Date: Thu, 2 Jun 94 04:30:19 PDT From: Ham-Digital Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Ham-Digital-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Ham-Digital@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Ham-Digital Digest V94 #172 To: Ham-Digital Ham-Digital Digest Thu, 2 Jun 94 Volume 94 : Issue 172 Today's Topics: Alpha-Numeric Paging Software An open note to Gary Coffman, KE4ZV (3 msgs) Cardinal DSP16 boards $79 +$5s/h (2 msgs) Help with JNOS for Linux JNOS for Unix. LOOKING FOR: PK-88 need repeater advice PCMCIA TNC RTTY DIGITAL JOURNAL subscription info Telix modem software doesn't choke on 7plus files Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Ham-Digital Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1 Jun 1994 22:50:57 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!udel!news2.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!bga.com!patm@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Alpha-Numeric Paging Software To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu TSTADER (tstader@aol.com) wrote: : In article <2rt9s2$mpr@giga.bga.com>, patm@bga.com (Patrick Mcguire) : writes: *** Thanks for the credit but I this is *not* the response that I posted.*** vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv : Somebody once gave me the info to Motorola's document request : line.... but not sure where I saw it.... but if you call : 1-800-542-7882 and ask them for a copy of the Motorola "Third Party : Referal Guide to Alpah and Data Paging"... you'll get a nice booklet : listing all of the "known" software suppliers out there whose : products do what you want. There is a section for DOS, Macintosh and : Unix. They have a section for Shareware/Freeware, but the 04 March : 1994 edition shows none. : I don't know how Motorola will continue to support this document.... : but it is nice. They also sent me a whole bunch of info on their : NewsStream and NewsCard products.... it got the wheels turning on we : might be able to adapt this product... pretty neat. : 73 for now.... c u on the shortwaves : Terry Stader - KA8SCP : America Online Ham Radio Club Host : Macintosh Amateur Radio Software List Maintainer : Internet: tstader@aol.com (e-mail) or : p00489@psilink.com (binaries/files >28K) : KA8SCP@WA1PHY.#EMA.MA.USA.NOAM : ka8scp@ka8scp.ampr.org [44.56.4.82] Mac : [44.56.4.120] DOS Clone : (they're BOTH pc's!) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What I did originally post was a short note concering the use of any generic comm program to access an alphanumeric pager. A short recap of this follows: Obtain the paging terminal access telephone no from the pager co. This is the number you must have regardless of the access software you use. Set your comm program to 1200 bps N81 at first. If this does not work use 300 bps. These terminals are not speed demons. When the terminal answers it will ask for password. In my experience this is just the name of the paging co. or some variant. (e.g. McCaw Communications is "MCCAW") Next you will be queried for the number of the pager. Enter the telephone number of pager -just 7 digits, no area code. Then just enter the text of your message, usually 80 chars max. That's all there is to it... If you are so inclined a 'script' could be written that would enter all the preamble stuff automatically. Patrick McGuire WA8PLR patm@bga.com ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1994 15:25:57 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!icaen!drenze@network.ucsd.edu Subject: An open note to Gary Coffman, KE4ZV To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Gary, you should be getting a copy of this on Packet as well, but I thought I'd toss it out on Usenet as well for others to comment upon. I recently came across a note by you in our local Packet BBS archives dated 12-MAR-92. You probably don't remember having written it, but it was a response to a UK user's request for information on packet applications. Your response was that there was so much potential for packet, but that right now, aside from local packet BBS's and packet mail, there are none, diddly, zippo. You said that, you expected it "to fall into a 1200 baud and C64 forever mindset that never reaches the heights it is capible of scaling." Well, two years later, I see you as being 100% right. I've not been in packet that long, but what I've seen makes me believe that the case may be worse than you depicted it then. I'll use the Iowa packet network as an example. It's a fairly extensive network, you can get into it from pretty much anyplace in the state on 2-meters. But I have the network map here in front of me...and that's about all it is, 2 meters. There are only a handful of 9600 baud connections throughout the state, and those are mostly to get *into* nodes, not links between the nodes, and the few which are backbone links don't even connect the major nodes. I hear people talking on the linked repeater system about mail moving "fast" today--only taking 16 hours or so to make a 3-link trip. Needless to say, I have a hard time swallowing that. I realize that much of this is simply the way the local net is set up, but the way it is set up reflects the mindset of which you wrote. Also, from my conversations with other packeteers, this sort of setup is not uncommon. But what can be done about it? It seems to me that