HAM Radio 3/hamradioversion3.0examsandprograms1992.iso/packet/gate1120/gate1120.87

Text File | 1987-12-19 | 14KB | 338 lines

Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter
Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU, Editor
Volume 4 Number 5 - November 20, 1987 - Part 1 of 3

EASTERN AREA STAFF SUPPORTS ZIP ADDRESSING

Packet-based radiogram routing dominated the issues at the National Traffic
System's Eastern Area Staff (EAS) meeting October 24-25 in Virginia.  Area
Staffs, which comprise all NTS Officials above the section-level, serve to
advise the ARRL Field Services Manager (Rick Palm, K1CE) on major National
Traffic System (NTS) issues, and maintain the day-to-day long-haul
functions of the NTS.

The EAS passed two significant motions recommending 1) ZIP code addressing
for routing of radiograms through the emerging PBBS auto-forwarding
network, and 2) a study of specific proposals made by members of the
Northeast-based Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS) for NTS
user interface with the system.  The latter was referred to the EAS Region
Packet Managers; their report is due March, 1988.  (Region Packet Managers
are special advisors to EAS members.)

from The ARRL Letter

NETWORK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SOFTWARE

Did you ever wonder how well your local packet-radio network is real
working (or not working)?  If you read the paper entitled "Performance
Monitoring -or- 'I Wanna Fix It, Is It Broke?'" that was presented by Skip
Hansen, WB6YMH, and Harold Price, NK6K, at the 6th ARRL Computer Networking
Conference, you know that Skip and Harold were developing software to
monitor received frames, accumulate data and periodically dump the data
into a log file that could be used to compile statistics concerning network
performance.  That software is now available from CompuServe's HamNet.  Its
file name is MONAX2.ARC and it is written in C for the IBM PC or a
compatible computer.  A TNC with KISS capability is necessary to use the
software.

{A description of new products available from Kantronics was included in
this section.  Since it COULD be considered commercial in nature, it was
deleted in this edition for Packet Distribution.}

220-MHz SPORADIC E STUDY VIA PACKET RADIO

In the November issue of QEX, editor Paul Rinaldo, W4RI, proposed that
a packet radio network be established to study sporadic E and other
propagation in the 220-MHz band.  Citing the automatic beaconing and
listening capabilities of packet radio, W4RI suggests that "receiving
stations can be set up to receive and store all beacon transmissions heard"
and "if transmitting stations use a simple computer program to send the
date and time in each packet transmission, receiving stations can store
the data for later analysis." Such detective work could solve some of the
riddles of 220-MHz propagation.  Is anyone willing to take up this
challenge?


TNC 2 MODIFICATION

Paul Williamson, KB5MU, has designed a modification to the TAPR TNC 2
which allows two EPROMs each containing different software to be installed
simultaneously, selectable from a front panel switch.  Paul wants somebody
to try out his instructions before they are published.  Any volunteers?

from San Diego Packet Radio Association Newsletter

220-MHz PBBS PORT FOR NOVICES

Rob Marzili, KC3BQ, has activated a 223.58 MHz port for his Skaneateles,
New York (near Syracuse) KC3BQ PBBS in order that Novices may enjoy the
packet radio BBS operation.

from The Upstate Packet News

(Gateway would like to publicize other Novice packet activities, so if you
know of any, please let me know - WA1LOU.)


SYSOPS FOR ZIPS?

I would like to run an idea around to my fellow PBBS SYSOPs.  I would like
to put forth the idea that perhaps we are going in the wrong direction with
our ever-expanding PBBS automatic forwarding system.  The present system
depends on a very well-maintained list of the other PBBSs and who you have
to go through to get to them.  We ask everybody to be listed in a white
pages system so we can keep track of where everyone's home PBBS is.
Changes are constantly being made, requiring a great deal of editing of
forwarding files by many SYSOPs.  Is there a different and, perhaps, a
better way?  Maybe.

