| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 14.07.03 15:30l 293 Lines 10793 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1607-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jul 11, 1/2
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<OK0PPL<RZ6HXA<SP7MGD<ON0BEL<VK7AX<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 030713/1325Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:4285 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:1607-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
TAPR APRS Special Interest Group Digest for Friday, July 11, 2003.
1. Re: today's test results
2. Change e-mail address
3. Re: today's test results
4. Even more off topic than hamradio and ARRL
5. Re: hidden transmitter problems
6. Re: today's test results
7. Re: today's test results
8. Re: VoIP (over packet?)
9. Please...authors...please [was: hidden transmitter problems]
10. Re: VoIP (over packet?)
11. Re: VoIP (over packet?)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: today's test results
From: Dan Brown <brown@brauhausdc.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 07:52:42 -0400
X-Message-Number: 1
At 03:18 PM 7/10/2003 -0500, Mark Fellhauer wrote:
>OTOH, I have travelled to other cities, like Minneapolis, where there
>seems to be no cooperation/coordination of who digipeats and when, so it
>ends up everyone and his uncle is digipeating - even from homes and from
>mobiles. The packet cacophony caused by this is utter nonsense...
>
>I once accidently left digipeat on at my home QTH when I lived in
>Phoenix. I got a phone call within 4 hours politely asking me to stop... :)
This may be something of a side topic, but, are there any of the internet
gateways which are setup with "listen only" or "upload only" ports? I know
that you can turn on various filters, and have personally used the
"messages only" ports, without digipeat turned on, but would be nice to be
able to get connected, and, in whatever small way, help fill in the gaps
where big digi's don't hear well, but, without adding RF congestion.
Perhaps I've missed something some place, and this already exists. This
would seem akin to a "remote input" on a repeater.
--
73 N8YSZ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Change e-mail address
From: "Gilson, Ron" <RGilson@ecmc.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:17:31 -0400
X-Message-Number: 2
Hi:
Please change my e-mail address from:
rgilson@ecmc.edu
To my new address:
rgilson@adelphia.net
Thank you.
Ron
WA2WWK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: today's test results
From: "Curt Mills, WE7U" <hacker@tc.fluke.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 06:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 3
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Dan Brown wrote:
>This may be something of a side topic, but, are there any of the internet
>gateways which are setup with "listen only" or "upload only" ports?
Yes. Xastir allows you to globally select whether you're gating at
all, gating to INET, or gating in both directions. Quite a few
people are doing what you're suggesting, gating only from RF->INET.
--
Curt Mills, WE7U hacker_NO_SPAM_@tc.fluke.com
Senior Methods Engineer/SysAdmin
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math!"
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates!" -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Even more off topic than hamradio and ARRL
From: Alex <kr1st@amsat.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:50:26 -0400
X-Message-Number: 4
I just got a Cisco IP phone (7940) on my desk. You know what I'm
thinking...
Has it been done before? Oh, and perhaps something with APRS also?
73,
--Alex KR1ST
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: hidden transmitter problems
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:59:12 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 5
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 wes@johnston.net wrote:
>I started pulling data from findu, and discovered that... what we have
>is a case of the digipeaters not hearing my packets _not_ because of my
>location, but rather because of NETWORK CONGESTION.
I remind everyone of the new PHGr format we discussed back in February
that makes Network Analysis trivial if authors would just implement it.
Adding a RATE on the end of PHG and calling it PHGr then not only tells
something about the power, height and gain of your APRS station but also
how often it is transmitting.
Then anyone, anywhere, anytime, can statistically look at RECEPTION of
those packets anwhere, anytime and know exactly the network statistics at
that point.
Without the "r" term telling you how often the packet was transmitted, one
can make very little statistical sense of gathering such packets.
The fully backwards compatible PHGr construct is described in:
http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs/probes.txt
de Wb4APR, Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: today's test results
From: "Daniel H. Brown" <brown@brauhausdc.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 11:35:32 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 6
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Curt Mills, WE7U wrote:
>Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 06:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
>From: "Curt Mills, WE7U" <hacker@tc.fluke.com>
>To: Dan Brown <brown@brauhausdc.org>
>Cc: TAPR APRS Special Interest Group <aprssig@lists.tapr.org>
>Subject: Re: [aprssig] Re: today's test results
>
>On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Dan Brown wrote:
>
>>This may be something of a side topic, but, are there any of the internet
>>gateways which are setup with "listen only" or "upload only" ports?
