World of Ham Radio 1994 January/AMSOFT_1994.iso/packet/docs/pd198803.doc

Text File | 1993-12-31 | 140.4 KB | 2,958 lines

1-Mar-88 02:03:21-EST,1398;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 1 Mar 88 02:03-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 29 Feb 88 23:06:10 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 29 Feb 88 23:05:57 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.11)
    id AA13947; Mon, 29 Feb 88 20:05:48 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Feb 88 00:21:34 GMT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Xportal-User-Id: 1.1001.1420

All this discussion raises another question:  Is the prohibition on
business communications on amateur frequencies unnecessarily strict?
Should some of what the FCC currently calls business comm be changed?
For example, posting personal for sale ads?  Reporting lead runner
positions at running races?

Ham radio is both an experimental AND personal radio service.  I think
the FCC regulations, by today's standards are probably no longer
appropriate.  Anyone else wish to discuss changing them?

ed mitchell
sun!portal!cip.portal.com!ed.mitchell
wa6aod @n6iiu


 1-Mar-88 12:54:49-EST,1120;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 1 Mar 88 12:54-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 10:39:42 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 10:39:00 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.11)
    id AA02522; Tue, 1 Mar 88 07:38:03 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 Mar 88 01:56:06 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John B. Nagle)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Infrared communication (Was: low power license free packet?)
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

     The FCC lost that one in court some years back, I think.  In the
late 1960s, when the first laser data links were being set up in
Cleveland, the people involved looked into this and discovered that
the FCC had lost a case involving "blinking light signals" some time
before.  Lasers are regulated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

                    John Nagle


 1-Mar-88 17:37:47-EST,793;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 1 Mar 88 17:37-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 15:21:25 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 15:19:22 EST
Received: by icst-cmr.arpa (5.51/4.7)
    id AA06073; Tue, 1 Mar 88 15:13:41 EST
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 88 15:13:41 EST
From: Robert Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Infrared communication


Twarn't infrared, but the Allan B. Dumont Laboratories used optical
communication to get their TV video from the WABD studio across a
New York street to the transmitter. The year was about 1941!!!!

Bob,  W3OTC
 1-Mar-88 19:14:57-EST,1445;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 1 Mar 88 19:14-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 16:28:30 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 16:28:18 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA26809; Tue, 1 Mar 88 13:26:52 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Mark Peting)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
Date: 1 Mar 88 17:25:56 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

One solution for providing a packet band without taking anyone's spectrum
is to allow the use of any unused UHF television channel in an area.
Even in large cities there are hundreds of megahertz available for this.
Just make it clear that any channel can be taken away if needed for T.V.
If the packet modems were able to switch to any channel then it would
not be any trouble to go to a new channel, and anyone trying to send into
a T.V. channel would never key up since the channel would always be busy
with the T.V. signal.  Also since UHF is rather line of sight there
shouldn't be much problem with interference with other cities that have
a different UHF assignment.

Mark Peting
[e-mail]


 1-Mar-88 23:46:25-EST,1750;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 1 Mar 88 23:46-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 20:44:01 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 1 Mar 88 20:43:36 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA16003; Tue, 1 Mar 88 17:42:10 PST
Return-Path: <ut-sally!ut-emx![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Mar 88 00:35:46 GMT
From: ut-sally!ut-emx![e-mail] (L.J. Goree)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet radio info
Posted: Tue Mar  1 18:35:46 1988

The United Nations Development Program Office in Brasilia, Brazil is
interested in hooking up some of their field offices to their main
computer in Brasilia.  The telephone system doesn't reach many of
these villages and the packet switching network, RENPAC, is only
in the major cities.

I remember reading that there were ham-radio links that might solve
their problem.  I'll be leaving in two months to begin work in the
U.N. office there and thought I'd research the subject while still in
the States.  I've come to this USENET group for some basic information,
suggestions and directions to go for useful articles.  Any help?

Please reply to this address since I don't want to bother the rest of the
the usenet readers.

Thanks,

Langston

--
*   The Institute of Latin American Studies, Univ. of Texas at Austin   *
* Internet:  [e-mail]   Bitnet  :  ilcj775@uta3081         *
* UUCP    :  {harvard}!ut-sally!ut-emx!ilasut                    *
* Phone   :  [phone]  Langston James Goree VI, Computer manager  *


 2-Mar-88 16:31:25-EST,2695;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 2 Mar 88 16:31-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 2 Mar 88 11:09:14 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 2 Mar 88 11:08:55 EST
Received: from Burger.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 02 MAR 88 08:04:22 PST
Sender: "Hugh_E._Wells.ElSegundo"@Xerox.COM
Date: 2 Mar 88 08:03:52 PST (Wednesday)
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
From: "Hugh_E._Wells.ElSegundo"@Xerox.COM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: Ed_Eric_Mitchell%cup.PORTAL:COM:Xerox's message of 29-February-88
 (Monday) 23:57:53 PST
Message-Id: <880302-080422-4255@Xerox>

Ed Mitchell writes: "All this discussion raises another question:  Is the
prohibition on business communications on amateur frequencies unnecessarily
strict? Should some of what the FCC currently calls business comm be changed?
For example, posting personal for sale ads?  Reporting lead runner
positions at running races?

Ham radio is both an experimental AND personal radio service.  I think
the FCC regulations, by today's standards are probably no longer
appropriate.  Anyone else wish to discuss changing them?"


It is my belief that to change the FCC rules to allow business type
communications would change the perception of HAM RADIO sufficiently to
eventually destroy it.  The FCC currently recognizes two distinct forms of
communication; HAM RADIO and BUSINESS RADIO.  If business activities are carried
out on the ham bands, then only one form of radio will exist and the two
services would be merged under the same rules.  In speculation, the licensing
rules would also change requiring everyone to have a commercial ticket to
operate and service a "type certificated" radio.  Under HAM rules, you can
build, modify, operate, and repair your non-certificated equipment with a "ham
ticket".

Hams are currently involved in public services where lead runner positions,
tennis scores, aircraft race positions,  etc. are reported.  Hams also run
"on-the-air" swap meets which are a form of non-commercial advertizing.  Such
activities are much needed but they tend to relax ones guard about what should
be or should not be allowed to exist in ham radio.

 Ham radio is in a currently frail position in our ever changing world political
environment.   I believe the rules need to remain as-is to protect what we have,
not liberalize them allowing for eventual loss of HAM RADIO. Therefore, if it
comes to a vote, I will vote to keep ham radio as a non-business entity.

73,

Hugh Wells
W6WTU
 2-Mar-88 19:44:49-EST,2243;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 2 Mar 88 19:44-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 2 Mar 88 15:22:31 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 2 Mar 88 15:22:13 EST
Received: from huey.udel.edu by Louie.UDEL.EDU id aa00853; 2 Mar 88 15:12 EST
Date:     Wed, 2 Mar 88 15:08:28 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  low power license free packet?
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>

Folks,

I have been rudely reminded in briefings to Goverment committees of which
I am a member:

1. The FCC staff no longer has so many licensed hams as it once did. They
   and the Commissioners are mostly lawyers much more sensitive to economic
   and political issues and special interests.

2. While some Government agencies (FEMA) are reasonably friendly to
   ham infrastructure in case of national emergency, others (NTS) are
   distinctly unfriendly. To understand why, you have to consider the
   civil/military spin on the agency mission. My perception of the present
   climate at the FCC is a measureable spin against the ham "mission."
   Once upon a time before the FCC themselves suggested a no-license
   and the hams loudly objected, things were quite different.

3. As the ham population is not expanding by more than a nominal amount and
   the average age of hams continues to climb, every threat of incursion
   by commercial interests in the ham allocations becomes harder and harder
   to justify. While the boom in packet radio and repeater linking is
   a welcome reversal, any suggestion that this may represent a threat to
   commercial (or even agency missions) will be instantly met by hordes
   of lawyers, program managers and probably even the FCC itself.

With the above thoughts in mind, I suggest that any attempt to loosen the
third-party rules or commercial restrictions or to suggest the use of
amateur frequencies for commercial purposes may be met with instant
acceptance and loss of these frequencies for any other purpose.

Dave
 3-Mar-88 18:40:42-EST,13089;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 Mar 88 18:40-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 3 Mar 88 15:33:17 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 3 Mar 88 15:33:01 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA03006; Thu, 3 Mar 88 12:31:59 PST
Return-Path: <osu-cis!n8emr![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Mar 88 11:56:17 GMT
From: osu-cis!n8emr![e-mail] (Gary Sanders)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: gateway 2-19-88

=====================================================
>>Relayed from W8CQK packet BBS to N8EMR ham BBS...<<
>>Ham BBS, Columbus,Oh. 614-457-4227 (300/1200,8N1)<<
=====================================================

Packet Path: AD8I!N8NN!WA8JXM!KC8TW

Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter

Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU, Editor, Vol. 4, No. 11, 19-Feb-88

70-CM, 23-CM AND 33-CM BAND PLANS ADOPTED

At their January meeting, the ARRL Board of Directors voted to adopt the
packet-radio frequency recommendations of the ARRL Committee on Amateur
Radio Digital Communications for the 70-cm and 23-cm bands.  Also, the
Digital Committee's recommendations for the 33-cm band were adopted as
interim guidelines for packet radio frequencies pending conclusion of a
study by the Membership Services Committee on revising the current interim
33-cm band plan.

On 70-cm (420-450 MHz), the Digital Committee recommended the following
frequencies, if they are available in a given area:

o 100 kHz-wide channels at 430.05, 430.15, 430.25, 430.35, 430.45, 430.55,
430.65, 430.85, and 430.95 MHz.  (430.75 MHz is not recommended to minimize
interference to/from distant ATV aural carriers.)

o 25 kHz-wide channels at 440.975, 441.000, 441.025, 441.050, and 441.075
MHz plus an additional narrow-band channel at 431.025 MHz which could serve
as a buffer for the wide-band packet radio channels listed above.

On 23 centimeters, the recommended frequencies are:

o 2 MHz-wide channels at 1249.0, 1251.0, and 1298.0 MHz.

o 100 kHz-wide channels at 1299.05, 1299.15, 1299.25, 1299.35, 1299.45,
1299.55, 1299.65, 1299.75, 1299.85 and 1299.95 MHz.

o 25 kHz-wide channels at 1294.025, 1294.050, 1294.075, 1294.100, 1294.125,
1294.150 and 1294.175 MHz.  1294.100 MHz is designated the 23-cm national
packet radio calling frequency.  (These frequencies are available to Novice
operators.)

On 33-cm (902-928 MHz), the recommended interim packet radio band plan
allocates two 3 MHz-wide channels (to accommodate 1.5 Mbit/s links) with
10.7-MHz spacing.  This allocation may be accomplished with channels at
903-906 and 914-917 MHz.

In another packet radio matter, the Board of Directors has asked the
Digital Committee to prepare draft rule changes for Part 97 to facilitate
HF packet radio, particularly with reference to the experiments being
conducted currently under Special Temporary Authorization (the HF automatic
message forwarding PBBS network).