newer, more efficient protocols need to be developed *and actively promoted* rather than making 10 or 15-year-old technology the standard. A new implementation of TCP/IP might even help the situation. While the TCP/IP protocol suite is far from perfect, it seems to be much more efficient than the network we have now. But the current implementations, while pioneering in their time, are currently out- dated. IMO the best way to update our current technology would be to develop a device driver for the standard TNC in KISS mode. This device driver would allow standard TCP/IP implementations and apps to interface to amateur packet radio transparently. It seems to me that there is no reason that standard TCP/IP applications which run on the Internet should not be able to run on a Packet radio internet, including standard implementations of ftp, telnet, rlogin, usenet news, internet bbs's, etc. I have been dabbling with such a device driver, but I do not pretend to either be a professional programmer (I'm a writer by trade) or to understand the AX.25 protocol or to understand KISS. Furthermore, this would be an excellent avenue to bring new blood into Amateur Radio. I've mostly grown up with computers, but as great as my understanding of them is, I don't have the intuitive understanding that those even ten years younger than me do. I've only been using computers since I was ten or so...these kids currently in high school have been living with their wonders since the day they were born. These are the ones we should be talking to, that we should be bringing into Amateur Radio to develop the networks of tomorrow. With their help we could put Amateur Radio back on the cutting edge of technology rather than the trailing edge we seem to be holding on to right now. Comments? I'm interested in hearing what people have to say. You can please direct any flames to /dev/null--I don't want to hear them. -- Doug Renze, N0YVW * drenze@isca.uiowa.edu * N0YVW @ W0IUQ.ia.usa.na ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 00:24:25 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!fconvx.ncifcrf.gov!mack@network.ucsd.edu Subject: An open note to Gary Coffman, KE4ZV To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu In article <2si9a5$40g@news.icaen.uiowa.edu> drenze@icaen.uiowa.edu (Douglas J Renze) writes: > But what can be done about it? It seems to me that newer, >more efficient protocols need to be developed *and actively promoted* >rather than making 10 or 15-year-old technology the standard. > A new implementation of TCP/IP might even help the situation. >While the TCP/IP protocol suite is far from perfect, it seems to be >much more efficient than the network we have now. But the current >implementations, while pioneering in their time, are currently out- >dated. IMO the best way to update our current technology would be >to develop a device driver for the standard TNC in KISS mode. This >device driver would allow standard TCP/IP implementations and apps >to interface to amateur packet radio transparently. It seems to me >that there is no reason that standard TCP/IP applications which run >on the Internet should not be able to run on a Packet radio internet, >including standard implementations of ftp, telnet, rlogin, usenet news, >internet bbs's, etc. TCPIP is already available with the KA9Q NOS code (there's lots of books eg NOS INTRO, thru ARRL, to helpyou on your way). There is a problem that there's no one to talk to. The real problem is that increased data rate requires a wider IF and AF section in the T/X. The current voice grade audio that comes through ham FM rigs is only good to about 2400 baud (others probably have better estimates). If you want 56kb, then you need a whole new TX, basically an RF modem. To talk at ethernet rates (10MHz) you are going to have to put all your rigs on 10Ghz. It's a lot of money to invest in a system which is hobbled by every message having to be read by a human at the point of entry. Joe Mack NA3T mack@ncifcrf.gov ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jun 1994 04:36:06 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.uiowa.edu!icaen!drenze@network.ucsd.edu Subject: An open note to Gary Coffman, KE4ZV To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu mack@ncifcrf.gov (Joe Mack) writes: >In article <2si9a5$40g@news.icaen.uiowa.edu> drenze@icaen.uiowa.edu (Douglas J Renze) writes: >> But what can be done about it? It seems to me that newer, >>more efficient protocols need to be developed *and actively promoted* >>rather than making 10 or 15-year-old technology the standard. >> A new implementation of TCP/IP might even help the situation. >>While the TCP/IP protocol suite is far from perfect, it seems to be >>much more efficient than the network we have now. But the current >>implementations, while pioneering in their time, are currently out- >>dated. IMO the best way to update our current technology would be >>to develop a device driver for the standard TNC in KISS mode. This >>device driver would allow standard TCP/IP implementations and apps >>to interface to amateur packet radio transparently. It seems to me >>that there is no reason that standard TCP/IP applications which run >>on the Internet should not be able to run on a Packet radio internet, >>including standard implementations of ftp, telnet, rlogin, usenet news, >>internet bbs's, etc. >TCPIP