Some of the NTS people have decided to use the US Postal System of ZIP
codes to route their traffic.  If this method will work for NTS, why not
for regular, non-NTS, ham-to-ham messages.  If a local here in the western
Michigan area wishes to send a note to a buddy ham of his in Dallas, Texas,
he would address it as: SP WA5ABC @ 752.  A local PBBS would figure out
immediately that it goes out of state, so it would be sent to Michigan's HF
gateway, WA1LRL in Brighton.  WA1LRL would look up 75* ZIP as going to
Texas and then the Texas HF station would drop it to the local PBBS that
covers the 752 ZIP.  Compared to the present method, no header editing
would be needed by any SYSOP to get the traffic into Texas.  Any changes in
an area would only be required by that area's local PBBSs.  A PBBS in
Florida would not need to know about any new, changed or deleted PBBS
stations in western Michigan.  At present, we either request a local user
to specify the destination PBBS or, we, as SYSOPs, have to look it up
ourselves.  Sources for the ZIP codes are easy to come by, indeed, here in
Grand Rapids I can call the local post office on a special line to get any
ZIPs for the largest 100 cities in each state.

To address the problem for our friends in other countries, who do not have
the same ZIP code system as the United States, we would put "DXxxx" in the
@-field, where xxx is the international telephone exchange country number.
Then, in the subject field, we would request that the originator put that
country's ZIP code, whatever its format might be.  Since Canada and Mexico
use the same telephone Area Code system as the United States, we could
either use "@ DXVE1" or "@DX514" for Montreal as an example.  Another
possibility would be for all United States non-NTS messages to be formatted
with a "@U49508."

Maybe I have overlooked a serious flaw in this proposed system, but, more
than once, I have had a local user either not have any idea who the local
PBBS was for his buddy or give me a call that his buddy said was valid for
a home PBBS, but I am unable to find any record of it.  In addition, we
have WA1LRL in Michigan, W0RLI in California, etc., so the number in the
call sign can not be depended upon to locate a station.

One more plus: check your existing forwarding file and see how much simpler
it would be with ZIP code routing.  Once the message came to stop at a
PBBS, we might have a minor modification to the PBBS's code to strip the @
from the message header and then that PBBS could route it per local user
tables.

If you have any opinion, please feel free to send it back to western
Michigan.  If your existing file has me in it, fine, if not route to WA1LRL
or W9ZRX.  And, if the ZIP code system were operational, use WA8URE @
49508!

from Tom Bosscher, WA8URE


BEWARE OF MEGA-PACKETS

I have been noticing a whole lot of "Mega-Packets" lately --- hand typed
packets which are longer than 80 or so characters --- many of them as high
as 255 characters.  I suspect those who are originating them do not realize
what is going on.

All modems have a bit error rate (BER) which is how many bits can be sent
(on the average) before an error occurs.  When an error occurs, we have to
retry.  Other factors that contribute to the BER in the real world are
propagation and collisions.  It is fairly easy to calculate the size of a
packet (7 bytes X 2 for call signs, + 1 control byte, +s the data, + a
2-byte checksum).  Assuming BER is a constant, an 80-character packet
consists of 97 bytes or 776 bits, while a 255-character Mega-Packet
consists of 272 bytes or 2176 bits.  As a result, a Mega-Packet is 2.8
times more likely to get damaged before reaching its destination.  So, not
only does it take 2.8 times as long to transmit, but it will (on the
average) take 2.8 more tries or something like 7.84 times as much network
time to transmit as it would if the message was broken into three saner
sized packets.

Also, these quick calculations do not take into account the actual value
for BER.  If the BER is 0.05% (1 in 2000), the 2716 bit Mega-Packet will
likely never get through.  Mathematics aside, the Flow parameter in the TNC
allows very comfortable QSO type operation in a full-duplex environment if
you just hit return after each 80-column line.  If your friend is using a
shorter screen display, try to hit return more often to accommodate him.
If you cannot remember to hit return after each line, at least set Paclen
to a lower value (say 75 or so) --- then the whole network will be more
efficient and we will be able to share the channel more effectively;
everything will work better.

from Lynn Taylor, WB6UUT, via San Diego Packet Radio Association Newsletter

WA7MBL: NOT A TRAFFIC KILLER!

In our description of the KT command in Gateway, Volume 4, Number 3, it is
implied that all PBBS software supports the KT command, when, in fact, it
is supported by W0RLI PBBS software, but is not supported by WA7MBL PBBS
software (version 3 and higher).