OSCAR 10 OFF THE AIR

AMSAT-OSCAR 10 (AO-10) has been showing symptoms of insufficient power
production during the past several days.  There have been reports of the
general beacon and transponder FMing and of the beacons and transponder
operating in random states.  As a result, AO-10 has been removed from
service.  All user access should stop immediately.  AO-10 may be back in
service in a few months.

>from AMSAT NA News Service (ANS)


ROBOT 6-METER METSCAT STATION

A robot 6-meter packet-radio meteor scatter (METSCAT) station was on the
air in central Iowa during the January 23-25 ARRL VHF Sweepstakes.  Robot
QSO functions were provided by SAREX 2 TNC software developed by Howard
Goldstein, N2WX, as part of the project headed by Tom Clark, W3IWI, to fly
packet-radio capabilities in a space shuttle.  In the future, METSCAT
operation is planned for grid square DXpeditions during June and September
ARRL VHF contests.  It is not known if the robot station won the Iowa
Section Award!

For further information concerning these events, contact Ralph Wallio,
W0RPK, at 1250 Highway G-24, Indianola, IA 50125 or @ WA0JFS-1.

>from The ARRL Letter

DIGIPEATER FREQUENCY COORDINATION...YOUR INPUT IS WANTED!

The ARRL Committee on Amateur Radio Digital Communications is studying
whether packet-radio digipeaters should be sanctioned or coordinated by
local frequency coordination councils and the Digital Committee is
soliciting comments from packeteers concerning how digipeater frequency
coordination does work, does not work or ought to work in their area.

If the Digital Committee determines that digipeaters should be sanctioned
or coordinated, the Digital Committee will develop suggested or recomm*** connec
t request:N8NN VIA WA8JXM
ended
guidelines for use by local frequency coordinators to sanction or
coordinate such digipeaters.

Besides packeteers, the Digital Committee is also seeking input from the
VHF Repeater Advisory Committee (VRAC) and the VHF-UHF Advisory Committee
(VUAC).  Your comments on this matter should be sent to Chairman, ARRL
Committee on Amateur Radio Digital Communication, ARRL headquarters, as
soon as possible.  This study is being undertaken as a result of the ARRL
Board of Directors meeting last month.

PHASE-3C LAUNCH EFFORTS CONTINUE

Momentum is increasing on several fronts leading to a launch of AMSAT's
Phase 3C spacecraft in late spring.  While the actual launch date has
apparently slipped a month into late May or early June, preparations to
support the launch activities are proceeding well.  These support
activities include planning for the launch support team from AMSAT NA and
AMSAT DL in Kourou and launch activity coverage by the AMSAT Launch
Information Network Service.

AMSAT NA's launch support team met recently in Boulder, Colorado to map out
plans for their activity in Kourou.  Together with the AMSAT DL team, they
will accomplish the final preparations on the Phase 3C satellite after it
has arrived at the Kourou launch site of the European Space Agency.  They
will apply thermal blankets, install the antennas, fuel the spacecraft and
integrate it with the SPELDA, the large container which sits atop the
Ariane 4 launcher to support and contain the payload.

After integration, a minimum support team will remain on site to monitor
the spacecraft telemetry sent through the umbilical to the monitoring
facility.  A 24-hour watch team will assure that all telemetry values
remain within tolerance.  This watch will continue to launch.

Major launch-related activities will be broadcast on a worldwide ALINS
prior to, during and after the launch.  Local repeater groups are
encouraged to rebroadcast Phase 3C ALINS traffic.  Special landline ports
will be available for repeater operators to patch into for live launch
coverage.  Additional details regarding frequencies and schedules of the
various nets will be announced as soon as the schedules are firmed.
Interested parties should contact Ralph Wallio, W0RPK, at 1250 Highway
G-24, Indianola, IA 50125.

With activity levels increasing on many fronts, AMSAT headquarters is
encouraging all its Area Coordinators and members to take an active part in
helping make Phase 3C a success in terms of membership as well.

>from AMSAT NA News Service (ANS)

LETTER FROM LIBERIA

I would like to give you an update on packet-radio activity in Liberia.

We presently have five active packeteers in Liberia: Reinhard, EL2BB, Mark,
EL5G, Lee, EL2FE, Bassam, EL2BN, and myself.  I sent off for WB4APR's PBBS
software and Reinhard has it on line 24 hours a day on 145.5 MHz.  We find
that it is perfect for our low volume of activity.

Mark and I have KAMs and are on HF, as well as on VHF.  Mark is a
missionary doctor located in a remote village in the interior of Liberia
(he has a solar powered station) and we regularly work 40-meter packet
radio.  He also gateways through me to the VHF PBBS.  We are active on
other HF bands, but we find that 20 meters is practically useless because
of QRM.  HF packet radio really needs to spread out!  Fifteen meters is
pretty good and 10 meters should be even better when it starts humming.

As an interesting sidelight, Reinhard, Mark and I have been working with
the Liberia Rural Communications Network, a series of low power AM
broadcast stations, to develop an HF, AX.25 packet radio based narrative
data network.  This is an excellent example of how amateur experimentation
and development makes a real contribution to the state of the art.  It is
particularly significant that this new technology is being applied in the
Third World where low cost is a must.

That is the word on packet radio in Liberia.  I am on my way back to
6-land, so I regret that I will no longer be involved in Liberia's packet
radio infancy.  As with all amateur modes, this is a great place to be a
ham!

One last thing, please pass the word that EL is active on packet radio.  I
have seen several lists in the last few months that did not mention us.

>from Jim DeLoach EL2GA/KB6EH

WHAT IS AN LAN?

There has been much written and spoken about LANs in amateur packet radio.
Just what is an LAN anyway and how is one "built" and maintained?

The initials stand for Local Area Network and the nomenclature is drawn
>from the commercial networking environment.  By definition, an LAN is "..a
communication system that connects devices within a constrained area..." In
the amateur packet radio world, the term and concept of LAN has been abused
and misused.  The true implementation LANs in the amateur packet radio
should be done exactly as the definition proclaims... a system that
operates within a constrained area or more precisely, on frequencies that
are selected on a noninterference, non-adjacent criteria.  These LANs
should then be connected to each other by some other Wide Area Network.

This should not be something new.  It is a theme that has been suggested
for quite some time and implemented in various areas with great success.
Why is it then that we still see "authoritative" coordinating bodies still
proclaiming certain frequencies as LANs and then issuing maps detailing the
LAN coverage from Maine to Maryland?  That is certainly not a constrained
area, nor is it a nonadjacent assignment of frequencies!

I am speaking of the recent proclamation of 145.05 as an LAN, supported by
a detailed map of half the East Coast.  The majority of our PBBS forwarding
still takes place on 145.01 MHz with UHF backbones slowly emerging.  There
is still the overpowering need for local implementation of LANs, but
selecting a frequency such as 145.05 MHz as an LAN is a bit ludicrous.  In
many sections of the East Coast, 145.05 MHz emerged as a secondary Wide
Area Network.  It has wide coverage digipeaters, NET/ROMs, COSI- switches,
high volume PBBS traffic, uucp gateways and a couple of dead cats for good
measure.  If the coordinating bodies want to really do some good then they
should take into account the network topologies involved, the activity of
the various PBBSs and the overall goal of the area in question.  Declaring
145.05 MHz as an LAN defies description.  Next someone will claim 145.01
MHz as an LAN as well!

Folks, there are plenty of frequencies to be shared on a nonadjacent,
noninterference basis.  Let us keep the Wide Area Networks in place,
improve the backbones, customize the links and the coverage areas of the
existing systems.  Multiport the high volume PBBSs to maintain good user
activity.  Support your system providers and help whenever and wherever you
can to promote, not hinder, the advance and growth of this art of our
hobby.

>from Tom Teel, KB3UD @18013

220-BBS Port for Novices

WA2EXE-4 Woodside, NYC, BBS now has open and running a port on 223.420 MHz
for Novices.

>from Bob Clayton, WA2EXE


BACK ISSUES OF GATEWAY ARE AVAILABLE

All back issues of Gateway are available from ARRL headquarters.  For
details contact ARRL, 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111.

GATEWAY CONTRIBUTIONS

Submissions for publication in Gateway are welcome.  You may 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.  Via telephone,
your editor can be reached at 203-879-1348 on evenings and weekends, and
he can switch a modem on line to receive text at 300, 1200, or 2400 bauds.

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.



63 msgs/0310z >>>

--
Gary W. Sanders         {ihnp4|cbosgd}!n8emr!gws
(cis) 72277,1325        (packet) N8EMR @ W8CQK
HAM/SWL BBS (HBBS) 614-457-4227.. 300/1200 bps


 3-Mar-88 18:43:05-EST,1688;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 Mar 88 18:42-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 3 Mar 88 14:55:54 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 3 Mar 88 14:55:34 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA00751; Thu, 3 Mar 88 11:54:11 PST
Return-Path: <uunet!mnetor!utzoo!ncc![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Mar 88 22:10:22 GMT
From: uunet!mnetor!utzoo!ncc![e-mail] (Lyndon Nerenberg)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Summary:        UHF might present problems


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Peting) writes:
> One solution for providing a packet band without taking anyone's spectrum
> is to allow the use of any unused UHF television channel in an area.
> Even in large cities there are hundreds of megahertz available for this.
> Just make it clear that any channel can be taken away if needed for T.V.

There would still have to be some type of frequency co-ordination
to prevent intermod interference to existing primary users of the
spectrum. Given that broadcast video is AM I don't think it would
take much power at the packet transmitter to screw up all the TV's
for several blocks around if you pick the "right" frequency.

Of course if you don't have any UHF TV stations around (like us) it
shouldn't be a problem...

--lyndon  VE6BBM  {alberta,utzoo}!ncc!lyndon


 3-Mar-88 19:13:44-EST,1128;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 Mar 88 19:13-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 3 Mar 88 17:12:08 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 3 Mar 88 17:11:42 EST
Date:  Thu, 3 Mar 88 17:02 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject:  What is the latest firmware for aTNC-1?
To: [e-mail]
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>

Subject: What is latest TNC-1 Firmware?
I dropped out of packet radio several years ago and now would
like to pick it up again, so pardon the question.  I have a
very early serial number TNC-1.  I used to keep updating
the proms with the latest firmware.  Now the question is,
what is the latest firmware for a TNC-1 and does anybody
have an Intel format load, so I can burn a new set?
If I do this, will I be I sending the latest and greatest
protocol over the airwaves, or will I be screwing up
the network with trashy packets?
You can send me ARPA mail to:
  Meldrum @BCO-Multics
Many thanks  Dave KA1MI >>
 5-Mar-88 04:10:38-EST,792;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 Mar 88 04:10-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 03:00:13 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 02:59:48 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: by umunhum.stanford.edu; Fri, 4 Mar 88 23:56:07 PST
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 88 23:56:07 PST
From: Michael Chepponis <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: DRSI

On page 44 of the March '88 Ham Radio there is an "ad" (teaser?) that says:

"DRSI

Digital Radio Systems, Inc.

The next era in Packet Radio is just over the Horizon."

