QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/digital/940247.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 17.3 KB

Date: Sat, 23 Jul 94 04:30:16 PDT
From: Ham-Digital Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Digital Digest V94 #247
To: Ham-Digital


Ham-Digital Digest          Sat, 23 Jul 94       Volume 94 : Issue  247

Today's Topics:
                    amprnet via internet (2 msgs)
                          Baycom & software
                   Current Capabilities of Packet?
                      Hamcomm interface problems
                    Hamcom program non-functional
                     internet -> pr ->internet ?
                       TheNet and AEA PK-96 ??
                     The Net and TNC-1's (2 msgs)

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: 22 Jul 1994 13:33:34 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.onramp.net![e-mail]
Subject: amprnet via internet
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mack Ray) says:
>
>     How does one post an e-mail message to someone knowing his amprnet
>     address?  I wanted to send a message to NU3E  (44.066), but this seems
>     to be missing 2 parts of an IP address.
>

  Ray,

Likr all IP addresses, there are 4 bytes.  all AMPR.ORG addresses are in net
44.0.0.0.   Therefore, his address _could_ be 44.66.??? ie..anything!!  In a
previous posting, the address coordinator for 44.066 was John DeGood NU3E
in Delaware.   You can contact him.  Maybe finger [e-mail] will return
something usefull.

Just a starting point, cause you dont have enough info to address a mail message!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Randall Blair, CBE                         [e-mail] = 214.605.4902
 Electronic Data Systems                Internet = [e-mail]
 Plano, TX               Ham Internet Mail = [e-mail]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 15:21:32 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!mvb.saic.com!eskimo![e-mail]
Subject: amprnet via internet
To: [e-mail]

Scott R. Ehrlich ([e-mail]) wrote:
: In article <[e-mail]>,
: Mack Ray <[e-mail]> wrote:
: >     How does one post an e-mail message to someone knowing his amprnet
: >     address?  I wanted to send a message to NU3E  (44.066), but this seems
: >     to be missing 2 parts of an IP address.
: >
: >     Thanks in advance
: >
: >     Ray
: >     WD5IFS
: >     [e-mail]
: >


: Well, performing 'nslookup nu3e.ampr.org' returns: 44.66.0.1

: Hope this helps :)

: Scott


: --
: Scott Ehrlich, Amateur Radio Callsign: wy1z   [e-mail] [AX.25 Packet]
: How to reach me: [e-mail] [Internet], [e-mail] [TCP/IP Packet]
: Boston ARC ftp archives: ftp oak.oakland.edu /pub/hamradio
: Boston ARC Web page: http://www.acs.oakland.edu/barc.html

Additionally, the ampr.org domain is not well connected to internet, and it
is not contigiously connected itself.  So unless there is an amprnet to
internet gateway properly configured and operating near the destination
station, the mail will probably be bounced back to you.  A simple way to see
if a path exists to the station in question is to try doing a telnet to his
domain name or ip address.  If it results in a login prompt, then you should
also be able to send mail to the same address.  The only other gotcha is
that some gateway operators restrict which services pass through their
gateway, to avoid hearing from FCC...

73, Bob

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Donnell, kd7nm     [e-mail]   [e-mail]
Western Washington Amateur IP Address Coordinator   [phone]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 22 Jul 94 01:38:00 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!iat.holonet.net!moondog![e-mail]
Subject: Baycom & software
To: [e-mail]

MC>I have experience with both programs - I would, without question
MC>recommend KAGOLD!  HM2PLUS is (was) good in it's day, but it is
MC>old, and not much support from Kantronics. This is not a slam
MC>against the fine folks at Kantronics, just a fact that we and
MC>they are aware of.  On the other hand, KAGOLD is a fully supported
MC>software product with programmers at the other end of the phone/
MC>internet that listen to it's users - refreshing.

I don't know much about packet but I do have a Baycom BP-1 TNC/Modem and
it works fine with my 386/dx25.  I wonder if a change of software will
give me any better features with the Baycom or is it dependent on the
software that came with it?

---
. QMPro 1.0 41-6392 . Celibacy is not hereditary, except in my family!