>
>Yes. Xastir allows you to globally select whether you're gating at
>all, gating to INET, or gating in both directions. Quite a few
>people are doing what you're suggesting, gating only from RF->INET.
I've be able to setup what you're describing using UI-View. But,
actually, maybe what I'm looking for is a filter on the SERVER end,
rather than the client. I'd rather not have to receive ANYTHING down
from them, other than what is neccessary for the login exhange -- and
then only be able to send what I hear.
Make sense?
--
Dan Brown
brown@brauhausdc.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: today's test results
From: "Curt Mills, WE7U" <hacker@tc.fluke.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 08:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 7
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Daniel H. Brown wrote:
>I've be able to setup what you're describing using UI-View. But,
>actually, maybe what I'm looking for is a filter on the SERVER end,
>rather than the client. I'd rather not have to receive ANYTHING down
>from them, other than what is neccessary for the login exhange -- and
>then only be able to send what I hear.
For this you connect to one of the filtered servers. I think
Ui-View has support for entering the filter constants, and I know
Xastir does.
--
Curt Mills, WE7U hacker_NO_SPAM_@tc.fluke.com
Senior Methods Engineer/SysAdmin
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math!"
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates!" -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: VoIP (over packet?)
From: Bill Owens N2RKL <bill-tapr@owensfamily.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 12:19:23 -0400
X-Message-Number: 8
On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 10:50:26AM -0400, Alex wrote:
>I just got a Cisco IP phone (7940) on my desk. You know what I'm
>thinking...
If you're thinking about putting the IP traffic over packet, it might
be possible but not easy. The Cisco website (which I just happened to
have open) doesn't say what data rates the 7940 supports, but does offer
that it has G.711 and G.729a codecs. G.711's standard rate is 64 kbps,
but G.729a is only 8 kbps. So perhaps a 9600 baud packet link would work.
But of course VoIP is notoriously sensitive to network delay and jitter
(variation in delay). I don't know this particular phone's tolerance,
but I'm going to guess that nothing other than a point-to-point packet
link with very fast turnaround radios would work.
If you do try it, I'd be very interested in knowing whether it works. Not
because I want to try it myself, just out of geek curiosity ;)
Now on the other hand, it would be interesting to create a phone patch
to a VoIP phone. I wonder if you could adapt the IRLP hardware to do that?
Bill N2RKL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Please...authors...please [was: hidden transmitter problems]
From: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 12:45:26 -0400
X-Message-Number: 9
The new PHGr format is starting to evolve into an extremely useful
system...but NOT for the reasons that you may think. It's *not* about how
your program interprets the data (ie-drawing coverage circles based on the
info). It'a about allowing the embedding of data that could then be sent
to "the experts" to analyze.
You don't have to think of your product as the analysis tool. Instead,
think of it as a display tool...allowing the observer to make whatever
analysis they wish to make. So...consider this:
Maybe you haven't included support for /PHG in your product because you
don't think the coverage circles are an accurate representation of the
data...please consider including support for /PHGr as a window (much like a
station list) in which the received data is displayed...and nothing more.
Something like this:
Call Location To-Call PHG
WB4APR FM19LM APRS 52006
W2EV FN03MA CQ 9100C
K2AXX FN12CS APRS 4420A
....
Or use the data to reference a lookup table to display values that mean
something to the human who is looking at them. Something like this:
Call Location To-Call Power HAAT AntGain AntVector TXRate
WB4APR FM19LM APRS 25-35w 40-79' 0 dBd omni 6/hr
W2EV FN03MA CQ 81-100w 20-39' 0 dBd omni 12/hr
K2AXX FN12CS APRS 16-24w 160-319' 2 dBd omni 10/hr
....
This information could be of great interest to many communities, while not
placing you in a position of being the "information interpreter".
Ya wannt add a feature that will really knock our socks off? How about
keeping track of all of the stations that are RF-received, and tablulating
the number of RX's per hour, and including that as the last column...like
this:
Call Location To-Call Power HAAT AntGain AntVector TXRate Rcvd
WB4APR FM19LM APRS 25-35w 40-79' 0 dBd omni 6/hr 6
W2EV FN03MA CQ 81-100w 20-39' 0 dBd omni 12/hr 2
K2AXX FN12CS APRS 16-24w 160-319' 2 dBd omni 10/hr 8
....
Please...please...please consider adding this function to your program's
personality. This would provide profound functionality for many purposes.
Ev, W2EV
PS: Don't do it yet...just consider doing it. I'm going to suggest the
addition of some other parameters to the /PHGrABCDR/ construct in some
email in the close future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