That's it.  Does anybody know what it's about?  Tnx!  -Mike k3mc
 5-Mar-88 19:48:56-EST,3122;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 Mar 88 19:48-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 18:51:38 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 18:51:29 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA12139; Sat, 5 Mar 88 15:49:26 PST
Return-Path: <uunet!mcvax!ukc!stc!idec![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 Mar 88 10:03:53 GMT
From: uunet!mcvax!ukc!stc!idec![e-mail] (Gareth Howell)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Integration of net/rom, BBS and tcp/ip in the uk: comments please


Hi There,
I just saw a mail item regarding the integration of TCP/IP and
Net/ROM. Potentially this has far reaching implications for the uk
packet community.  I have been thinking about this and I have a first
pass of how this integration can be exploited.  I'd like to run this
past you all and gauge reaction.

The uk is dominated by the existence of raw ax.25 level 2 traffic at
present, plus some net/rom traffic and a mass of WORlI and MBL BBSs.
At present there are very few frequencies allocated to packet and this
has led to considerable congestion.  The way out of this as presently
planned is to set up a national backbone network on 23cms or 13cms
with access to this from other bands.  The network will be formed out
of net/rom nodes. This network is just now being formed.

I and a few others have been promoting TCP/IP in the uk, but with only
limited success, due mainly to the preponderence of 8 bit micros (BBC)
in end-user hands (there is nothing like the penetration of 16-bit
m/cs in the uk, yet).  The capability of using the backbone network to
connect isolated tcp/ip nodes/lans together using net/rom is very
attractive.

The other bugbear at present is mail forwarding by the BBSs, which at
times causes congestion collapse on 2M!  Some people are using
dedicated ports on other frequencies just for mail forwarding but in
general it is still being done using the user access band (2M). The
facility already exists to integrate MBL BBSs with tcp/ip but has been
of little use due to the limited number of tcp/ip users (chicken and
egg).

What we seem to be able to do now (or soon) is to run tcp/ip on the
BBSs, possibily forming lans of tcp/ip nodes, and connecting them via
the net/rom network.  This would remove a lot of forwarding problems
for the BBSs, would ease the load off the congested non-backbone
network, promote tcp/ip in the community, and create a single,
integrated packet network with each of the network components used
optimally.

Please comment freely on this as I want to gell this asap and then
drive it hard in the uk.
73 Gareth
-----

--
Gareth Howell  <[e-mail]>  G6KVK @ IO91VX
ICL Financial Services, London, England, Tel:[phone]
[e-mail], mcvax!ukc!idec![e-mail]
G6KVK @ G4SPV (uk packet 144.650MHz) 44.131.19.1 [e-mail]


 5-Mar-88 19:51:17-EST,2498;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 Mar 88 19:51-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 18:50:48 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 18:50:19 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA12066; Sat, 5 Mar 88 15:48:15 PST
Return-Path: <uunet!nuchat!splut![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Mar 88 00:05:37 GMT
From: uunet!nuchat!splut![e-mail] (Kurt Freiberger)
From: splut![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Routing and Beacons in Net.EXE
Summary: Do not arouse the wrath of Gods...
Keywords: tcp/ip amprnet
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gareth Howell) writes:
> Two Qs:
> 1). Is there currently any mechanism for automating the generation of
> routing tables in NET.EXE?
> 2). Two features that would be nice in NET.EXE
>       The ability to send beacon messages (we don't have much
>       traffic in the uk at present and it is nice to be able to
>       advertise your presence on a rather empty channel.
>       The presence of the routing info in a separate file from
>       AUTOEXEC.NET, as with the HOSTS.NET file.

1:  The routine tables should update so long as digipeaters aren't used,
    as far as I know.  Wish it were dense enough so I could see it happen.

2.  Be careful, Gareth!  This question can be rather like criticising a
    mother's firstborn or standing in the middle of a John Birch Society
    meeting and extoling the virtues of Communism.  For empty channels,
    I agree.  That's really what it was meant for.  Unfortunately, there
    are folks that abuse the beaconing feature: fancy control characters,
    "cutesie" graphics, etc.  Good luck on this one.  However, if you have
    the sources, go for it!
    On the routing info, I could agree.  However, this could interfere with
    the effort to stay "standard" in all environments.  I'd like to see
    function key implementation, windows, etc. but it would make it so that
    the universality of the code would suffer.  I've been trying to think
    of a way to add code to dump the routing tables to a file so that it
    could be folded into the AUTOEXEC.NET with an external merge program.
    That might be the way to do this.

     73, Kurt wb5bbw


 5-Mar-88 19:54:24-EST,1578;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 Mar 88 19:54-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 18:49:13 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 18:48:59 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA11973; Sat, 5 Mar 88 15:46:53 PST
Return-Path: <uunet!nuchat!splut![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Mar 88 23:53:03 GMT
From: uunet!nuchat!splut![e-mail] (Kurt Freiberger)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: News package for MS-DOS using NET.EXE?
Summary: Well, I dunno...  Could be the Pandora Syndrome
Keywords: tcp/ip, amprnet
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gareth Howell) writes:
> The
> possibility of replacing MBL BBSs with netnews systems with segregated
> news conferences appeals; certainly to me anyway :-)
> G6KVK @ G4SPV (uk packet 144.650MHz) 44.131.19.1 [e-mail]
There is a basic problem with systems of this nature:  Unless one is dedicated
to grooming the beast, it can be a millstone of undreamed-of proportions.
I refer to the task of censoring the articles to keep undesirable verbage
>from being propagated on the amateur frequencies.  After all, it's not nice
to say "F**k" on the repeater, or digipeater.  Running a PBBS is hard enough.
But the influx of uncontrolled data from the net could be quite a problem.

Kurt, wb5bbw


 5-Mar-88 20:14:37-EST,1205;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 Mar 88 20:14-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 19:16:48 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 19:16:36 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA13370; Sat, 5 Mar 88 16:14:29 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Mar 88 18:22:23 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Phil Karn)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: gateway 2-19-88
Summary: Misuse of "LAN"
References: <[e-mail]>

Strictly speaking, I think we should avoid the use of the word "LAN" altogether
when talking about amateur packet radio networks. Outside of amateur radio,
the term "Local Area Network" universally means a network covering a single
building or at most a collection of nearby buildings on a campus. Ethernet and
AppleTalk are examples of true LANs.

Amateur packet radio channels on VHF/UHF would be better described as "MANs"
(Metropolitan Area Networks) since they generally serve cities or collections
of towns.

Phil


 5-Mar-88 20:15:34-EST,1310;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 Mar 88 20:15-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 19:18:17 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 19:18:05 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA13434; Sat, 5 Mar 88 16:16:02 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 Mar 88 14:17:03 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Chasey)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: MFJ 1274 question
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dave Chasey)

I have an MFJ 1274 TNC running version 1.1.3 of their firmware.   I can't
seem to get the mfilter parameter to block control-Z.   That is the screen
clear character on the terminal I use. ^Z floats by a lot when the local digis
are in net rom mode and it gets annoying.   I called MFJ and they said that
they weren't aware of any problems with mfilter, but said that the newest
release of the firmware is 1.1.5. and I might want to try upgrading to it.
Has anyone had a similar problem and/or heard if 1.1.5 corrects it ?

Thanks.....   Dave Chasey - WN9NBT

......!pur-ee!wn9nbt
[e-mail]


 6-Mar-88 00:12:33-EST,2576;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 00:12-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 23:19:18 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 23:19:06 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA19163; Sat, 5 Mar 88 20:17:02 PST
Return-Path: <uunet!ccicpg!cci632![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Mar 88 19:35:52 GMT
From: uunet!ccicpg!cci632![e-mail] (David Hallidy)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
Summary: FCC regs too restrictive?... don't think so
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>


The question was raised as to whether or not the FCC's definition
of "business communications" as the term applies to Amateur Radio
may be too restrictive. My understanding of Part 97 of the Rules
and Regulations allows me to do just those things that were
cited as examples of No-No's. Every Sunday evening we have a
local two meter net which not only acts as the local Ham News
Dissemination Service, but also as the local swap/ sale service.
People regularly announce personal items (of an Amateur nature)
that are for sale or that are being looked for to buy. Also,
every year (1988 no exception), the local radio club assists
in the running of a road rally by providing communications at
the check-points to establish positions and possible
emergency needs. This has been going on in the Amateur Radio
fraternity for as long as I can remember (not just here in
Rochester) and in fact, is the essence of ham radio.

In that we are an experimental, hobby, and most of all an
EMERGENCY service, I can't see where relaxing the rules to
allow any greater flexibility in the types of communications
in which we may engage would be of benefit. The commercial
services provide adequate means for conducting business and
those types of communications specifically not allowed on the
Amateur bands generally would not fit under a "Public Service"
type of classification. Since Amateur Radio is by definition
a Public Service, disallowing bona fide business communications
seems justified. The Citizen's Radio Service (CB) was
originally established to fill that need back in the late 50's.

I'd be interested to find out how the rest of the net feels
about the subject.
73                                    Dave Hallidy  KD5RO


 6-Mar-88 00:14:23-EST,1321;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 00:14-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 23:22:20 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 5 Mar 88 23:22:10 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA19215; Sat, 5 Mar 88 20:19:58 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Mar 88 17:13:00 GMT
From: [e-mail] (fred, k1io@FN42jk, [phone])
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Automatic routing for TCP/IP

Kurt wb5bbw asked about automatic routing...

We've got a little project going on over here to add automatic generation
of routing tables to the KA9Q et al TCP/IP package.  This makes use of
a new protocol (RSPF) which exchanges route information between routing
nodes which constitute a backbone.  The algorithm is based on the same
Shortest Path First Spanning Tree developed for the core ARPAnet.

There's still a bit to be done and some architectural questions which
will have to be decided before the coding stage, but we're getting a
handle on it.  We'll announce it one of these months :-) .
      fred k1io ([e-mail])


 6-Mar-88 09:40:22-EST,665;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 09:40-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 08:57:22 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 08:57:10 EST
Received: from Burger.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 06 MAR 88 05:58:20 PST
Sender: "chaz_heritage.WGC1RX"@Xerox.COM
Date: 6 Mar 88 05:58:30 PST (Sunday)
Subject: Remove from DL
From: "chaz_heritage.WGC1RX"@Xerox.COM
To: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <880306-055820-1229@Xerox>

Please remove me from the Packet-Radio DL.

Thank you.

Regards,

Chaz
 6-Mar-88 12:56:40-EST,1550;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 12:56-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 11:53:40 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 11:53:25 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA07595; Sun, 6 Mar 88 08:51:16 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 5 Mar 88 04:31:36 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Ralph Hyre)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: You call THIS phone service?
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andy Nourse) writes:
>Some people have been saying that there should be no public packet radio
>network on the grounds that everyone can do it over telephone lines.
>
>Clean telephone lines are not available where I live.  ....
Radio Frequencies are not very clean, this is why packet radio implementations
MUST do error detection and correction.  This has advantages and
disadvantages, but it would be nice if 'packet telephone' (build some
error detection and correction into the modems) would have been developed
before we could depend on AT&T for 'clean' phone lines.
--
                    - Ralph W. Hyre, Jr.

