Date: Mon, 27 Jun 94 04:30:03 PDT From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group Errors-To: TCP-Group-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: TCP-Group Digest V94 #131 To: tcp-group-digest TCP-Group Digest Mon, 27 Jun 94 Volume 94 : Issue 131 Today's Topics: NOS and the PC (2 msgs) Routing Project Send Replies or notes for publication to: . Subscription requests to . 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 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: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 08:05:53 -0500 (CDT) From: ssampson@sabea-oc.af.mil (Steve Sampson) Subject: NOS and the PC To: tcp-group@UCSD.EDU klarsen@kazak.NMSU.Edu writes: > But out there right now is the G8BPQ switch which I have running > and has NEVER CRASHED! Unless we need something better than netrom under > ax.25 this is the best thing available. You brought up some interesting points about mountaintop operation. Almost all sites probably run everything off a battery. That's where the TNC-2 fits in, as it runs off of 12 volts. I have a PC in my Buick that runs off of 12 volts and is equipped with an inverter. It runs the CRT display which simulates the guages. But you're right, you have to factor the cost of an Inverter (commonly called UPS in computer lingo) for the PC as well as a battery for the radios. Where I think you stray from modernization is the reliance on serial port I/O. This is always worse than DMA. So no, I don't think the answer is to just hook up serial devices to the PC. I think if you're not going to use a plug in card with DMA, that you're not really modernizing and wasting your time. BPQ, Net/Rom, and Rose are all antiquated software technology, designed for serial ports. Along with that, they are designed for 1200 baud and small packet sizes. Once you forget about 1200 baud as the network speed, then you have to forget about serial I/O. If BPQ and Net/Rom are so good, why doesn't your company use it to run their computer network? Because they want the performance of DMA in the form of an Ethernet card. -- Steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 1994 09:12:23 +0200 (BST) From: A.Cox@swansea.ac.uk (Alan Cox) Subject: NOS and the PC To: ssampson@sabea-oc.af.mil (Steve Sampson) > you have to forget about serial I/O. If BPQ and Net/Rom are so good, why > doesn't your company use it to run their computer network? Because they want > the performance of DMA in the form of an Ethernet card. BPQ supports stuff like the Baycom 4 port card (2*1200, 9600 + other high speed modem of choice). It needs a PC, and it needs a fast PC to do a lot of fast traffic, but it is _not_ just a KISS tnc driver. The fact you can play wolfenstein at the same time as having BPQ loaded high and running the node says something.. Alan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 1994 08:57:24 +0200 (BST) From: A.Cox@swansea.ac.uk (Alan Cox) Subject: Routing Project To: ssampson@sabea-oc.af.mil (Steve Sampson) > Alan Cox reports that his group is nearing completion of a Linux design > that could run in 2 Meg and a floppy. I like this idea much better, being > an advocate of using better code. For example the TCP/IP is probably no > better than Phil's, but the support code is (domain, NFS, etc). Hopefully > they will be able to release a floppy image. You can already put it together yourself barring TCP/IP over AX.25 VC links. Thats the one thing KA9Q has as a 'feature' as opposed to an improvement. The KA9Q AX.25 also has the added stuff for doing out of order frame reassembly. For the basic router only purpose however while a 2MB 386SX will do it beautifully and in some style, an XT with a hacked KA9Q will do many of the cases on hardware sitting in everyones cupboard looking for a reason to exist. At least in the UK second hand 386's are not yet _that_ common. Obviously by using a Linux or *BSD kernel you immediately get tcp routing, ftp, nfs, dns etc. You get handling for SLIP, PPP, AX.25 (not netrom 8) ) and ethernet TCP/IP. > That was my intention. To get off the single character at a time logic in > NOS, and do bulk transfer. That serial code is terrible, and the performance > is terrible (I've been able to NOS up to 4800 baud without overruns). I looked > at redesign of that part, but it's a major change. Linux gets 56Kbit with no losses on a 386DX40 with SCSI disks, 38400 with IDE due to certain IDE drives needing you to lock interrupts off during a transfer to avoid nasty messes occuring. The code is clean and could as equally be shoved into DOS or anything else. Another way to attack this from the NOS/DOS side is to use the FOSSIL drivers. > It doesn't have to be Telnet (just an idea) and maybe a simple AX.25 connection > would be good enough. Anyway the remote command mode in NOS is the only area > that needs to be modified in order to bring it out as the main console. You want full reconfigure ability if possible and the ability to trace. I'll put together an ALPHA disk release next week after Im back from the Linux & The Internet conference in Heidelberg. Alan ------------------------------ End of TCP-Group Digest V94 #131 ******************************