me the name calling. You accuse Bob of being hard to work with, and
then you use terms like reactionary. Try a mirror, buddy.
>If you don't like what someone looks like, you have the right to not allow
>them to use your equipment or even not to allow them in your home. Fact of
>the matter is, you don't need to give a reason. But when you enter the public
>arena, a different set of rules apply.
Now you make up your own rules. I do not cede my right to control who and
how my equipment is used when I put it on radio. I'm not impressed with your
"different set of rules apply" point.
>Your venue for compliant, at least in the U.S., is the Federal Communications
>Commission. Make use of that, and not the SIG.
I have no legal complaint and never said so. Is this another one of your
straw men? It's starting to approach an army in your positions. I'll make
use of the SIG to express my views however I choose, thank you very much.
What happened to that "free country" stuff you were spouting above?
Your positions are so loaded with fallacious points, straw men and internal
inconsistencies, that I can see there is no point in continuing.
Enjoy...but don't address any further comments to me. I have no desire to
carry on any sort of discourse with you.
>Thanks
>
>Jeff
>
>p.s. Feel free to send my name to the FCC, but do note at this point I have
>only received OpenTrak packets on 144.39. Typically the FCC doesn't have
>alot to say about SWL's, which is not to say I adverse to sending a OpenTrak
>packet on 144.39, just haven't done it yet. And after Thursdays test, I don't
>see any harm what-so-ever in doing so. NON ISSUE.
You really don't get it, do you? Who said anything about the FCC...you just
make stuff up out of whole cloth, argue from that point and imagine that you
have actually made progress. Earth to Jeff.....come in. On second thought,
don't bother. We're done.
....hasan, N0AN
p.s., there's no "n" in the middle of my first name.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: OPENtrack verus APRS format example
From: Henk de Groot <henk.de.groot@hetnet.nl>
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 19:57:08 +0200
X-Message-Number: 78
At 00:21 5-6-2004 -0600, Bill Herrmann wrote:
>Note: If you don't want to read the technical stuff skip to the next to
>the last paragraph.
>
>At 06:13 PM 6/4/2004 -0700, Scott Miller wrote:
>>In hex:
>>
>>0C 10 18 DC 17 7B AA 5D 7A D6 0F 89 BC 05 11 3E 38 3E 6E 05
>>34 D8 19 0D 15 07 16 E6 96 87 E5 AD 97 04 13 9C 04 57 83 05
>>00 0C 84 05 03 00 F0 04 12 41 42 43 03 14 00 0D
>
>Ok, so why not tunnel that through APRS by adding the "user-defined data
>format" header from page 87 of the APRS Specification? (page 97 of 128 in
>the PDF)
Best case you would only get:
0C 10 18 DC 17 7B AA 5D 7A D6 0F 89 BC 05 11 3E 38 3E 6E 05
34 D8 19 0D
And loose the rest since in the APRS ASCII format 0D is a line terminator.
The rest:
15 07 16 E6 96 87 E5 AD 97 04 13 9C 04 57 83 05
00 0C 84 05 03 00 F0 04 12 41 42 43 03 14 00 0D
would be interpreted as a new APRS packet, needless to say that all those
APRS programs processing ASCII and with apperently minimal checking will
not be happy with this...
Extending APRS with a space-efficient flexible binary protocol like
OpenTrack is at most only possible in theory but most certainly not
possible with the current way APRS is applied in practice.
Kind regards,
Henk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Too many personalities
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:38:36 -0700
X-Message-Number: 79
>Oh, like Email? I hope you noticed how impossible it was
>for Scott to put his 66 byte OPENtrack version of his packet
>into email? It took what, 20 lines to convey it, where as
>the APRS version is printable ASCII and fit on half a line.
Ok, I'm trying not to drag this out, but this is silly. That's like asking
for UDP encapsulation over email. It's been done, but it's silly.
M#!`8W!=[JEUZU@^)O`41/C@^;@4TV!D-%0<6YI:'Y:V7!!.<!%>#!0`,A`4#
+`/`$$D%"0P,4``T`
There, wasn't that fun? This is getting really old... let's take the debate
off-SIG before we lose everyone. I'll write my paper, you can write a
rebuttal if you want. On your own website.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: OPENtrak incompatibilites not needed.
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:42:52 -0700
X-Message-Number: 80
>I ask again? SO WHY DO WE NEED OPENTRAK?
I've asked that this discussion be taken off-sig before we annoy anyone any
more with this p*ssing match. I'm not going to debate the 'why' any further
here.
The digi objects thread, though, is not related, and it's something I'd like
to get hammered out.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Empirical data on the Kenwood/APRS <> OpenTrak non-issue
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 14:44:25 -0400
X-Message-Number: 81
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 03:20:56 -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Kenwood_TH-D7/
>332 members, very active, must be approved to read posts (no data)
Got approved for the list, not a single reported problem.
>Kenwood total: 2000+ with no reported problems.
Now up to 2332+ with no reported problems with OpenTrak.
