| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 31.08.96 15:15l 196 Lines 7410 Bytes #-10901 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_96_176B
Read: GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 96/176B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0SON<DB0SIF<DB0NHM<DB0FC<DB0SAW<DB0ERF<DB0SHG<
DB0SM<DB0ACC<PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8WFL<PI8VNW
Sent: 960831/0912Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:58760 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA16601 ; Sat, 31 Aug 96 08:54:21 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.61/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00003765 ; Sat, 31 Aug 96 10:48:17 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00003759 ; Sat, 31 Aug 96 10:43:03 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.61/7.5.4) with SMTP
id AA00008009 ; Sat, 31 Aug 96 10:42:42 MET
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 96 10:40:02 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_96_176B>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 96/176B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
SRI International
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:31:00 +0100 (BST)
From: Alan Cox <alan@cymru.net>
Subject: PPP/SLIP in connected AX25?
> The default PPP negotiation timer is 10 seconds. I've run it at 300 bps.
> What problem do you think will occur at 1200 bps? The typical PPP LCP
> packet is 10 bytes. And the timing should be configurable in any case.
Its not so much the packet size, its the turn around time. If one
other channel user sends a large packet it might be 8 seconds or more
before we get to transmit our reply. If a couple of folk get in we lose.
Better to get a TNC that can do PPP<->native AX.25 conversion
Alan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:14:03 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ron Atkinson <n8fow@hamgate.cc.wayne.edu>
Subject: PPP/SLIP in connected AX25?
My mailer said csmall@gonzo.apana.org.au said this:
> > Karn>A Motorola BitSurfer and an ISDN line.
> >
> > BitSurfRs are $260 mailorder in the USA. PacBell wants $200 for the
> > ISDN installation and $24 for the first month, which will give you 112
>
> What's the cost for the line for the following months?
>
> In Australia, ISDN is not really an option for normal users. It's been a
> while since I've done some costings, but it was serious bucks, perhaps 10x
> what you would pay. A normal phone line is about $8/mth rental, which is ok.
> Ask for anything else, even a leased line, and the costs go up rapidly.
I pay $29.95 a month for my BRI ISDN line. I get 2 B channels too and with
just about all the bells and whistles included. It's also cheaper than
my analog telephone line is which only has callwaitin and caller ID.
I live in an apartment, so amateur radio is difficult for me to do anymore,
but when packet comes out with equipment which can match the thruput of
my ISDN line at 128 kbps (ham radio equipment, not non-amateur Part 15
devices) for the same cost or cheaper then maybe I'll get back into
packet from home. Of course they're installing fiber in the apartment in
about a month, so it's gonna be hard to beat.
It's amazing that amateur radio equipment still costs so much money
compared to commercial equipment. It's hurting this hobby more than it's
helping it.
Ron N8FOW
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 14:03:17 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Holger Riethmueller
<riethm%slsc47t.stgl.sel.alcatel.de@god.bel.alcatel.be>
Subject: PPP/SLIP in connected AX25?
Hi,
I just joined this mailing list last week, but I was happy to see what
is discused in here. Some weeks ago I talked to some friends about
the problem how to get "normal" hams using Win.../OS2/ATARI.. boxes
connected to our TCP/IP "playground". In our area there are many
"non computer experts" useing PR for BBS and convers... - and are
happy that they managed to deal with that. They are not able
setting up a extra NOS/LINUX/... router box (and of course, most of them
don't want to deal with such stuff). But for every platform a PPP/SLIP
kit is available or included.
Therefore we thought about useing these packages. We did not come
to a final solution, but we believe that it should be possible to get it
work (with some ideas in mind).
Since then I was collecting info and around that (PPP/SLIP). When I took a
look at the rfc1171 (PPP) and I was quiet happy about the things what I read
there. But then I discovered that this rfc is an old one and I looked into
rfc1661. I was afraid to read, that PPP requires a FULL duplex connection.
Also the X.25 related rfc1598 tells that FULL duplex operations are a
MUST ! Maybe I'm wrong, but for me FULL duplex means RX+TX at the same
time ! Is this FULL duplex operation really a must or is it possible to
work with the "normal" equipment which is out there ?? For the user
group we have in mind it has to work with what is there.
SO : DOES PPP WORK ON HALF DUPLEX CONNECTIONS ??
(Maybe it is only required for things we do not really need like
qualtity tests etc.)
For your information, here some info of what we want to use on the
other end :
A Linux box running the kernel AX.25 stuff with a running AX.25 deamon
which starts pppd or SLIRP for an incomeing connection. (Maybe one
SSID used for SLIP one for PPP?)
For the hams useing their PPP/SLIP package we want to try (for the
beginning) a TNC in transparent mode with a configuration like the one
mentioned in this mailinglist before.
Thanks & 73
Holger
--
Holger Riethmueller
DL8SCU
Email Address: (just a workaround this time)
riethm%slsc47t.stgl.sel.alcatel.de@god.bel.alcatel.be
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 12:09:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Subject: PPP/SLIP in connected AX25?
>I suspect that what you are thinking of is trying to run PPP as a "dumb
>terminal" serial stream, HDLC framing inside AX.25 framing. I wouldn't
>recommend it. Better to send on packet boundaries (someone has already
>mentioned this).
Why? As long as you're using AX.25 connected mode, there's no reason
why the frame boundaries have to match. And there are some good reasons
for allowing them not to.
You do have to be careful in the implementation not to do silly things
like hand the HDLC frames to the AX.25 layer one byte at a time so you
end up with lots of AX.25 tinygrams.
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 12:48:52 -0700
From: brian@nothing.UCSD.EDU (Brian Kantor)
Subject: PPP/SLIP in connected AX25?
Bill Simpson:
>The default PPP negotiation timer is 10 seconds. I've run it at 300 bps.
>What problem do you think will occur at 1200 bps? The typical PPP LCP
>packet is 10 bytes. And the timing should be configurable in any case.
Well, some people on this list (myself included) are good at finding
reasons why something won't work and therefore shouldn't be tried, but
there is a reason for some concern:
The problem is not 1200 bps. The real problem is that a typical ham
radio packet connection has the average throughput of tin cans and string.
If you're lucky to live in an area where there aren't many hams, you
might get more than that, but given connection turnaround (remember,
most hams run simplex because they don't trust packet repeaters),
collisions, damaged packets, etc., it's the rare ham packet connection
that comes even close to 1200 bps.
First we have to fix the links.
- Brian
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 13:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Subject: PPP/SLIP in connected AX25?
>Wow. Add that to my monthly $33 bill from TCI, and I'd be sending $60
>or so to TCI every month. Unless they upgrade their service so that we
Until recently I was paying $50/mo to my local cable company just for
TV and digital music -- no Internet.
To be continued in digest: tcp_96_176C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