Internet: [e-mail]    Phone:(412)268-{2847,3275} CMU-{BUGS,DARK}
Amateur Packet Radio: N3FGW@W2XO, or c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club, Pittsburgh, PA


 6-Mar-88 12:59:02-EST,1660;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 12:59-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 11:55:11 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 11:54:45 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA07898; Sun, 6 Mar 88 08:52:37 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Mar 88 17:34:59 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Andy Valencia)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Re: News package for MS-DOS using NET.EXE?
References: <[e-mail]>

/ hpindda:rec.ham-radio.packet / [e-mail] (Kurt Freiberger) /  3:53 pm  Mar  2, 1988 /
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gareth Howell) writes:
>> The
>> possibility of replacing MBL BBSs with netnews systems with segregated
>> news conferences appeals; certainly to me anyway :-)
>> G6KVK @ G4SPV (uk packet 144.650MHz) 44.131.19.1 [e-mail]
>There is a basic problem with systems of this nature:  Unless one is dedicated
>to grooming the beast, it can be a millstone of undreamed-of proportions.
>I refer to the task of censoring the articles to keep undesirable verbage
>from being propagated on the amateur frequencies.

    I am gatewaying in comp.sys.cbm, rec.ham-radio, and rec.ham-radio.packet.
I used to do comp.sys.ibm.pc, but the traffic was just to heavy.  Yes, it's
a bit of work, but my users seem to like it.

                Andy Valencia
                [e-mail]
                WB6RRU @ WB6RRU


 6-Mar-88 13:21:16-EST,1428;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 13:21-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 12:02:18 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 12:01:59 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA08317; Sun, 6 Mar 88 08:59:53 PST
Return-Path: <uunet!mnetor!utzoo![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Mar 88 04:30:39 GMT
From: uunet!mnetor!utzoo![e-mail] (Henry Spencer)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: low power license free packet?
Keywords: Bandwidth for nothing, gigabits for free
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>

> ... Why not try diffuse infrared off the cloud deck as a
> scheme for short-range outdoor communications?  ...

Those of us in urban settings can also use diffuse infrared off tall
buildings (artificial clouds!).  At one point I seriously thought of
trying this as a way to get a fast link between my home and work, but
the combination of having moved to a less favorable location and having
acquired a Telebit Trailblazer has made me shelve the idea for now.
--
Those who do not understand Unix are |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
condemned to reinvent it, poorly.    | {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,utai}!utzoo!henry


 6-Mar-88 13:41:31-EST,1002;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 13:41-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 12:47:12 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 12:47:01 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA09166; Sun, 6 Mar 88 09:44:46 PST
Return-Path: <somewhere![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 Mar 88 03:53:21 GMT
From: [e-mail] (David R. Marquardt)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Where can I get KA9Q for PC and System V ?
Keywords: FTP
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David R. Marquardt)
Posted: Thu Mar  3 21:53:21 1988

I'm trying to find a site that has the latest released versions of KA9Q for the
IBM PC and System V available for anonymous FTP.  If anyone knows of one,
please mail me a note or post a note here.  Thanks.

    Dave


 6-Mar-88 21:41:52-EST,684;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 Mar 88 21:41-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 20:55:40 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 6 Mar 88 20:55:29 EST
Received: from huey.udel.edu by Louie.UDEL.EDU id aa16830; 6 Mar 88 20:44 EST
Date:     Sun, 6 Mar 88 20:40:42 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: "fred, k1io@FN42jk, [phone]" <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  Automatic routing for TCP/IP
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>

Fred,

May I suggest a visit to RFC-981?

Dave
 8-Mar-88 05:08:41-EST,1160;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 8 Mar 88 05:08-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 8 Mar 88 04:09:07 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 8 Mar 88 04:08:51 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Tue, 08 Mar 88 04:10:33 EST
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET (C0033003) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 8637; Tue, 08 Mar 88 04:10:32 EST
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 88 10:07:37 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via MAILER@MITVMA
Subject: re: TNC1 firmware

>From:         [e-mail]
>Subject:      What is the latest firmware for aTNC-1?

There is a version of the TAPR-TNC1-Firmware updated by the
PACKET WERK GROUP in Belgium. Some old bugs are repaired and
some futher features are included, e.g. monitoring changed, online
help menue etc.

I don't know if this is the newest one, but it's the newest I know.

Detlef ( DK4EG , C0033004 at DBSTU1.BITNET )
 8-Mar-88 10:58:22-EST,1909;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 8 Mar 88 10:58-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 8 Mar 88 09:38:09 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 8 Mar 88 09:37:39 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from VMS.CIS.PITTSBURGH.EDU by VB.CC.CMU.EDU; Tue, 8 Mar 88 09:33 EST
Received: from vm2.cis.pittsburgh.edu by vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu; Tue, 8 Mar 88
 07:02 EDT
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 88 05:29 EST
From: PMDF Mail Server <[e-mail]>
Subject: Undeliverable mail
To: [e-mail]

The message could not be delivered to:

Addressee: 000544
Reason:
  %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user 10217_000544 at node CISVM2

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

Received: from JNET-DAEMON by vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu; Tue, 8 Mar 88 05:29 EST
Received: From UIUCVMD(MAILER) by PITTVMS with RSCS id 3423 for 000544@PITTVMS;
 Tue,  8-MAR-1988 05:29 EST
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.25) id 3334; Wed, 09 Mar 88 04:25:47 CST
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 88 10:07:37 MEZ
From: [e-mail]
Subject: re: TNC1 firmware
Sender: Packet Radio <[e-mail]>
To: Packet operator <[e-mail]>
Reply-to: [e-mail]
Comments:     CROSSNET mail via MAILER@MITVMA
X-To:         [e-mail]

>From:         [e-mail]
>Subject:      What is the latest firmware for aTNC-1?

There is a version of the TAPR-TNC1-Firmware updated by the
PACKET WERK GROUP in Belgium. Some old bugs are repaired and
some futher features are included, e.g. monitoring changed, online
help menue etc.

I don't know if this is the newest one, but it's the newest I know.

Detlef ( DK4EG , C0033004 at DBSTU1.BITNET )
 9-Mar-88 13:26:31-EST,1777;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 9 Mar 88 13:26-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 9 Mar 88 10:56:14 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 9 Mar 88 10:56:04 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA15015; Wed, 9 Mar 88 07:53:58 PST
Return-Path: <rutgers!galaxy!argus![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 8 Mar 88 15:59:41 GMT
From: rutgers!galaxy!argus![e-mail] (Ron DeBlock)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: opinion poll - public packet
Keywords: just vote - no flames!!!

OK, this is sure to generate MANY flames, but I promised someone I
would do this.  This someone is on another network (may have access to
this, I don't know).  This person is very active in the fight for equality
in information access, and a public packet radio service is key in his
proposals.  He has a commercial packet station in the business bands (not cheap).
His main concern seems to be free (or very low cost) data communication
for all.

Please do not suggest that every one get a ham license, some of the operations
and services would be prohibited from using our bands due to commercial nature.

Please mail answers to me, I will summarize.

1) Are you a ham?

2) Are you active in packet radio?

3) Would you like to see a public packet service? (Yes, No, Don't Care)

4) Please give a SHORT a comment on your answer in 3. (NO FLAMES!!!)


Thanks and 73
--
Ron DeBlock     KA2IKT          213 River Dr.
...!rutgers!galaxy!argus        Lk Hiawatha, NJ 07034
[e-mail]             [phone]
"NECKTIES MAKE MEN STUPID" - Weekly World News headline


10-Mar-88 18:01:40-EST,2848;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 10 Mar 88 18:01-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 10 Mar 88 14:23:53 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 10 Mar 88 14:23:33 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Thu, 10 Mar 88 10:07:01 EST
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET (C0033003) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 6123; Thu, 10 Mar 88 10:06:27 EST
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 88 14:45:04 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via MAILER@MITVMA
Subject: PD firmware offer

      NORD><LINK - The northern Germany Packet Group presents
      -------------------------------------------------------

                  THE NET
        Compatibel. Portabel. Public Domain. By NORD><LINK.

Networking software for the TNC2.  Fully compatible to NET/ROM (*) Version 1.3
but

   -  no more encrypted callsigns, easy to change
   -  all default parameters easy to change in EPROM
   -  default password to allow remote sysop access after cold-start
   -  2 LED (or relais) outputs for remote access by SYSOPs

(*) NET/ROM is a registered trademark of SOFTWARE 2000 Inc.



THE NET is

   -  free for non-commercial users
   -  ||| public domain source code for non-commercial users |||
      ||| (95% C, 5% Assembler)                              |||


To get executable EPROMs for the TNC2 you need

   -  a good C-Compiler (we used Q/C 4.0 by The Code Works)
   -  an assembly optimizer (also available from The Code Works)
   -  a special homemade optimizer (available from NORD><LINK at NO charge)
   -  a M80 compatible assembler
   -  a suitable linker like PLINK-II (L80 does'nt work, the code is too long)


Objectcode will be released within the next (4..6) weeks.  We are just running
the final test. The fully documented source will be ready by july this year. A
"not that good documented" working copy is ready right now.  A warning for all
non-german  users:  the variables and functions are named in a germish  (mixed
german/english)  way and all comments are german.  A perfect reason for all of
you to learn basic german.  Maybe someone in US does the translation. We would
appreciate that.


A remark on this package:  we really don't like commercialising amateur radio.
That's why we make everything public domain.

"Why re-invent the wheels if you can have perfect drawings?"

You may reach us by electronic mail via DK4EG or by paper mail.

Michael Roehner, DC4OX
Hans Georg Giese, DF2AU

Hinter dem Berge 5

D3300 Braunschweig
FRG

73s de Detlef, DK4EG
( C0033003 at DBSTU1.BITNET )
11-Mar-88 14:24:01-EST,1319;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 11 Mar 88 14:23-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 11 Mar 88 13:05:07 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 11 Mar 88 13:04:05 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from amc1 by AMC-HQ.ARPA id ab02691; 11 Mar 88 11:43 EST
Date:     Fri, 11 Mar 88 11:34:49 EST
From: "D. H. Bennett, AMCRM-FTM"  <[e-mail]>
To: packet-radio%eddie.mit.edu@amc-hq
Subject:  Please pass to [e-mail]

Am very interested in your NET software. They are beta testing the
PD COSI Software right now and has lots of bugs.  Would like to get
a copy of the software and coumentation.  I can place it on my landline
BBS and make it available to who ever wants it. I agree with you that
Amateur Packet Radio Software should be PD. I dont like the idea of
a Corp controlling what we can and can not do.

Donald H. Bennett (K4NGC)
15016 Carlsbad Road
Woodbridge, Va 22193 USA

(APRA) dbennett@amc-hq
(Work) 703-274-9355 or 56
(Home) 703-670-4773
(PBBS) K4NGC @ K4NGC

PS,
Let me know what the cost will be to you and I will send Dollars (or what
ever) to take care of it.