I've also asked ~15 hams here reporting "other peoples" problems with
OpenTrak to please be specific. To a one, not a single one has provided any
firsthand detail to support their claims.
Which still leaves us the two reported problems on the first day. I can see
on the HamHud list they are looking into it, and James Jefferson has provided
tips to the other party on how to fix it on their end.
Gentlemen, I'm happy to announce the birth of yet another giant bouncy baby
NON-ISSUE on the APRS-SIG list.
Who will bring the cigars to the DCC? ;-)
-Jeff wb8wka (yes I have a call Doug)
http://db.aprsworld.net/datamart/switch.php?call=wb8wka&table=position&maps=yes
(yes, I even get into the APRS system once in a great while)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Solar tetroon Sky Diamond - signal loss????
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:51:30 -0700
X-Message-Number: 82
>The fact is we (I'm betting a very large majority) disagree with the
>intrusion that OT represents on 144.390 (the frequency all our hardware
>investment is tied up on). Further, all the ultimate decisions will be made
It comes down to a local decision. Some areas decide they want certain
FireNet data gated to local RF. That's not APRS per se, but it's useful,
and the decision is made to support it despite the added load on the
network.
>Simply put: We're not moving, OT is not welcome (in it's current
>configuration), we'll hold the door for you on the way out.
And my proposal to add the comma specifier to flag it as invalid or test
data?
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: OPENtrack DIGIpeater Objects
From: Henk de Groot <henk.de.groot@hetnet.nl>
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 20:49:44 +0200
X-Message-Number: 83
At 10:51 5-6-2004 -0700, Scott Miller wrote:
>I'll offer one final proposal to bring OpenTRAC in line with APRS. I'm
>willing to modify the spec and all existing implementations such that all
>packets carried over AX.25 will be prefixed with a comma. According to
Don't waste your time on it, as soon as you do this people will expect it
to work. Problem is that the converse TNC's will try to print your message
in ASCII anyway and presense of a 0x0d character will cause breaking up the
packet in two lines - where the second line will break the decoder of some
APRS applications and ends up on the APRS-IS anyway.
A binary protocol is just not compatible with APRS and you aready did the
right thing by making it another protocol.
I have always thought that Radio Amateurs were technical people but it
seems that even the most simple protocol technology - a Protocol-ID as
discrimiator to seperate different protocols from eachother - can not be
comprehended. My suggestion is not to waste more time on people who don't
want to learn and don't understand that the problem is not OpenTrack's
fualt but that their own station is broken and has been broken al those years.
Kind regards,
Henk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Solar tetroon Sky Diamond - signal loss????
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 15:01:29 -0400
X-Message-Number: 84
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:16:04 -0500, hasan schiers wrote:
>My last comments on this issue are interspersed.
dittos
>Secondly, stop playing straw man games with me. I have praised the
>innovation. It just doesn't belong on 144.390.
Ok on the first, the second is your opinion.
>If you are running OT, don't worry, it will function automagically,
>and spare me the name calling. You accuse Bob of being hard to work
>with, and then you use terms like reactionary. Try a mirror, buddy.
Different topics, the term reactionary was aimed at those reporting "other
people's" problems, yet unwilling to describe any first hand knowledge or
cite any contact names... kinda like you now that I think of it.
>>If you don't like what someone looks like, you have the right to
>>not allow them to use your equipment or even not to allow them in
>>your home. Fact of the matter is, you don't need to give a reason.
.... (move this part down a bit to make a little more sense)
>Now you make up your own rules.
No, not at all. Those are called personal property rights, and they are
fundamental to any capitalistic society. You have the right to not allow
Hispanic people in your house, without giving an overt reason. Too bad if
they don't like it, doesn't mean you are a nice guy, just means you have
property rights.
>>But when you enter the
>>public arena, a different set of rules apply.
....
>I do not cede my right to control
>who and how my equipment is used when I put it on radio. I'm not
>impressed with your "different set of rules apply" point.
Well, then try banning Spanish speaking children (U.S. citizens) from the
public schools, and see how "impressed" the federal government is.
Point being, you have every right to dictate how your property is used. You
don't have the individual right to dictate how public assets are used. I was
making two points, not one, and there is a BIG difference depending on the
venue.
>>Your venue for compliant, at least in the U.S., is the Federal Communications
>>Commission. Make use of that, and not the SIG.
>
>I have no legal complaint and never said so. Is this another one of
>your straw men?
No, I was just trying to direct your energies more usefully since you felt so
strongly on the matter and was comparing OpenTrak to illegal computer viruses
and stealing resources.... you know what, come to think of it, you also might
try the FBI as well, as stealing computer network resources is also a crime.
>I'll make use of the SIG to express my views however I choose, thank
>you very much. What happened to that "free country" stuff you were
>spouting above?
Go for it. Send some Virgra ads to the SIG as well, its a free country.
>Your positions are so loaded with fallacious points, straw men and
>internal inconsistencies, that I can see there is no point in
>continuing.
