| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 03.04.97 13:49l 169 Lines 7914 Bytes #-10670 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_97_28L
Read: GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 97/28L
Path: DB0AAB<DB0CRL<DB0TTM<DB0SWR<DB0FP<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0RWI<
PI8ZAA<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PI8VNW
Sent: 970403/0823Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:10942 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA32831 ; Thu, 03 Apr 97 07:40:12 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00002253 ; Wed, 02 Apr 97 22:03:05 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00002221 ; Wed, 02 Apr 97 21:59:39 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.6) with SMTP
id AA00009308 ; Wed, 02 Apr 97 21:59:33 MET
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 97 21:53:20 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_97_28L>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 97/28L
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
remotely associated with such behaviour.
Much of the disparagement of mainstream packet which I hear from TCP/IP
devotees comes across as some form of self-justification for doing
something they know is wrong, and feel ashamed about. Excuses are then
offered, and baseless rationalizations ( like how mainstream packet is
holding TCP/IP back ) are uttered verbatim from the "party line". Do
amateur TCP/IP ops work so hard to avoid thinking about these issues
because it is too embarassing and painful?
Parroting slogans is not an acceptable substitute for individual
perception, thought and insight. Please do not insult yourself further by
neglecting to think these matters through. Amateur TCP/IP ops would do well
to critically re-examine the slogans and assumptions many of them are
carrying around right now.
Amateur TCP/IP should seek to be a part of the mainstream of amateur packet
radio, not apart from it with radical, anti-ham policies which can only
lead to ruin.
FACE the challenge of amateur packet radio!
There are many applications for packet/internet gateways which do not set
back our progress with the RF net by moving amateur traffic over the
Internet, "routing around" existing RF links, slow though they may
currently be. Gateways can greatly enhance the operation of the RF net as
simple interfaces between the Internet and ham networks. Obviously both
Internet and Packet would benefit from such an exchange, and I'd be glad to
assist any efforts along those lines. There are endless possibilities.
Using gateways to move amateur radio traffic has proved to be a disasterous
mistake though, and this practice should be limited or stopped altogether
while we still have an amateur packet radio RF digital network to improve.
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
Packet Radio : N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
E-Mail : n5pvl@texoma.com
Web : http://www.texoma.com/~n5pvl
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 16:01:39 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ron Atkinson <n8fow@hamgate.cc.wayne.edu>
Subject: Benefits of AMPR IP encapsulation gateways.
My mailer said Charles Brabham said this:
>
> Most hams realize that the HF bands, 2 meters and 440 MHz. which carry
> over 90% of the AX25 Packet Radio network, is of little (or no) interest to
> devotees of either amateur TCP/IP or high-speed RF networking, particularly
> in the case of most experimentors.
They use those bands because decent RF equipment for higher bands are
hard to come by. Most TCP/IP experimenters that I used to know were
more into developing software for amateur radio, they were not hardware
experts and not capable of desiging their own radios.
Now what I mean by *designing their own radios* does not include HF/VHF.
Hams seem to think that they are RF experts when they build some HF QRP
rig or an SWR meter. C'mon, this is far from "high-tech". I think I'll
throw up if I see another article in QST or 73 something like "How to
build a dipole", or "Build a 20m CW QRP rig". Since that's the intellectual
level of RF development for most hams in this hobby you can kiss all
chances of moving the TCP/IP folks off of HF, 2m and 440 goodbye until
"plug-n-play" radios show up for higher frequencies. Software writers
don't have the time to play "RF", RF designers don't have the time to
write software. Both sides need to complement each other, and this doesn't
happen because we don't have the RF designers around. Also don't bother
to list things like a 10 GHz link that virtually nobody has the capability
to build a *decent* one, or some other obscure project that only a few
people on this planet even have operational. Hams want something that
all they need to do is "turn it on" and they're on the air, they don't
have time to design it from scratch.
BTW, if someone wants to build an HF QRP rig or a new antenna that the
design has been around for 30 years (it's new to them I guess) for fun
and enjoyment or to learn the basics, then I encourage that and have no
problem with it. It's just that very very few hams ever get farther than
that. If they did have the knowledge to design good UHF/SHF equipment,
they probably quit doing it for a hobby and got a job putting their talent
to work instead.
> Once you "normalize'" the use of the telephone instead of radios to carry
> amateur radio traffic, there is no logical end to it. Eventually, it will
> develop to the point where amateur TCP/IP ops will be using the phone lines
> to communicate across town, not to mention across country. ( Actually, I'm
> sure it happens right now.. Why not? )
> "It's cheaper".
> "It's faster".
If you don't like the packet Internet gateways I guess you would really
hate all the hams that use Internet Phone to link radios and repeaters
together :)
> As I have pointed out before, the higher freqs which are prime territory
> for the stated aims of most amateur TCP/IP devotees is relatively "open
> country". There's absolutely nothing or nobody keeping any experimentor
> from utilizing those bands. As an "RF purist", my first wish is that you
> folks WOULD utilize those freqs, instead of endlessly talking about it.
> Somebody needs to! Let's see some action, instead of endlessly argueing how
> many contradictory theories can be balanced on the head of a surface-mount
> chip. Prove your ideas!
See my above comments... lack of RF equipment is keeping people from
being able to move to higher frequencies. Also Part 15 spread spectrum
devices don't apply, that's not amateur radio either. I used to use
those under Part 15 and have never called it Amateur Radio regardless
of the STA that basically thinks it's Amateur.
Ron N8FOW
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 09:02:13 +1100
From: Terry Dawson <terry@perf.no.itg.telstra.com.au>
Subject: Benefits of AMPR IP encapsulation gateways.
Charles Brabham wrote:
> Once you "normalize'" the use of the telephone instead of radios to carry
> amateur radio traffic, there is no logical end to it. Eventually, it will
> develop to the point where amateur TCP/IP ops will be using the phone lines
> to communicate across town, not to mention across country. ( Actually, I'm
> sure it happens right now.. Why not? )
> "It's cheaper".
> "It's faster".
> "Every time the radios become too much of an expense or of a technical
> challenge, we'll just use the telephone and pretend it's a radio instead".
> "We'll put a radio on either end of an Internet link, and pretend it's
> 'advanced amateur packet radio networking', even though it's really not
> amateur packet radio at all".
> "It's just temporary, until the megabaud RF network suddely springs up on
> it's own, without my help or participation in it's development because I'll
> be using the telephone. It's cheaper. It's faster, ect...".
Consider this. At present those people who are interested in hybrid
radio/internet facilities are working _with_ amateur radio. If the
decision is made that amateur radio is not the place for that sort of
activity then those people will begin to _compete_ with amateur radio
by demanding spectrum allocation somewhere else. Any of the ITU
sanctioned
Amateur allocations will probably remain safely protected, but I already
don't hold much hope of amateur radio keeping much of it VHF/UHF/higher
To be continued in digest: tcp_97_28M
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