                            DB
11-Mar-88 14:48:47-EST,1529;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 11 Mar 88 14:48-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 11 Mar 88 13:32:59 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 11 Mar 88 13:04:54 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from amc1 by AMC-HQ.ARPA id ac02691; 11 Mar 88 11:43 EST
Date:     Fri, 11 Mar 88 11:44:44 EST
From: "D. H. Bennett, AMCRM-FTM"  <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:  LandLine Bulletin Board

If anyone is interested, I have established a Landline  BBS  (703-680-5970)
that  will  contain nothing else except Packet Radio related files.  If you
have anything you want to add to the BBS please mail a disk to me.  I  will
return  the  disk  after  coping the files and I will include cash to cover
your postage.  This way you dont loose any money  keeping  the  BBS  up  to
date.  For  those who have been using my USA-PKT files they are included on
this BBS in Download Area #1 and are  updated  every  Saturday.  Copies  of
TCP/IP,  WA7MBL  PBBS,  and  W0RLI  PBBS  software are on the system.  I am
hoping that this BBS can act as a focal  point  on  anything  dealing  with
Packet Radio.

Donald H. Bennett (K4NGC)
15016 Carlsbad Road
Woodbridge, Va 22193

(Home) 703-670-4773
(Work) 703-274-9355 or 56
(ARPANET) dbennett@amc-hq
(CompuServe) 72310,263
(PBBS) K4NGC @ K4NGC
(FIDO BBS) 703-680-5970
14-Mar-88 13:08:02-EST,1600;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 Mar 88 13:07-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 14 Mar 88 11:44:59 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 14 Mar 88 11:44:45 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA19192; Mon, 14 Mar 88 08:41:47 PST
Return-Path: <mit-vax![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Mar 88 16:01:28 GMT
From: mit-vax![e-mail] (Dan Cerys)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TNC advice needed
References: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Devon E Bowen) writes:
>I'm having a little trouble deciding on a TNC and I thought I'd tap USENET
>to give me a hand... Right now, I've got it narrowed down to the PK-232 from
>AEA or the KPC-2 from Kantronics. My primary interest is to bring up TCP/IP
>on it, so I'm considering these two based on the fact that they have KISS
>built into them.

I'm also shopping for my first TNC.  I was under the impression that
the equivalent to the PK-232 was the Kantronics KAM.  These look
roughly alike to me.  They are also priced nearly the same.  The KAM
offers a few features the PK-232 doesn't provide (simultaneous HF/VHF
connections, simple PBBS system in the TNC), but since my initial
interest is in TCP, I don't care about those for now.  Anyone have any
comments in regard to reliability/features/customizability for these
two units?

Dan Cerys, N1FMK


14-Mar-88 18:16:17-EST,2284;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 Mar 88 18:16-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 14 Mar 88 15:23:34 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 14 Mar 88 15:22:45 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from VMS.CIS.PITTSBURGH.EDU by VB.CC.CMU.EDU; Mon, 14 Mar 88 13:25 EST
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 88 13:22 EST
From: PMDF Mail Server <[e-mail]>
Subject: Undeliverable mail
To: [e-mail]

The message could not be delivered to:

Addressee: 000544
Reason:
  %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user 000544 at node CISVM2

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

Received: from JNET-DAEMON by vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu; Mon, 14 Mar 88 13:21 EST
Received: From UIUCVMD(MAILER) by PITTVMS with RSCS id 7963 for 000544@PITTVMS;
 Mon, 14-MAR-1988 13:21 EST
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.25) id 7882; Mon, 14 Mar 88 12:13:11 CST
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 88 16:01:28 GMT
From: Dan Cerys <mit-vax![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TNC advice needed
Sender: Packet Radio <[e-mail]>
To: Packet operator <[e-mail]>
Reply-to: [e-mail]
X-To:         [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Devon E Bowen) writes:
>I'm having a little trouble deciding on a TNC and I thought I'd tap USENET
>to give me a hand... Right now, I've got it narrowed down to the PK-232 from
>AEA or the KPC-2 from Kantronics. My primary interest is to bring up TCP/IP
>on it, so I'm considering these two based on the fact that they have KISS
>built into them.

I'm also shopping for my first TNC.  I was under the impression that
the equivalent to the PK-232 was the Kantronics KAM.  These look
roughly alike to me.  They are also priced nearly the same.  The KAM
offers a few features the PK-232 doesn't provide (simultaneous HF/VHF
connections, simple PBBS system in the TNC), but since my initial
interest is in TCP, I don't care about those for now.  Anyone have any
comments in regard to reliability/features/customizability for these
two units?

Dan Cerys, N1FMK


14-Mar-88 20:03:42-EST,1838;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 Mar 88 20:03-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 14 Mar 88 18:01:51 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 14 Mar 88 18:01:37 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA16086; Mon, 14 Mar 88 14:58:38 PST
Return-Path: <ames!oliveb!amdahl![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Mar 88 20:41:50 GMT
From: ames!oliveb!amdahl![e-mail] (Greg Bullough)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW

Okay, my PCXT and my transceiver were sitting side-by-side on my desk
yesterday and began to nudge me, indicating that they would really like
to get together and do some work. Since the world seems to be turning
digital before my eyes I decided to turn digital myself.

Has anyone had any experience with the MFJ line of TNC's some of which
seem to be multi-function. The one I'm particularly thinking of is
number 1278 (I think) and goes for about $250. It seems to copy and send
CW, PACKET, SSTV, ASCII, and BAUDOT and receive weatherfax. Tuning
indicator on the front, and they have IBM/PC software for 20 bucks.
This seems like a lot of function in a little box for not much money.
I particularly like the multi-mode features, being a bit of a
dilletante.

Has anyone had any experience with this unit (or similar) that they
would like to share? If you have seen the ad, is there something
important that I am missing that will cost me thousands of dollars?
How much luck has anyone had running a PCXT next to a HF or VHF
transceiver (This is a genn-u-wine IBM PCXT; yeah, I know, but
I worked for them when I bought it.).

Greg B  (WA6DCL)


15-Mar-88 13:04:13-EST,2817;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 Mar 88 13:04-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 15 Mar 88 11:22:06 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 15 Mar 88 11:21:47 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA19898; Tue, 15 Mar 88 08:18:39 PST
Return-Path: <gamma!ulysses!thumper![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Mar 88 04:54:57 GMT
From: gamma!ulysses!thumper![e-mail] (Phil R. Karn)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW
Summary: TNC recommendations
References: <[e-mail]>

Which TNC you should buy depends heavily on what you want to use it for.
If you like do-everything-in-one-box gadgets with lots of blinking
lights and features, the AEA PK-232 is for you. This is particularly
true if you like to operate HF and run modes other than packet.

However, dedicating a PK232 to VHF packet is a real waste. Particularly
if all you want is a "KISS" TNC for use with my TCP/IP/AX.25 package,
it's hard to go wrong with the cheapest MFJ (1240?)  They're not much
above $100 now, less than 1/2 of the cost of a PK-232, and because
they're a clone of the original TAPR TNC-2 they run K3MC's "KISS ONLY"
roms just fine.

Dedicating a TNC-2 clone to KISS mode has some strong practical
advantages, the main one being that the multi-mode TNCs (like the 232)
have an annoying tendency to drop out of KISS mode when you don't want
them to (and, conversely, be difficult to get out of KISS mode when you
DO want them to and can't remember how to do it). (In fairness to AEA,
the reason has to do with the use of a BREAK on the asynch line as the
"kiss off" command signal, since the interface otherwise must be
transparent to all data characters. Unfortunately, a power failure on a
PC will generate a break, knocking the TNC out of KISS mode even if the
TNC is battery powered and the PC reboots itself automatically. Given
that you need to support other modes besides KISS, AEA did about as good
a job as could be expected -- except that they, like virtually every
other TNC manufacturer, omitted the software-readable hardware
configuration switches that could have solved this problem nicely).

In the near future, however, I'm hoping that Terminal Node Controllers
will die of benign neglect as people realize that it's COMPUTERS that we
should be networking, not terminals, and as add-on HDLC adapter cards
for PCs become widespread. It makes much more sense to do it this way if
you already have a computer; all of us who worked on the KISS TNC never
considered it to be anything more than a stopgap.

Phil


15-Mar-88 15:04:06-EST,3460;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 Mar 88 15:04-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 15 Mar 88 13:10:01 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 15 Mar 88 13:09:33 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from VMS.CIS.PITTSBURGH.EDU by VB.CC.CMU.EDU; Tue, 15 Mar 88 13:12 EST
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 88 13:10 EST
From: PMDF Mail Server <[e-mail]>
Subject: Undeliverable mail
To: [e-mail]

The message could not be delivered to:

Addressee: 000544
Reason:
  %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user 000544 at node CISVM2

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

Received: from JNET-DAEMON by vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu; Tue, 15 Mar 88 13:10 EST
Received: From UIUCVMD(MAILER) by PITTVMS with RSCS id 4396 for 000544@PITTVMS;
 Tue, 15-MAR-1988 13:09 EST
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.25) id 4332; Tue, 15 Mar 88 12:05:01 CST
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 88 04:54:57 GMT
From: "Phil R. Karn" <gamma!ulysses!thumper![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW
Sender: Packet Radio <[e-mail]>
To: Packet operator <[e-mail]>
Reply-to: [e-mail]
X-To:         [e-mail]

Which TNC you should buy depends heavily on what you want to use it for.
If you like do-everything-in-one-box gadgets with lots of blinking
lights and features, the AEA PK-232 is for you. This is particularly
true if you like to operate HF and run modes other than packet.

However, dedicating a PK232 to VHF packet is a real waste. Particularly
if all you want is a "KISS" TNC for use with my TCP/IP/AX.25 package,
it's hard to go wrong with the cheapest MFJ (1240?)  They're not much
above $100 now, less than 1/2 of the cost of a PK-232, and because
they're a clone of the original TAPR TNC-2 they run K3MC's "KISS ONLY"
roms just fine.

Dedicating a TNC-2 clone to KISS mode has some strong practical
advantages, the main one being that the multi-mode TNCs (like the 232)
have an annoying tendency to drop out of KISS mode when you don't want
them to (and, conversely, be difficult to get out of KISS mode when you
DO want them to and can't remember how to do it). (In fairness to AEA,
the reason has to do with the use of a BREAK on the asynch line as the
"kiss off" command signal, since the interface otherwise must be
transparent to all data characters. Unfortunately, a power failure on a
PC will generate a break, knocking the TNC out of KISS mode even if the
TNC is battery powered and the PC reboots itself automatically. Given
that you need to support other modes besides KISS, AEA did about as good
a job as could be expected -- except that they, like virtually every
other TNC manufacturer, omitted the software-readable hardware
configuration switches that could have solved this problem nicely).

In the near future, however, I'm hoping that Terminal Node Controllers
will die of benign neglect as people realize that it's COMPUTERS that we
should be networking, not terminals, and as add-on HDLC adapter cards
for PCs become widespread. It makes much more sense to do it this way if
you already have a computer; all of us who worked on the KISS TNC never
considered it to be anything more than a stopgap.

Phil


15-Mar-88 18:57:08-EST,1013;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 15 Mar 88 18:57-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 15 Mar 88 17:36:39 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 15 Mar 88 17:21:15 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA26230; Tue, 15 Mar 88 14:17:58 PST
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 88 14:17:58 PST
From: [e-mail] (Clifford Neuman)
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: New path for archives
Cc: [e-mail]

Anonymous FTP on EDDIE.MIT.EDU was recently changed to allow access to
only special public directoroy.  This made it difficult to access the
archives for the packet radio mailing list.  The archives have now
been moved under the public directory, and can be reached through
anonymous FTP as packet/packet.archive*.