Then spell them out. I've really spent alot of time trying to present the
best facts and empirical data I can... see the RF horizon posts, APRS-WG
links and the Kenwood empirical data. These where facts that were all outside
of the realm of my "opinion", yet you easily and directly could have
challenged these facts. You didn't. You also failed to provide any data on
what problem the OpenTrak transmissions on Thursday caused you, even though I
think I must have already asked you twice.
I can deal in facts and logic, what I can't deal in is raw out of control
emotion.
>Enjoy...but don't address any further comments to me. I have no
>desire to carry on any sort of discourse with you.
OK, I just copied it to the SIG then. Still would like to know what direct
problems you observed however.
-Jeff wb8wka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: The OpenTrac Debate and BS!
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 15:22:19 -0400
X-Message-Number: 85
On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 08:07:15 -0500, Greg Higgins wrote:
>The count is now 3002 and climbing rapidly. It is disgusting the way
>that this sig has degenerated to an open war
>Jeff - quit stirring the pot!
Greg, I agree with you, and in theory there shouldn't be a need to stir the
pot. But did you look (and read) some of the links on the APRS-WG I posted?
That is the proper venue for these debates, and they should never occur. here
But the problem is, the APRS-WG has ceased to exist. The pot has tipped over
and the parrot is dead.
In the short term, I don't have a answer for you. But I am going to propose
that the topic of the APRS-WG, and its rejuvenation, be put on the DCC
agenda.
73
Jeff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Empirical data on the Kenwood/APRS <> OpenTrak non-issue
From: Curt Mills <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 86
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Jeff King wrote:
>Which still leaves us the two reported problems on the first day. I can see
>on the HamHud list they are looking into it, and James Jefferson has provided
>tips to the other party on how to fix it on their end.
Henk points out that Kenwoods don't have a problem with PID as they
stand. I'll assume that the Alinco APRS radio doesn't either, as it
uses a very similar TNC internally (if not identical).
I have provided to the list (with help from several, thanks!) the
serial TNC settings in order to fix other possible problems. Those
settings are now part of the standard Xastir distribution, in the
form of tnc-startup.sys files. I can post those again if anyone
needs them.
If other client authors would add those settings for converse-mode
TNC's, we'd have fewer problems in the future, whatever protocol &
frequency they happen to be tuned to at the time.
Setting up a converse-mode TNC to allow any protocol through, when
the software could choke on it, is poor design. Note that with
TNC's in KISS mode, AX.25 kernel mode interfaces, and AGWPE, the PID
byte is readily available and can be checked by the software (and
SHOULD be). It's only the converse-mode TNC setups where this is a
problem, as the PID info is not passed on to the client program.
--
Curt, WE7U. archer at eskimo dot com
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown
Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U.
The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: '...I'll just take my ball and go home!"
From: Curt Mills <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 10:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 87
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Brian Riley (maillist) wrote:
>I will say, once again, we all learn from these melees ... It gets stuff
>out in the open and discussed, no-holds-barred. Granted it would be tiresome
>if they went on for ever, but even the most cantankerous of the combatants
>has to take a 'nice'-break once in a while! ;-)
The... personalities... on this list must be taken into account (and
I'm one of them!). I wouldn't want to miss a single word of this
discussion. Unfortunately that's how things get done (or not!)
around here. It's been that way as long as I can remember.
You have to live with it, or give your delete key some dusting off.
I'm reading every one and marking several with the "important" flag
as they have relevant points. Of course a lot of them don't, and I
move on.
I figure those that are unsubscribing are those that don't have a
vested interest or detailed knowledge of the points being discussed,
else they'd be glued to their e-mail as I am.
--
Curt, WE7U. archer at eskimo dot com
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown
Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U.
The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Wanted: PIC code to gen tones
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 16:23:03 -0400
X-Message-Number: 88
Andrew:
Generally a lookup table, but that is not a hard requirement. Mostly done for
speed. You just clock through the array
You'll need a D to A, or emulate one. I'll refer to the later.
Take a look at the code for the SOTT, which is at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TinyTrak/files/
it has the R2D tables in it for constructing ax.25 waveforms. Drops into a
TT3 PCB.
Also, take a look at the MicroChip site for some app notes on DTMF and also I
think D to A converters. I seem to recall Byon referenced these at one time
in building his 4 resistor D to A converter. If you can't find them, let me
know and I'll give a look.
BTW, if your PIC part has a comparator in it, it also has a programmable
voltage reference. You might be able to forego the discrete resistors and
just use this.
Also.... Will Clement's AX.25 MIM/MIC-E way back when, used the PWM to
generate a signwave. You run it through a low pass filter, run the PWM quite
high, and use the average voltage level, which is based on duty cycle, to
emulate your D to A.
Here is another guy:
http://members.tripod.com/ve2yag/id68.htm
who used a bigger R ladder to generate PSK31 tones with a PIC. I don't have
any firsthand knowledge here however.
Good luck
-Jeff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