is already available with the KA9Q NOS code (there's lots of books >eg NOS INTRO, thru ARRL, to helpyou on your way). There is a problem that >there's no one to talk to. The real problem is that increased data rate >requires a wider IF and AF section in the T/X. The current voice grade >audio that comes through ham FM rigs is only good to about 2400 baud (others >probably have better estimates). If you want 56kb, then you need a whole >new TX, basically an RF modem. To talk at ethernet rates (10MHz) you are >going to have to put all your rigs on 10Ghz. It's a lot of money to invest >in a system which is hobbled by every message having to be read by a human >at the point of entry. I'm aware that TCP/IP is already available. But this is a suite of programs which operate only through packet, if I'm not mistaken. Ideally, any program which can run through standard TCP/IP should be able to run through a packet-radio version of TCP/IP. As far as I know, this is not currently the case. If I'm using a Macintosh, for example, and want to use TCP/IP I *ought* to be able to use NCSA telnet, ditto for Windoze, standard telnet should work for me on a Linux box, and the DOS version of it should work on a DOS box. Understand what I'm saying? And who said anything about Ethernet rates? Seems to me that a lot of people run SLIP at 9600 baud and don't have many problems. Heck, I've even heard the rumour that all of Iceland is linked to the rest of the Internet through a single 9600 baud SLIP link. Similar performance should be possible via packet (I mean, if LANs can do it, why can't we?). A packet network should be treatable as a WAN. I've also been thinking some more about some applications for Packet. Why don't we use a Client-Server architecture for our BBS's? It's much more efficient both in the use of the frequency and in the use of the host computer. Why not write distributed BBS's, where multiple computers at different sites share the loads? This is an offshoot of the client- server architecture. There are so many possibilities! 73 - doug -- Doug Renze, N0YVW * drenze@isca.uiowa.edu * N0YVW @ W0IUQ.ia.usa.na DRenze@aol.com ** drenze@chop.isca.uiowa.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 21:52:24 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!analog.com!analog.com!kangas@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Cardinal DSP16 boards $79 +$5s/h To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu In article jdc@cci.com (James D. Cronin) writes: >In article <1994May27.185206.22868@midway.uchicago.edu>, >Kenneth C Hopper wrote: >> For those digitally enabled hams who are in- >> terested in exploring the KC7WW PC soundcard >> application - you can get a Cardinal DSP16 for >> $79 at the PC Connection 1-800-243-8088 plus >> about $5 s/h. Good deal for a programmable >> ASP based DSP PC board. >> >It sounds interesting. What's needed in the line of software for >programming it? Is there a developer's kit or something of that >nature? >Also, what ham-oriented software has been written for this card? Note that the Cardinal board isn't ASP based, but instead has a real DSP onboard, an Analog Devices 2115. I have no idea if any ham software has been written for it, but Analog is supposed to release an SDK for the Cardinal and the other PSA-based soundcards (ie Orchid Soundwave, MediaMagic, Adaptec, etc.) Real Soon Now... which means I thought it was supposed to be out a couple of weeks ago, but seems to have been postponed a little bit. If you're interested, the official announcement should be on comp.dsp sometime soon. Hmm... that is a pretty good price on the card, though. Might have to pick on of 'em up myself. (ps - I'm not a ham... yet. just another interested bystander.) -Matt -- . . . . . , , , , , , , , , , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Matt Kangas `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,"(Thus we join television in leading people matt.kangas@analog.com `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` to kill thoughtlessly.)" -RMS DSP Tools Group, Analog Devices Inc `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`[Emacs, you know...] ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1994 22:56:01 -0400 From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net Subject: Cardinal DSP16 boards $79 +$5s/h To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu In article <1994Jun1.215224.4951@analog.com>, matt.kangas@analog.com writes: In article jdc@cci.com (James D. Cronin) writes: >In article <1994May27.185206.22868@midway.uchicago.edu>, >Kenneth C Hopper wrote: >> For those digitally enabled hams who are in- >> terested in exploring the KC7WW PC soundcard >> application - you can get a Cardinal DSP16 for >> $79 at the PC Connection 1-800-243-8088 plus >> about $5 s/h. Good deal for a programmable >> ASP based DSP PC board. >> >It sounds interesting. What's needed in the line of software for >programming it? Is there a developer's kit or something of that >nature? >Also, what ham-oriented software has been written for this card? A friend and I bought 3 of these boards several months ago they were such a "bargain" (about $120). We had so many problems with software and drivers and installation, we sent them back! Cardinal Tech Support was useless. Sometimes you get what you pay for! Anyone need the Wavetable Chip for this Board?? ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1994 21:37:03 -0400 From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net Subject: Help with JNOS for Linux To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Benn trying to get JNOS (j109lxa3) working. When I compile, everything goes fine until it gets near the end, then I get "curses.c XXX (linux.a(curses.o)) Undefined symbol _getattrs referenced from text segment" This is repeated 5 times, with 5 line numbers (XXX), 434,489,496,524, 533) . I loaded ncurses 1.8, and even changed my kernel from 99.14 to 1.10, but the error is the same. Obviously, I am no expert on C programming. Has anyone had the same experience, and can tell me what to do. Dumb I may be, bur also stubborn, and have benn struggling with this for 3 days. Thanks in advance.. John N4JS (jsielke@wx2l.uscc.com) ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1994 14:24:02 -0400 From: newstf01.cr1.aol.com!search01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail@uunet.uu.net Subject: JNOS for Unix. To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Try UCSD.EDU in hmradio/packet/jnos. You want j109lxa3.tar.z ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 14:55:42 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!concert!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!saips.cv.nrao.edu!sadira.gb.nrao.edu!dgordon@network.ucsd.edu Subject: LOOKING FOR: PK-88 To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu I am looking for a used PK-88 for use with my C64. Got the software, just need the modem and cables. Thanks David - KB4LCI dgordon@nrao.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 20:01:45 GMT From: spsgate!mogate!newsgate!dtsdev0!kinzer@uunet.uu.net Subject: need repeater advice To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu There seems to be very little packet activity in this area (Phoenix) on 440 MHZ. Around our club, we were kicking around the idea of putting up a small BBS or something, just to get our hands into the packet arena. The idea kept evolving until we found ourselves talking about putting up a full blown repeater for digital use (we already have voice repeaters.) We think we can scrounge up the necessary radio equipment, and are continuing thinking along these lines. So, with setting up a repeater as the goal, what do we need to do to make a deluxe installation? I see operation at 9600 baud as a possibility, even though I (nor nobody I know) does 9600 at the present time. We would probably be setting a precedent for the area on 440, and thus should do the job well. There appears to be a bit-regenerator kit from TAPR, but I am not networked well with that organization yet (new member.) Is this the way to go, or is there some other option to consider? Anyway, fire away, and we'll see what we can come up with. -dave ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1994 22:42:32 GMT From: pa.dec.com!usenet@decwrl.dec.com Subject: PCMCIA TNC To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Anyone know if someone is looking at doing a PCMCIA TNC? I think that this would be a neat item. (I know I could put it to good use). Any pointers would be appreciated. 73 de Jeff -- KD1IT/7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff McLeman Internet: mcleman@zso.dec.com Redmond, Wa. Amprnet: jeffm@kd1it.ampr.org KD1IT / 7 AX25 slownet: kd1it@n7fsp.wa.usa.na ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1994 14:56:18 GMT From: nwnexus!krel.iea.com!comtch!mikec@uunet.uu.net Subject: RTTY DIGITAL JOURNAL subscription info To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Kenneth C Hopper (khopper@kimbark.uchicago.edu) wrote: : Great source of info about all digital ham modes. Give it : a try for $19 (first class US)/yr. : The rtty DIGITAL Jouranl : c/o The American Digital Radio Society : P.O. Box 2465 : New York, NY 10185-2465 : or Jim, N2HOS : P.O. Box 3328 : Indian Rocks Beach, FL 34635 : I am not affiliated with the RDJ in any way - but I feel : it is the digital ham's best publication and I want you : to know about it :-). I _am_ affiliated with the RDJ, and I have to agree with you - the Journal is an excellent source of digital information! -- - - - - - - - - - - - - mikec@comtch.iea.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Michael B. Candy Amateur Radio Call: KI7FX P.O. Box 1953 KI7FX@KA7FVV.#EWA.WA.USA.NA Airway Hts, WA. 99001-1953 American Digital Radio Society ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 11:36:18 GMT From: psinntp!gdstech!gdstech!bat@uunet.uu.net Subject: Telix modem software doesn't choke on 7plus files To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Any time you are sending binary files over a modem you run the risk of wierd things happening, as the XON/XOF characters are encountered in the stream. Using hardware flow control is almost always a better bet. Set your comm software (and sometimes a modem setting is needed) to use RTS/CTs and you will have lots fewer transmission problems. BTW, I use the new MSKermit, and it works great, and is free. -pat -- *-----------------------------------------------------------* * Pat Masterson D12-25 | KE2LJ@KC2FD * * Grumman Data Systems | 516-346-6316. * * Bethpage, NY 11746 | bat@gdstech.grumman.com * ------------------------------ End of Ham-Digital Digest V94 #172 ******************************