    ~ Cliff

16-Mar-88 12:38:43-EST,2396;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 16 Mar 88 12:38-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 16 Mar 88 10:42:43 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 16 Mar 88 10:42:24 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA28099; Wed, 16 Mar 88 07:39:09 PST
Return-Path: <tektronix!tekcrl![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Mar 88 19:28:46 GMT
From: tektronix!tekcrl![e-mail] (Jan Steinman)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW

<How much luck has anyone had running a PCXT next to a HF or VHF
transceiver...>

I have been *very* disappointed in my attempts to get computers and HF gear to
get along.  THe PK-232 seems to put out a lot of broadband noise.  I placed
star washers under all the cover screws, and ran all interconnecting wires
through ferrite beads, and I still get 1-2 S-units of noise almost everywhere.
My next project is to go inside the PK-232 and put .01's to ground on all
egressing wires.

If the broadband noise weren't enough, there are birdies.  One whopper (S5) is
right on 28.103, a common packet frequency!  I've might "rubber the rock" in
the PK-232 to place that particular birdie somewhere else.

As for computers, I've tried six different ones: TRS-80 Model 100, Tek 4404,
Tek 6210, Heathkit H89, GRiD 1101, and GRiD 1139.  All but the GRiDs raised the
noise by about 1-3 S-units.  The worst were the H89 and the M100.  Even the
GRiDs, with their cast magnesium cases, raised it noticeably, although not
budging the S-meter.

To be fair, it may be that my Icom C-735 is leaking through the case.  I've not
yet tried any of this with another transceiver or packet controller.

Otherwise, I'm quite happy with the PK-232.  I just turn it off and on a lot,
and try to remember that I've got to hear a noise-free signal before I turn it
on, cause a noisy signal will simply go away.  The noise does not seem to be a
problem at all on VHF.

:::::: Software Productivity Technologies    ---    Smalltalk   Project ::::::
:::::: Jan Steinman N7JDB       Box 500, MS 50-470      (w)503/627-5881 ::::::
:::::: [e-mail]      Beaverton, OR 97077     (h)503/657-7703 ::::::


17-Mar-88 18:16:44-EST,1859;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 18:16-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 16:30:29 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 16:30:17 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA03197; Thu, 17 Mar 88 13:30:12 PST
Return-Path: <sri-unix![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 17 Mar 88 03:43:02 GMT
From: sri-unix![e-mail] (Alan Larson)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Kantronics KAM
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Alan Larson)

[e-mail] (David Dodell) writes:
>I have been interested in buying a Kantronics KAM.  Can anyone
>tell me their experiences with it?

A friend of mine has a Kantronics (I don't know the model).  His is the
new one with the personal BBS, and with the last upgrade he got from
them, a relay mode which he called something like kan or kam mode.  (We
do not use that feature.) The bad news is that it refuses to talk to
many other TNCs.

    --  I can connect to it through a 3 digipeater path from
    my old tapr TNC-1.
    --  Since the middle digipeater in the path is net/rom, I
    have tried to use it to shorten the length of the path
    for retrys.  The Kantronics board never seems to respond
    to the connection requests from the net/rom node.
    --  When I try to connect using the Macintosh version of
    Phil Karn's TCP/IP code (using ax25, of course), it
    connects, but never sends the header message.

I do not know what is going on, but I suspect the problem is in the
Kantronics box.  Does anyone have any enlightnment?  Does Kantronics
have a finders fee for bugs in their units?

    Alan


17-Mar-88 19:02:45-EST,1185;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 19:02-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:30:39 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:30:01 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id ai07809; 17 Mar 88 15:17 EST
Received: from bgsu.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id ad21117; 17 Mar 88 15:03 EST
Received: by andy.bgsu.edu (5.51/3.1)
        id AA00399 ; Thu, 17 Mar 88 13:49:49 EST
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 88 13:49:49 EST
From: Louis Graue <[e-mail]>
To: tektronix!tekcrl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW
Cc: [e-mail]

I also run pk232 with both H89 and model 100 radio shack and do not have
the problems you mention with HF.  Perhaps your antenna is too close
to your operating position.  My antennas are over 100 feet away.
When I tried using indoor antenna sometime ago I did have the problem
you mentioned.  Using coax and placing the antenna far away should
keep the noise from being picked up by the antenna.

17-Mar-88 19:13:20-EST,2497;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 19:13-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:38:16 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:37:47 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA29478; Thu, 17 Mar 88 12:37:42 PST
Return-Path: <gatech!hubcap![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 17 Mar 88 01:23:13 GMT
From: gatech!hubcap![e-mail] (BJ Backitis)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Software for portable packet/rtty

Does anybody out there have any good suggestions for software to run on
an IBM-PC compatible laptop (in particular, the Tandy 1400LT) that is
capable of running a TNC or multi-mode digital controller for emergency
use??  The main feature, I would suppose, is the ability to enter and
store radiogram messages, call them up and send them at will (and dump
to a printer when asked), and store incoming messages.  I figured, some
sort of terminal emulation and an "operating system" in the foreground
to control text entering, editing, storage, and such.

I know, I'm asking a lot!!  I feel something like that would have great
use in an emergency packet/RTTY station.  Imagine, being able to enter
radiogram traffic in a block (and saving them onto one of the onboard
disks), then connecting thru to the destination and sending the message
(or even a block).  Same goes for RTTY, which our local RACES group uses
for official traffic between our Emergency Operating Center and the
mobile EOC van.

Is any other group (or individual) using something with this capability,
or am I going to have to break out my Turbo C and try writing something?
Please e-mail or post (posting may be good in case somebody else out
there is also interested).  I would be interested in hearing how other
groups use packet and/or RTTY for mobile/emergency operations.  TNX!

                       73,
                       BJ Backitis -- KB4VSW
                       ARES EC, Pickens County, SC

--
Frank J. ("BJ") Backitis                       | Clemson University ARC
Information Systems Development                | WD4EOG
Division of Computing & Information Technology | P.O. Box 2277
Clemson University, Clemson, SC  29631         | Clemson, SC  29632


17-Mar-88 19:17:06-EST,3002;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 19:17-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:35:53 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:35:29 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA29381; Thu, 17 Mar 88 12:35:21 PST
Return-Path: <fluke![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Mar 88 23:11:51 GMT
From: fluke![e-mail] (Paul Lutt)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TNC RFI Problems

I'm having a problem with my TNC which I hope someone can shed some
light on.

First a description of the setup.  I have an MFJ-1274 TNC connected to
an ICOM IC-02AT feeding a roof mounted J-pole antenna.  I'm using a PC
clone running Kermit as the terminal.  Everything works fine as long as
I restrict my packet activity to 145.01 MHz.  In the last couple of
months, a lot of packet activity has moved over to 144.99 MHz.  I
decided to see what was up on that frequency.

Imagine my dismay when I found that my receiver input was absolutely
swamped by a digital buzz on 144.99 MHz.  The interference is so bad
that I can't get the squelch to close with any setting of the squelch
control.

I began to investigate the problem.  It turns out that the TNC is
generating a rich set of harmonics that show up about every 83 kHz
throughout the 2-meter ham band.  These signals appear to be radiated,
since I can disconnect the handheld from the TNC, running on batteries
and the external antenna, and still get a signal that "pegs" the bar
graph display.

I have tried wrapping the TNC in aluminum foil and grounding the thing,
but the noise is always present.

I installed some additional power supply bypass capacitors across the
CPU and SIO chips, which helped a little bit, but the noise still drowns
out any interesting signals.

I looked around on the board with an oscilloscope and it appears that
the offending signal is related to the I/O strobe going from the CPU to
the SIO chip.  This strobe has a period that directly ties in with the
83 kHz harmonics observed.

I suspect that the interference may be getting into one of the IF stages,
rather than coming through the front-end.  This particular radio has a
16.9 MHz first IF followed by a 455 kHz second IF.  It seems possible
that the interference is happening in one of these stages.

So now I'm stumped.  I've got the noise down enough that I can copy
packets that peg the receive strength meter, but the squelch is turned
WAY up.  Has anyone else seen this problem?  Any suggestions on what to
try next?

Thanks and 73,
Paul  KE7XT
--
    Paul Lutt
Domain: [e-mail]
 Voice: [phone]
  UUCP: {uw-beaver,decvax!microsof,ucbvax!lbl-csam,allegra,sun}!fluke!pwl
 Snail: John Fluke Mfg. Co. / P.O. Box C9090 / Everett WA  98206


17-Mar-88 19:38:41-EST,1019;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 19:38-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 18:12:03 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 18:11:37 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA09308; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:11:35 PST
Return-Path: <bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Mar 88 22:53:32 GMT
From: bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail] (Phil R. Karn)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW
Summary: RF noise
References: <[e-mail]>

I have Icom radios and a PK-232, and I've discovered that much of the RF
noise is CONDUCTED into the radio by the cable between the TNC and the
radio. Try disconnecting the molex plug from the Icom's accessory socket
and see if the noise doesn't diminish considerably.

Phil


17-Mar-88 19:56:18-EST,1904;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 19:56-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 18:23:33 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 17:42:18 EST
Received: from ROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by VALLECITO.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 214326; Thu 17-Mar-88 16:53:54 EST
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 88 16:53 EST
From: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Kantronics KAM
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>

    Date: 17 Mar 88 03:43:02 GMT
    From: sri-unix![e-mail] (Alan Larson)

    [e-mail] (David Dodell) writes:
    >I have been interested in buying a Kantronics KAM.  Can anyone
    >tell me their experiences with it?
    --      When I try to connect using the Macintosh version of
        Phil Karn's TCP/IP code (using ax25, of course), it
        connects, but never sends the header message.

    I do not know what is going on, but I suspect the problem is in the
    Kantronics box.  Does anyone have any enlightnment?  Does Kantronics
    have a finders fee for bugs in their units?

        Alan

I have a KAM and used it successfully with the MAC version of KA9Q code.
It shouldn't make any difference which host computer you use. What is
VERY important is the settings of TXDELAY and TXTAIL (which are KISS
parameters as well as normal mode paramters). Both of the 2m
transcievers I tried take an enormous amount of time to key up, and need
a long tail time also.

Make sure you initialize the KAM at the beginning of the NET session,
using the PARAM commands to set the transmit dealys. Otherwise you will
almost surely lose.

17-Mar-88 20:04:40-EST,1777;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 Mar 88 20:04-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 18:37:23 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 18:37:11 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA10394; Thu, 17 Mar 88 15:37:08 PST
Return-Path: <bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 17 Mar 88 05:57:10 GMT
From: bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail] (Phil R. Karn)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Software for portable packet/rtty
Summary: KA9Q TCP/IP/AX25 package runs fine on laptops
References: <[e-mail]>

My package runs just fine on PC-compatible laptops. All you need to get
on packet with it is a "KISS" mode TNC and radio. Many manufacturers are
now including KISS compatibity in their firmware (Kantronics advertises
theirs as "TCP/IP compatible").  Not only do you get the ability to run
the very same true high level networking protocols used on the ARPA
Internet, but you can also speak "plain" AX.25 and handle multiple
concurrent sessions of various types.

