QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/digital/940082.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 13.2 KB

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 94 04:30:11 PST
From: Ham-Digital Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Digital Digest V94 #82
To: Ham-Digital


Ham-Digital Digest          Sat, 26 Mar 94       Volume 94 : Issue   82

Today's Topics:
                             Am I normal?
                         DPK-9600 info needed
                  FROM INTERNET [e-mail]
                mailgateway Packet Radio <--> Internet
                        MFJ 1278B tnc problem
                      NET_Mac2.3.39.sea.hqx.text
                        NTS traffic on packet
                    RShtx202/KPC-3 wiring question

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

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: Fri, 25 Mar 1994 19:17:24 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: Am I normal?
To: [e-mail]

Now that I've gotten the attention of everyone on the net that likes
a good straight line...

I'm using a PK232MBX with a Drake TR7.

In CAL mode, I've followed the directions for setting up the levels.

But I find the following:

    1. In LSB mode on the transceiver, even though the
       power output looks right, the audio reports are
       bad and the signal sounds at once rough and weak.
    2. On RTTY mode, everything works okay on the air
       (i.e. AMTOR, RTTY, and PACTOR contacts work well,
       with much praise for the subjective signal quality).
       However, while calibrating, I note that when I set
       up for 50 watts out on the low tone, the high
       tone yields over 100 watts out. On LSB, the tone
       levels are within a couple of watts of one another.

Am I wrong in my assumption that the amplitude of the two tones ought
to be roughly equal? I guess that if it is so, I might be dealing
with a problem of audio filter roll-off. On the other hand, I've always
used the PK232 with FM rigs in the past, and it's harder to spot
over-deviation than it is the HF rig's obvious difference in power
output.

Does the PK232 have some kind of balance pots? I didn't see any information
in the manual.

On another cheerful note, I've seen a lot of discussion on the air about
PACTOR lock-up followed by disconnect, from people using the PK232.


73,

Greg

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 1994 15:54:51 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: DPK-9600 info needed
To: [e-mail]

Steve Ford (WB8IMY) ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I recently received a message from a Russian amateur requesting
: more information about the DPK-9600 modem. The text of his
: message follows:


: "I read article about the DPK-9600 modem. It says the DPK-9600
: features a single-chip FSK modem 4800/9600/19200. It also says
: it is complete compatible with K9NG and G3RUH modems.

: Is it really all features of G3RUH (scrambler/descramler, FIR filtr,
: DPLL clock recovery) in single-chip ? What is name of chip ? What is
: price ? Or maybe it is a some DSP chip with software support for all
: g3ruh features..? Can you tell me some more about this design in
: DPK-9600 ?"

I evaluated one for the VITA organization with UO-22 and KO-23.  The
performance on rx was VERY poor.  The recieved data rate was about
20% of my DSP-12.  I talked to DRSI, and they acknowledged they had a
problem decoding packets from the satellites.  My findings were duplicated
by Andy McAllister of AMSAT.

There is a single chip which seems to handle most of the modem functions,
but it's propriotary to DRSI I believe.

I can't speak for the performance on terrestrial packet, DRSI said it
worked well there.  It's unfortunate that it works so poorly with the
satellites, it's packaged in a tiny case, and draws very little power.
Aside from the fact it doesin't work, I liked it :).

73's de WA2N/5
Wayne Roth
--
                                             [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 25 Mar 1994 22:31:01 -0500
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news1.oakland.edu!vtc.tacom.army.mil!vtc.tacom.army.mil![e-mail]
Subject: FROM INTERNET [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

Before I would buy ANY book, you might want to look around the
internet.  (Eff.org specifically, and rtfm.mit.edu)

EFF produced and electronic book called "The Big Dummies Guide
to the internet".   It's very good and it's freely available.

N8IFQ

===============================================================================
Steven E. Grevemeyer            Phone: [phone] FAX: -5008
Software Enginnering Division (AMSTA-OS)
US Army Tank-Automotive RD&E Center
Vetronics Technology Center    Email: [e-mail]
Warren, MI 48397-5000
===============================================================================
--
Steven E. Grevemeyer    Phone: [phone] FAX: -5008
US Army TACOM/Software Enginnering Division (AMSTA-OS)
Vetronics Technology Center Warren, MI 48397-5000
Email: [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Mar 1994 08:00:35 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!newshub.nosc.mil!news![e-mail]
Subject: mailgateway Packet Radio <--> Internet
To: [e-mail]

In article <2mp75f$[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Olaf_Menzel) writes:

> I have read in the newsgroup rec.radio...
> in Amerika you have a mailgateway between Packet-Radio
> and Internet.


Is this the case?   Suppose I have a packet message I want to have
delivered to my email address, where should it be sent via packet?

Suppose the reverse is the case; I have a message here on my computer
which I want to send to a packet address...where do I send it?

Roger Keating - KD6EFQ
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 26 Mar 1994 00:45:29 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!news.unb.ca!nbt.nbnet.nb.ca!nbnet.nb.ca![e-mail]
Subject: MFJ 1278B tnc problem
To: [e-mail]

I have just upgraded to Pactor by adding a seperate board to the MFJ 1278.
This upgrade now turns the tnc into a 1278b.