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

Date: 21 Jul 1994 23:31:22 GMT
From: world!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.amherst.edu!news.umass.edu!nic.umass.edu!titan.ucs.umass.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Current Capabilities of Packet?
To: [e-mail]

david kelly ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Chris May writes:
: > I was wondering if anyone could provide me with some information
: > detailing the different price/performance options available for an amateur
: > radio setup capable of communicating with the internet via packet
: > radio.
: [stuff deleted]

: The cost ratio between internet access by wire and internet access by amateur
: radio (for similar services) is about 1000:1 where amateur radio costs about
: $1000 for the service you'd get for $1 via telephone.

: Maybe I exagerate, but only a bit :-)

: One does not get an amateur radio license in order to save money, except in
: the very rarest of situations.

Just because you haven't thought of a way to save money with amateur radio,
doesn't mean I can't think of some.

: One chooses to become an amateur radio operator because it is "RADIO" and
: radio is magic, and magic is fun in and of itself. There are areas available
: in amateur radio that do not exist on the internet, and vice versa. For

I never said I was trying to save money over wired internet, I just said I
wanted to know about the price/performance of packet setups.

I'll find all this out eventually on my own, as the companys who make
the stuff generally want to sell it.  It's nice to know that this newsgroup
is such a great resource for newcomers to the field.

Post a question in comp.os.linux.help and I bet you get an answer.
Not here.
--
-Chris May, Computer Science, University of MA, Amherst
-    Technical Assistant, P.C. Maintenance Lab

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

Date: 22 Jul 1994 09:38:41 -0400
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.cerf.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!bronze.lcs.mit.edu!not-for-mail@ames.
Subject: Hamcomm interface problems
To: [e-mail]

[I tried sending this privately, but it bounced.  It's good general advice
on HC anyway...DM]


I'd recommend trying these steps to get your converter going:

1) Get the latest HamComm, 3.0, which is at oak.oakland.edu.

2) Try hooking up the box using the program's default com port
selections as they come out of the archive;  when trying lots of
different configurations, it's easy to lose sight, and you need to
start fresh every so often.

2A) Pay special attention to the com port addresses and IRQs;  if these
are incorrect, you'll get no output to the program.

3) Check the voltages to the 741, particularly the diode bridge.  The
HamComm 3.0 docs have a good section on troubleshooting.

3A) You may need to power the 741 externally;  the HC 3.0 docs have
a schematic for such modifications.

4) If the box is working correctly, you should see noise (random dots)
on the scope (F8) display.

That being said, I have been using the same homebuilt decoder since
HamComm 2.0, and I have not had a problem.  The only change I will make
to my box is to put a TL071 op-amp, which is considerably more sensitive
than the 741.

...Dave



--
| David Moisan, N1KGH    /^\_/^\   [e-mail]      |
| 86 Essex St. Apt #204 ( o ^ o )  [e-mail]                |
| Salem. MA 01970-5225     | |     [e-mail]    |
|                                                                 |

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

Date: 22 Jul 1994 07:30:31 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!Munich.Germany.EU.net!thoth.mch.sni.de!news.sni.de!nanette!natter![e-mail]
Subject: Hamcom program non-functional
To: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]  (Ken Durham) writes:

>The simple ua741 op-amp interface for the Hamcom program works fine when used
>with a program called Hffax (a SSTV and FAX program.) This interface has been
>tested on Com1 with Hffax. When using Hamcom (a RTTY program), there is no
>response to the input signal. The screen functions seem ok but there is no
>signal shown on the Tuning scope or the Spectrum display.

>I have tried all kinds of port defintions and designations in the config
>file of the program to get the program to recognize the port and come alive.

Have you tried to follow the instructions in the manual section on
troubleshooting? There are many variations of circuits with just one
op-amp floating around.  The problem is, that most of them where meant
for receive only.  HamComm also transmits and has to pull the PTT and
FSK line.  To keep the op-amp happy the HamComm interface has a bridge
rectifier made from 4 diodes.  For a start, check the supply voltages at
the op-amp for correct polarity.  Also make sure the op-amp output is
really connected to DSR.

>I got this program from a BB called AA5S.

What version?   The current version is 3.0.

>Can someone tell me if there is a trick that I am missing or if the program
>may be deactivated and only a demo screen. If there is a way to get a good
>copy of this please let me know. The author of the program is in Germany.