And the best part is that it's all free for noncommercial use --
including complete C source code. You can get the software and
documentation from a variety of sources. If you're on the Internet, get
it by anonymous ftp from louie.udel.edu under /pub/ka9q; if not, you can
get it on 5.25" floppies from TAPR, PO Box 22888, Tucson AZ 85734. You
can either provide your own disks (include 3 blank disks, return postage
and $2 for copying costs) or you can have TAPR provide the disks for $1
+ $.75/disk = $3.25.

Phil


18-Mar-88 00:18:40-EST,1256;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 18 Mar 88 00:18-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 22:34:57 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 17 Mar 88 22:34:46 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA19366; Thu, 17 Mar 88 19:34:33 PST
Return-Path: <well![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 17 Mar 88 08:42:10 GMT
From: well![e-mail] (Glenn S. Tenney)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: TNC RECOMMENDATION REVIEW
Summary: didn't like MFJ
References: <[e-mail]>

When I got my ticket last year I went out and picked up an MFJ 1270
(about $130 last August).  I had nothing but trouble with it using
a Kenwood 215 (an HT).  The voltages for each of the two tones was
very different and just wouldn't work to all other tncs.  In a nut
shell, it was AWFUL.  I returned it and gladly paid for a PK-232.  The
MFJ was my choice 'cause I just wanted 2m packet to play with, but...
I doubt I'll ever think of buying another tnc since the 232 does
everything except the kitchen sink.

Glenn Tenney
AA6ER


18-Mar-88 10:01:24-EST,1308;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 18 Mar 88 10:01-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 08:57:37 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 08:57:02 EST
Resent-Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, 17 March 1988  10:58-MST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Sender: amdcad![e-mail] (Tom Slykhouse)
From: amdcad![e-mail] (Tom Slykhouse)
To: [e-mail]
Subject:   PC/AT LANCE Card
Resent-From: [e-mail]
Resent-To: [e-mail]
Resent-Date: Fri 18 Mar 1988 06:58-MST

Advanced Micro Devices has completed development on a Public Domain
Ethernet board for the PC/AT's and Clones, based on our LANCE controller.
Manuals, schematics and artwork are available for this product.

We are additionally considering porting several of the common
communications packages to this board.  One possibility is KA9Q
TCP/IP.  If anyone on the net would like this package ported, or would
prefer another package please respond to me with EMail.

Tom Slykhouse
Advanced Micro Devices
[e-mail]
decwrl!amdcad!toms
[phone]
18-Mar-88 18:12:10-EST,2532;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 18 Mar 88 18:12-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 14:42:43 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 14:42:18 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA16171; Fri, 18 Mar 88 11:42:07 PST
Return-Path: <uwvax!pipe![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Mar 88 16:07:19 GMT
From: uwvax!pipe![e-mail] (Dan Frank)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: net/rom level 3 in ka9q package
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dan Frank)

   This has been posted to tcp-group, but since some readers may not
be on that list, I'll summarize here as well:

   I have completed a preliminary implementation of net/rom level 3
(i.e. network layer) in the ka9q tcp/ip package.  This implementation
provides several features:

    1) IP datagrams may be passed across net/rom networks, with
       automatic routing by intermediate net/rom nodes.

    2) A computer running the ka9q code may act as a relay site
       in a net/rom network.  It may not act as an endpoint node,
       except for tcp/ip traffic.

    3) The link connection and channel are shared between IP
       and net/rom traffic, so you a node may relay *both*
       net/rom and IP traffic simultaneously.

    4) Support has been added for the net/rom serial framing
       method, which allows connection to a net/rom TNC via
       its serial interface.  This allows the ka9q package to
       be used as a packet switch for multiple net/roms, which
       eliminates the need for diode matrix bridges and half
       duplex operation on the serial links.  It also makes
       possible efficient operation of wormhole links where
       carrier detection is delayed or nonexistent.

   The network level implementation includes the ability to send and
receive routing broadcasts, and manual and automatic updates to the
(net/rom) routing table.  One feature added that is not in net/rom
is "node filtering", which allows the package to reject routing
broadcasts from particular nodes, or only accept them from a specified
group of nodes.  This can provide immunity from band opening problems
and "alligator" sites.

   At some point this will likely be added to the official release.
If you have a need for the code in the meantime, you can get it on
louie in nrnet.arc, or contact me.

   73 , Dan W9Nk


18-Mar-88 23:49:08-EST,3175;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 18 Mar 88 23:49-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 18:13:35 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 18:13:01 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA05090; Fri, 18 Mar 88 15:12:46 PST
Return-Path: <hou2d![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Mar 88 05:38:47 GMT
From: hou2d![e-mail] (G.BEATTIE)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Software for portable packet/rtty
References: <[e-mail]>

The TANDY 1400LT IS A REALLY NEAT MACHINE AND WONDERFUL FOR
MOBILE AND PORTABLE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS.

During the last New York City Marathon, I used a 1400LT, a
PAC-COMM Tiny-2 TNC and a 2m radio in my truck.  We were set
up during the previous overnight period and were quite content
to sit there and peck away all day long.

We handled a few hundred messages (short tactical type) from
a less than wonderful location in the south Bronx.  I used the
Shareware communications programme "PROCOMM" and the Norton
editor "NED".  I put the editor into the ramdrive so that it
would flip into the editor rapidly from inside the
communications package.  I would leave the TNC in a flow
controlled state while I edited and would open a buffer and
capture any incomming messages when I returned.
This approach allowed me to use familiar tools to toggle
between composition and communication.  When I get a chance,
I will probably load up Double-DOS and literally jump on a key
click between the two functions.  Double-DOS is about as good
as any other DOS multiplexer and works pretty well on floppy
systems.  Besides it is a very stable product and allows the
machine to give about all it has to user programme support.
A third or fourth application would require more CPU and
memory.

Look for PROCOMM on Compuslop or your local BBS.
The Tiny-2 from PAC-COMM is a neat box which is 100%
software compatible with a standard TNC-2.  It is
significantly smaller and has a better modem.
Another nice feature is the power switch is on the front!
They also have another unit which is the Low-Power 2.
This is a CMOS version.
The Tiny-2 costs about $120 and the Low-Power 2 about $170.
Call PAC-COMM at 813-874-2980.

Another approach is to go with a BBS package such as the
Packet Radio MailBox System (PRMBS).  It runs on any MS-DOS
machine and uses the same TNC-2 interface.  This system
is especially nice to run with Double-DOS because you can
operate the system while a remote user is also logged in.
If you would like any of the software mentioned in this
note, give me a call.

BYW, Does anyone out there know of a good source of add-on
goodies for the 1400LT ?  Are there any magazines with regular
articles or ADS for 1400LT toys?


Thanks,
        J. Gordon Beattie, Jr.
E-mail:    ihnp4!hou2d!n2dsy (Unix)  [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone] (Office)     201-615-4669 (Office FAX)
Telephone: [phone] (Home)


19-Mar-88 01:04:50-EST,840;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 19 Mar 88 01:04-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 23:43:37 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 18 Mar 88 23:43:14 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: by umunhum.stanford.edu; Fri, 18 Mar 88 20:44:12 PST
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 88 20:44:12 PST
From: Michael Chepponis <[e-mail]>
To: ihnp4!hou2d![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: G.BEATTIE's message of 18 Mar 88 05:38:47 GMT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Software for portable packet/rtty

Say, Gordon, do you have ROSE available for field testing yet?  Curious to
get a copy (as you know!)

Best -Mike
23-Mar-88 04:10:14-EST,1020;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 88 04:10-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 22 Mar 88 09:08:20 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 22 Mar 88 09:08:03 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from amc1 by AMC-HQ.ARPA id ab05209; 22 Mar 88 9:04 EST
Date:     Tue, 22 Mar 88 8:52:47 EST
From: "D. H. Bennett, AMCRM-FTM"  <[e-mail]>
To: packet-radio%eddie.mit.edu@amc-hq
Subject:  Packet Radio Land Line BBS

I have started a Land Line BBS that is dedicated to Packet Radio and
invite all to use it. It has the USA-PKT files which are updated every
Sunday morning.  The BBS is a FIDO board and operates with a 300/1200
baud modem. The telephone number is 703-680-5970.

In addition the BBS has the current COSI software along with WA7MBL
and W0RLI PBBS software. Give it a call

Don Bennett
dbennett@amc-hq
K4NGC @ K4NGC
23-Mar-88 04:10:53-EST,1020;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 88 04:10-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 22 Mar 88 09:08:36 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 22 Mar 88 09:08:17 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from amc1 by AMC-HQ.ARPA id ac05209; 22 Mar 88 9:04 EST
Date:     Tue, 22 Mar 88 8:53:06 EST
From: "D. H. Bennett, AMCRM-FTM"  <[e-mail]>
To: packet-radio%eddie.mit.edu@amc-hq
Subject:  Packet Radio Land Line BBS

I have started a Land Line BBS that is dedicated to Packet Radio and
invite all to use it. It has the USA-PKT files which are updated every
Sunday morning.  The BBS is a FIDO board and operates with a 300/1200
baud modem. The telephone number is 703-680-5970.

In addition the BBS has the current COSI software along with WA7MBL
and W0RLI PBBS software. Give it a call

Don Bennett
dbennett@amc-hq
K4NGC @ K4NGC
23-Mar-88 19:59:20-EST,3633;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 Mar 88 19:59-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 23 Mar 88 16:57:51 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 23 Mar 88 16:57:19 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA01981; Wed, 23 Mar 88 13:46:27 PST
Return-Path: <tektronix!tekcrl![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 22 Mar 88 18:52:03 GMT
From: tektronix!tekcrl![e-mail] (Jan Steinman)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: More Ammunition for the 220 Fight!
Distribution: na

Following is a letter sent to me by US Congressman Ron Wyden, who represents
the 3rd Oregon District.  (I live in the 5th district -- he's not even my rep!)
 Other Oregon hams have received the same letter.  Congressman Wyden makes an
interesting point, that may have been missed in the extensive amateur comments:
that packet radio in the disputed band provided valuable aid in fighting forest
fires in Oregon last season.  He also suggests an interesting alternative: the
226 MHz military band.

If you live in an area subjected to forest fires, I would urge you to write
your representative and senator, informing them of Congressman Wyden's stance,
and asking them to take similar action.  If you have not filed your comments
yet, you may wish to refer to Congressman Wyden's position in your comments.

Here is the text of the letter:
----------------------------------------------------------------
(Heading deleted)

Dear Mr. Steinman,

I thought you might be interested in a proposal before the Federal
Communications Commission which could have a significant impact on amateur
radio operators.

The FCC is proposing to reallocate the 220-222 MHz radio frequency band
exclusively to the land-mobile service.  The FCC argues this will facilitate
development of a technology called ACSSB, which has the potential to increase
land-mobile efficiency.

While I support efforts to develop more efficient communications technology, I
am concerned that reallocating the 220-222 MHz band would be harmful to amateur
radio operators and the services they provide the community.

Use of the 220-222 MHz band during the many fire emergencies in the West last
year highlights the importance of this band to the amateur service.  It was
possible for amateur radio operators to establish a packet radio network in the
220-225 MHz band without interfering with other communications.  Reallocation
of the 220-222 MHz band would significantly reduce this capability.