I noticed after making approx 3 or 4 Pactor contacts that I lost Amtor
capability. Since the loss didnt occur immediately upon firing up the new
upgrade, I suspect that it may not be associated with the new board. But I
dont know, and I dont want to ask the company.

Has anyone else run into this type of failure.

------------------------------

Date: 25 Mar 94 15:43:46 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NET_Mac2.3.39.sea.hqx.text
To: [e-mail]


                                            The Netherlands, March 25, 1994.
Hello dear reader,

Today I distributed the file NET_Mac2.3.39.sea.hqx...

For those who don't know NET/Mac...   NET/Mac is the application that
supports TCP/IP over packet-radio, which means, that hamradio operators
can use NET/Mac for their wireless TCP/IP network...

In this version of NET/Mac I implemented the following:

- Mods for Power Macintosh models (tested on a 7100/66)
- OUT windows in a split-window session were sometimes hidden
- Improved the generation of From addresses for hop-to-hop

This version obsoletes all versions of info-mac/comm/net/radio-netmac in
the Sumex-Aim archives.

The new NET/Mac has (hopefully) been uploaded to:
1) ucsd.edu, to the directory hamradio/packet/tcpip/incoming.
   If it's not there then look at hamradio/packet/tcpip/mac.

It may also get uploaded to:
oak.oakland.edu, to the directory pub/hamradio/mac/digital/????
as soon as I know where to put it...

Kind regards,

Adam PA2AGA  (e-mail: [e-mail]  )
             (    or: [e-mail]  for letters only, NO BIG files here)

------------------------------

Date: 25 Mar 94 19:29:43 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NTS traffic on packet
To: [e-mail]

Danny:
The ARRL Publications or others on the air/Internet can advise you on how
packet messages go point-to-point. My comment is addressed to the query,"
How does NTS traffic get handled on the Packet network?"

I am advised by local packet network managers and the local NTS
representatives that NTS traffic fares poorly on the packet network. The
problem is one of "culture"

The traffic culture was built around HF operations - originaly spark, then
cw , then voice and cw. When digital modes appeared, particularly AMTOR,
the NTS began to incoporate that mode for traffic. The traffic culture is
based upon one person handing traffic to another and the second person
agreeing to forward or deliver the traffic. The Q-signals reflect this
since QSL confirms receipt and QSP agrees to relay.

The packet network culture imitates the E-mail structure of public utilities
and companies, but has no provision (that I am aware of) for
automatically acknowledging receipt. This is not in general a limitation
since most packet messages are sent to someone who is a ham known to be
connected to the packet network.

The NTS system does not require that the message receipient be a member of
the National Traffic System or even to be an amateur. This is where a
significant problem lies. Because packet network messages are handled in an
"unattended" fashion, a node on the network may accept a message headed
into its area which will then be placed in a file awaiting checkin by the
recipient without agreeing that it will guarantee to relay or deliver.
The receipient may be a"one-time" or an "infrequent checkin" type and the
message will languish waiting for them to come and get it. Eventually aging
causes it to be removed from the active storage.

Most BBS operators implore those who check in to look at the accumulation
of NTS messages and accept one or more that they are willing to relay or
deliver. The problem is that there is not a habit pattern or culture
that has grown up within the packet community to accept such activity as
something of interest. In some cases, the persons checking in may not have
HF priviledges that permit them to off-load the messages to the local
traffic nets.

In summary, this is an interesting situation which perhaps offers an
opportunity for public service. If such a culture were developed, it would
be in place ready to go in the event of an emergency. Regrettably, to date
the right ingredients have not come together.

I hope this long answer helped your understanding of things.

Best 73
Tod Olson, K0TO
Director, Dakota Division
ARRL
+---------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Tod Olson, K0TO           | E-Mail [e-mail]     |
|                           | MCI address 246-8130             |
| Tao Enterprises           | Voice    1-612-473-6478          |             |
| 292 Heather Lane          | FAX      [phone]          |
| Long Lake, MN 55356-9439  | "There are no solutions, just    |
|                           |  different sets of problems!"    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 1994 16:23:41 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!psinntp!psinntp!gdc!evax.gdc.com![e-mail]
Subject: RShtx202/KPC-3 wiring question
To: [e-mail]

    Mark,

    The HTX202 manual has a section on hooking up a TNC and
        it seems quite simple.



            -Pat n1ocj

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 94 18:45:40 GMT
From: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx10![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <2mnbtp$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2mscpg$[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: KPC-3 and TCPIP

[e-mail] (Mike Stansberry) writes:

>: >KPC-3 is excellent value for the money.
>: If you only want to go 1200 baud it's fine and if you want to keep the same
>: EPROM in it it's fine.  But if you ever want to modify it for high speed
>: or DCD or KISS only you'll regret buying as I did.

>: Just my opinion and expierience,
>: 73, Nate

>The KPC-3 already has KISS capability.

I know notice the word 'only' after KISS.  I run a high speed KISS only EPROM (kiss 56).
Nate

---
Nathan C. Burnett N8MBK
AX.25 PBBS n8mbk@wb8h.#semi.mi.usa.na
AMPRNET [e-mail] [44.102.48.2]    "Nature cannot be fooled"
Internet [e-mail]                          Richard Feynman

------------------------------

End of Ham-Digital Digest V94 #82
******************************