TPRS ADDRESS CORRECTION

The address for the Texas Packet Radio Society (TPRS) as published in
Gateway, Volume 4, Number 1, was wrong.  The correct address is:

   Texas Packet Radio Society
   PO Box 831566
   Richardson, TX 75083-1566


 ZIP CODE DIRECTORY

To supplement the ongoing study and discussion concerning the use
of ZIP codes to route NTS traffic via the packet radio network,
Gateway presents the following list of ZIP code 2-digit prefixes
(the first two digits of a ZIP code).  The first list is sorted
alphabetically by location; the second list is sorted numerically
by ZIP code prefix.

List 1.  Alphabetically By Location

Location        ZIP Prefix
Alabama         35, 36
Alaska          99
Arizona         85, 86
Arkansas        72, 73
California      90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95
Colorado        80, 81
Connecticut     06
Delaware        19
D of Columbia   20
Florida         32, 33, 34
Georgia         30, 31
Hawaii          96
Idaho           83
Illinois        60, 61, 62
Indiana         46, 47
Iowa            50, 51, 52
Kansas          66, 67
Kentucky        40, 41, 42
Louisiana       70, 71
Maine           04
Maryland        20, 21
Massachusetts   01, 02
Michigan        48, 49
Minnesota       55, 56
Mississippi     38, 39
Missouri        63, 64, 65
Montana         59
Nebraska        68, 69
Nevada          89
New Hampshire   03
New Jersey      07, 08
New Mexico      87, 88
New York        09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
North Carolina  27, 28
North Dakota    58
Ohio            43, 44, 45
Oklahoma        73, 74
Oregon          97
Pennsylvania    15, 16, 17, 18, 19
Puerto Rico     00
Rhode Island    02
South Carolina  29
South Dakota    57
Tennessee       37, 38
Texas           75, 76, 77, 78, 79
Utah            84
Vermont         05
Virginia        22, 23, 24
Washington      98, 99
West Virginia   25, 26
Wisconsin       53, 54
Wyoming         82

List 2.  Numerically By ZIP Prefix

ZIP Prefix      Location
00              Puerto Rico
01              Massachusetts
02              Massachusetts and Rhode Island
03              New Hampshire
04              Maine
05              Vermont
06              Connecticut
07, 08          New Jersey
09-14           New York
15-18           Pennsylvania
19              Delaware and Pennsylvania
20              District of Columbia and Maryland
21              Maryland
22-24           Virginia
25, 26          West Virginia
27, 28          North Carolina
29              South Carolina
30, 31          Georgia
32-34           Florida
35, 36          Alabama
37              Tennessee
38              Mississippi and Tennessee
39              Mississippi
40-42           Kentucky
43-45           Ohio
46, 47          Indiana
48, 49          Michigan
50-52           Iowa
53, 54          Wisconsin
55, 56          Minnesota
57              South Dakota
58              North Dakota
59              Montana
60-62           Illinois
63-65           Missouri
66, 67          Kansas
68, 69          Nebraska
70, 71          Louisiana
72              Arkansas
73              Arkansas and Oklahoma
74              Oklahoma
75-79           Texas
80, 81          Colorado
82              Wyoming
83              Idaho
84              Utah
85, 86          Arizona
87, 88          New Mexico
89              Nevada
90-95           California
96              Hawaii
97              Oregon
98              Washington
99              Alaska and Washington

Note that the following locations share the same 2-digit prefix:

Location                        Shared Prefix
Alaska and Washington                99
Arkansas and Oklahoma                73
Delaware and  Pennsylvania           19
District of Columbia and Maryland    20
Massachusetts and Rhode Island       02
Mississippi and Tennessee            38

Needless to say, submissions for publication in "Gateway" are welcome.
Submit material via the US mail to:

   Gateway
   Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU
   75 Kreger Drive
   Wolcott, CT 06716-2702

or electronically, via CompuServe to user ID 70645,247

REPRODUCTION OF GATEWAY MATERIAL

Material may be excerpted from Gateway without prior permission, provided
that the original contributor is credited and Gateway is identified as the
source.