>Ken Durham K5MBV  214-997-3434

73 es 55 de Django
(HamComm instructor:-)

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 07:37:43 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!xlink.net!fauern!rrze.uni-erlangen.de!cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de![e-mail]
Subject: internet -> pr ->internet ?
To: [e-mail]

hello out there

i wonder if there is a possibility to get into the
packet radio net in europe or usa from the internet .
if you have information about this

please write to

[e-mail]

thanx , joachim

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 15:27:58 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!mvb.saic.com!eskimo![e-mail]
Subject: TheNet and AEA PK-96 ??
To: [e-mail]

Arild Fredriksen ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Does anyone have experience with the AEA PK-96 ?
: Will I be able to put TheNet nodesoftware in it?

: Arild Fredriksen
: BBS:      LA5WX @ LA1E.EGS.L.NOR.EU
: internet: [e-mail]

Not unless someone does a special version for it.  AEA TNCs are >not< TNC2
clones.  I don't even think the special version of NET/ROM that was done for
the PK-88 will work in the PK-96, because of the new dual-modem hardware.

73, Bob
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Donnell, kd7nm     [e-mail]   [e-mail]
Western Washington Amateur IP Address Coordinator   [phone]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 22 Jul 1994 06:01:23 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!news.unt.edu!tcet.unt.edu![e-mail]
Subject: The Net and TNC-1's
To: [e-mail]

Bob Donnell ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Bill Gunshannon ([e-mail]) wrote:
: : Has anyone ever put any version of The Net into a TNC-1??
: : If not, can anyone tell me why not??

: : bill  KB3YV

: I'd say the most likely reason is it uses a different microprocessor
: (6809) and would require rewriting probably from scratch.

TAPR use to offer a TNC-1 upgrade kit, which upgraded the TNC-1 into a
TNC-2 system (Z80 and all).  This would then be capable of running any
TCN-2 firmware.

We stopped offering it several years ago, but seems like there might be
interest in just bare boards with the instructions.

If this would help anyone - let me know and I'll see if I can get the
TAPR board to spring for a limited board run for just bare boards as
kit.  There is nothing really hard to find on the board - would probably
have to include the 1.1.8a firmware along with the set.

I would be interesting in getting input on this.  If there is enough
interest we might do something.

Cheers - Greg


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
President -- Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Corp
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAPR Office [phone]  | Internet: [e-mail]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 00:46:17 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!mvb.saic.com!eskimo![e-mail]
Subject: The Net and TNC-1's
To: [e-mail]

Bill Gunshannon ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Has anyone ever put any version of The Net into a TNC-1??
: If not, can anyone tell me why not??

: bill  KB3YV

I'd say the most likely reason is it uses a different microprocessor
(6809) and would require rewriting probably from scratch.

73, Bob

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Donnell, kd7nm     [e-mail]   [e-mail]
Western Washington Amateur IP Address Coordinator   [phone]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 13:18:26 GMT
From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.cerf.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!cs.utk.edu!stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV!xdepc.eng.ornl.gov![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>ⁿ
Subject : Re: One-way automated digital=bad

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:

>Standard channelization is the norm in all services except the amateur
>service, and is even accepted there for most VHF/UHF activity. There's
>a very good reason why everyone else has gone to standard channels, and
>that reason is lessened mutual interference. Amateurs are being backward
>in refusing to acknowledge the advantages of channelization as a tool for
>interference control.

Wrong.  Standard channelization is as old as the birth of broadcasting when it
was realized that something had to be done to control the frequency
allocations for the fledgling AM broadcast industry.  It is the easy way out
for narrow band VHF operations.  Amateur operation on HF has been an example
of how to share and conserve spectrum resources in an orderly fashion without
channelization.  As you pointed out just because your VFO has 10 Hz readout
doesn't mean there are 10 Hz wide channels on HF for your use.  But, if
stations in QSO need to move 100 Hz to get away from a foreign broadcast
carrier in region 2 then they can without worrying about changing channels.

We are taking a giant step backward by bringing something as ancient as
channelization to the HF bands, only for a crutch for automated digital
operation.  This is particularly disappointing when the technology exists to
provide a more robust and automated hunting system using dynamic channel
centering.  Unfortunately when channelization is implemented there will be no
incentive to improve on it.  So the first wrung of the system will be obsolete
before it gets started.

73,
C. C. (Clay) Wynn N4AOX
[e-mail]

=========================================================================
= Cooperation requires participation.  Competition teaches cooperation. =
=========================================================================
       ..._  .. ..._  ._   _ . ._.. . __. ._. ._ .__. .... _.__

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

End of Ham-Digital Digest V94 #247
******************************