| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 09.07.97 09:21l 168 Lines 4787 Bytes #-10572 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_97_37A
Read: GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 97/37A
Path: DB0RGB<DB0MAK<DB0BOX<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0SIF<DB0GV<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0RWI<
PI8ZAA<PI8HWB<PI8VAD<PI8VNW
Sent: 970709/0115Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:10322 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA37844 ; Wed, 09 Jul 97 00:10:30 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00002455 ; Sun, 13 Apr 97 15:57:43 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00002442 ; Sun, 13 Apr 97 15:47:41 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.6.1) with SMTP
id AA00009357 ; Sun, 13 Apr 97 15:47:38 MET
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 97 15:41:05 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_97_37A>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 97/37A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
TCP-Group Digest Sun, 13 Apr 97 Volume 97 : Issue 37
Today's Topics:
Benefits of AMPR IP ...
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12 Apr 1997 23:17:51 -0000
From: skoric@uns.ns.ac.yu
Subject: Benefits of AMPR IP ...
Hello hams and others,
Let me comment the following...
>From: brian@nothing.ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
>Subject: Benefits of AMPR IP encapsulation gateways.
>
>But the people who are developing protocols and applications are important
>too, as we need both radio circuits AND the mechanisms to carry data on them
>in order to build the network we'd all like to have.
You have right Brian, BUT, tcpip (except on its ends) is not RADIO neither
HAM RADIO. I often use my academy network, email, ftp, telnet etc, but all
this stuff is not (HAM)RADIO. In this newsgroup there is so much non-hams
and it is so positive this newsgroup exists. But, it is difficult to say
if these non-hams would become radio-amateurs (beside their being Internet-
-amateurs or telephone-amateurs) if we all force non-radio protocols and
applications in way you say: "...carry data on them in order to build the
network we'd all like to have". Do we (hams) really like to have NON-radio
tcpip network or what? I am not against tcpip and other newsgroups, email,
and all other "wired" TOOLS that are going to help us improving our RADIO
network. I support these TOOLS, but I am against tcpip that is going to
remove radio and establish itself as quazi-radio. I am sysoping one VHF
and one HF radio bbs's. I often use email, newsgroups, telnet, and other
tcpip stuff whenever needed to improve my RADIO service. But, I do not
like to see Internet wormholes that completely take place of forwarding
RADIO-originated mail and/or replace RADIO-nodes and repeaters. Please,
do not mix different "problems" :)
>The one thing I would NOT like to see is the encapsulating gateways being
>used as 'cheap internet access' - that is, the people running the gateways
>should have some interest in doing something for ham radio networking other
>than just being an Internet Service Provider for their buddies. That's not
>really the goal.
Perectly right. Even worse, not only to serve as an ISP to hams, but to
serve as an RADIO provider to non-hams.
>From: Alan Cox <alan@cymru.net>
>Subject: Benefits of AMPR IP encapsulation gateways.
>
>I spent ages trying to get people interested and involved. They don't care.
>In the UK amateur radio is mostly the preserve of the over 40's. The
>packet radio folk are fed up of being unable to develop anything clever,
>fed up with the 1200 baud folk who refuse to give them any channels and
>have mostly moved onto the internet instead. The screwed up third party
>message passing rules in the UK don't help one jot either.
Hmmm, who banned them to "develop anything clever... give them any channels"?
Not sure about the UK, but here in YU most of them use the packet network
without a single coin to improve its thruput. After they become "fed up"
they switch onto the internet where must to pay. I will not!
>In twenty years amateur radio will be a tiny fringe hobby with a lot less
>users, a lot less frequencies and probably few new ideas, killed by the
>internet, by the pressure for frequency allocations and the reduction in
>amateur radio value as the probability of a war needing a large scale
>call up of radio operators is needed (and thats why amateur radio ever
>got to exist).
Are you a ham?? I do not see how you would prevent ham-radio from this
To be continued in digest: tcp_97_37B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