I have written to FCC Chairman Dennis Patrick urging the Commission to consider
another alternative.  It may be possible to reallocate the two lowest bands of
the spectrum now reserved for military use, 226-227 MHz, to the land-mobile
service.  Of course, consideration would have to be given to ensure that this
would not threaten our national security.  But, if surplus military spectrum
exists, I think it should be made available to the land-mobile service.  This
would preserve the 220-222 MHz band for use by amateur radio operators.

The FCC is expected to issue final regulations within two months.  In the
meantime, please feel free to keep in touch.

Sincerely,
Ron Wyden

:::::: Software Productivity Technologies    ---    Smalltalk   Project ::::::
:::::: Jan Steinman N7JDB       Box 500, MS 50-470      (w)503/627-5881 ::::::
:::::: [e-mail]      Beaverton, OR 97077     (h)503/657-7703 ::::::


24-Mar-88 12:01:27-EST,2918;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 Mar 88 12:01-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 24 Mar 88 09:43:57 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 24 Mar 88 09:43:19 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Thu, 24 Mar 88 09:43:30 EST
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET (C0033003) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 4533; Thu, 24 Mar 88 09:08:13 EST
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 88 12:37:32 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via MAILER@MITVMA
Subject: re: 4-DPSK-modems & THE NET

This is the answer to several questions about our NORD><LINK-modems
and NET-firmware-source I received via e-mail.
I've tried to answer direct to some OMs via crossnet-mail but
this failed to some destinations.

About the modems:
There are about 50 DPSK-modemboards distributet in Europe and a few
boards are in Vancouver B.C. Documentation is translated to an english
version in Vancouver too. I don't know about the actual status there.
If you'd like to ask for the status of the translation you should
contact Richard, ve7cvs in Vancouver B.C. ( USERRICH at SFU.BITNET)

A small amount of 0-release boards are still available from me.
There are 5  patches neccessary on it, but these are well documented
so it should be no problem to be done by a real electronic freak.
I had the extraordinary chance to get the boards produced under special
conditions so I can offer those boards for 10 DM per piece ( about
7 US$, double sided epoxy, plated trough, tinned ) plus postage and
cost of fotocopies. I only have handdrawn circuit diagramms, so there
is no chance to xfer it via e-mail.
I'm afraid airmail-postage will be more expensive than the boards.

But remember (if someone is interested): your transceiver has to
produce 'clean' FM with no significant AF-restrictions below 3.5 kHz
for 4800 bps ( or 7kHz for 9600 bps) while the 3dB bandwidth of the
emitted spectrum is still only 1800 Hz at 4800 bps.
Some of our TRXs worked without any modifications,
others had to be fixed befor use.

Can someone tell me, where I can get some detailed infos about the
WA4DSY 56 kbps modems ?

Now for the NET-firmware:
We have THE NET running here and it works stabil since a few weeks.
But there are some historical relicts in the source which should
be cleared b4 release. Binary versions should be available short
after easter holidays, source about july.

I'll post some info when THE NET is available.

73s de Detlef

Detlef J.Schmidt   DK4EG                      NORD><LINK
C0033003 at DBSTU1.BITNET               The Northern Germany
Computing center                   packet radio developement group
University of Brunswick
25-Mar-88 05:16:50-EST,880;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 88 05:16-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 25 Mar 88 03:55:36 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 25 Mar 88 03:55:22 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Fri, 25 Mar 88 03:56:40 EST
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET (C0033003) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 2835; Fri, 25 Mar 88 03:56:28 EST
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 88 09:30:56 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via MAILER@MITVMA
Subject: enq

What happend to the mailer? Last week it worked, this week my mailes
are returned back to me ( or is it not ? ).

Detlef DK4EG
C0033003 @ dbstu1.bitnet
25-Mar-88 06:54:36-EST,784;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 88 06:54-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 25 Mar 88 05:59:52 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 25 Mar 88 05:59:39 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Fri, 25 Mar 88 06:00:57 EST
Received: from ICNUCEVM.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 2984; Fri, 25 Mar 88 06:00:35 EST
Received: by ICNUCEVM (Mailer X1.25) id 1257; Fri, 25 Mar 88 12:00:27 SET
Date:         Fri, 25 Mar 88 11:59 SET
From: Massimo Cartoni <[e-mail]>
Subject:      help
To: <[e-mail]>

help
25-Mar-88 08:36:07-EST,5351;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 25 Mar 88 08:36-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 25 Mar 88 06:55:31 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 25 Mar 88 06:55:19 EST
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Fri, 25 Mar 88 06:56:33 EST
Received: from UKACRL.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 3308; Fri, 25 Mar 88 06:56:25 EST
Received: from RL.IB by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 5112; Fri,
 25 Mar 88 11:44:36 GMT
Via:        UK.AC.RL.EARN; Fri, 25 Mar 88 11:44:34 GMT
Received:
Via:        UK.AC.UMRCC.CMS; 25 MAR 88 11:44:20 GMT
Message-Id: <25 Mar 88 11:42:19 GMT [e-mail]>
Date:       Fri, 25 Mar 88 11:42:19 GMT
From: "John Heaton (G1YYH@G4BVE) 0204-654564" <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:    UK Packet BBS's



      List of known UK Packet BBS's 14/02/88
      --------------------------------------

Call    Sysop   QTH           M'head Fwd  Type  Comments
------ ------- ------------- ------ --- ------ --------------------
GB3CD   John    Crewe         IO83TF Yes WA7MBL Sysop G4BVE
GB3HQ-2 David   Herts         IO91VQ Yes WA7MBL Sysop G3OUF & G3EFP
GB3KP   Ted     Surrey        IO91UK Yes W0RLI  Sysop G8LWY
GB3RA-2 John    Reading       IO91LI Yes WA7MBL Sysop G1AWD
GB3RY   Paul                         Yes        Sysop G4MQS
GB3UP-2 Jeff    Guildford     IO91QF Yes WA7MBL Sysop G0K8KA
EI5CI   Joe     Dublin               Yes WA7MBL Fwd via G1DIL
EI4AHP  Ted     Belfast              Yes WA7MBL Fwd via EI5CI
EI4WRI  Ivor    Randalstown   IO64TR YES WA7MBL
GM0FRI  Scott   Oban                 No  W0RLI
GM1VBE  Stuart  Airdrie       IO75XT Yes PBeeBs
GM1ZQM          Airdrie              No  PBeeBs
GM3SAM  Sim     Glasgow              No
GM4HCO  Vic     Glasgow              No  GM4HCO
GM8SNE  Phil    Dalgetty Bay         Yes WA7MBL
GU4YMV  Chris   Guernsey      IN89RL Yes WA7MBL
G0BSX-2 Pieter  Plymouth      IO70WJ Yes WA7MBL
G0DQW-2 Chris   Shrewsbury    IO82PR Yes WA7MBL Fwd via DIL & BVE
G0DQW-7 Chris   Shrewsbury    IO82PR Yes WA7MBL 70cms.
G1APC   Peter   Newbury              Yes WA7MBL Fwd via GB3RA & G8IMB
G1BYS           Bromley
G1DIL-2 Andy    Wolverhampton IO82VO Yes WA7MBL G'way to Ireland
G1HZI   Ian     Hexham               Yes WA7MBL 144.650/432.675
G1JAR   Lloyd   Portsmouth                      144.675
G1KVD-2 Mike    Taunton              Yes WA7MBL
G1NNB-2 George  Witham,Essex         Yes WA7MBL & G1NNB-7 on 432.675
G1OCN   David   Portland             Yes WA7MBL
G1PVR-2 Richard Kidlington           Yes WA7MBL Near Oxford
G1SLS   Ken     London (E)               KAM PBBS
G1SJU-2 Steve   London (E)               PBeeBs Manual Fwd only
G1UWS-2 Peter   SE London            Yes WA7MBL
G3LDI-2 Roger   Norwich       JO02ON Yes W0RLI  Also 3.5/14/21 MHz
G3OUF   David   Hertfordshire        Yes PBeeBs 50.650 Eve/W-ends
G3OZM   Peter   Doncaster                G3OZM  HF Amtor
G3PLX   Peter   Gosport                  G3PLX  HF Amtor/AX Gateway
G3VOM-2 Dave    Manchester    IO83TM Yes WA7MBL
G3WGV   John    Wokingham            No  G3WGV
G4AEU           Southampton          No  G4AEU  File server only
G4CLI-2 Dave    Wakefield     IO93FP Yes WA7MBL
G4IDX-2 Dave    Ashford, Kent        Yes WA7MBL
G4IDX-7 Dave    Ashford, Kent        Yes WA7MBL 432.675 Beaming NW
G4JBX-2 Adrian  Tamworth             Yes WA7MBL MAXPAK BBS
G4JGJ-1 Charles Brighton             No  WA7MBL
G4KCM   Clive   Southampton          Yes W0RLI
G4KLX-2 Jon     Wirksworth Derbys    Yes WA7MBL
G4KUQ   Mark    Bristol              Yes WA7MBL
G4LBJ   Len     Liverpool            No  G4LBJ
G4MTP-2 John    Daventry             Yes WA7MBL Via DV2 NODE
G4MTP-7 John    Daventry             Yes WA7MBL Via DV7 NODE
G4NQC           Catford
G4PHL-2 Phil    Sheffield            Yes WA7MBL
G4SPV-2 Andy    Stevenage     IO91VW Yes WA7MBL
G4TUP-2 David   Southport     IO83MP Y/N KAM    Fwd into but not out.
G4WSQ   John    Christchurch         Yes WA7MBL 144.650 + 432.675
G4XUR           Taunton                         Part time
G4YJA           Horsham Sussex           WA7MBL Part time
G4ZFL           Chelmsford               DIGICOM
G6KQZ   Brian   Basingstoke          Yes WA7MBL Part time
G6OQJ           Chelmsford               DIGICOM
G8AMD-2 Hayden  NE Birmingham IO92BN Yes G8AMD
G8EIA-2 Richard Middlesbrough IO94JN Yes WA7MBL
G8HBE   Bob     Amersham             Yes G8HBE
G8IMB-2 Martin  Bristol              Yes WA7MBL
G8IUD           Colchester               DIGICOM
G8POT           Sheffield            No  G4PHL
G8UFQ   Graham  Grimsby              Yes WA7MBL

Could anyone on the net provide a similar list for other countries, this
was downloaded from G4BVE.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
John Heaton                      | G1YYH @ G4BVE | Amateur Packet
NRS Central Administrator        | ________ Bitnet Below _____________
UMRCC Network Unit (Room G45)    | zzapsjc % cms.umrcc.ac.uk @ ukacrl
061-275 6011                     | nrs_admin % nrs.ac.uk @ ukacrl
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
26-Mar-88 14:52:36-EST,11137;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 Mar 88 14:52-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 26 Mar 88 13:35:08 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 26 Mar 88 13:34:51 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA25864; Sat, 26 Mar 88 10:35:40 PST
Return-Path: <ames!necntc!rayssd!raybed2![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 25 Mar 88 18:04:37 GMT
From: ames!necntc!rayssd!raybed2![e-mail] (EUGENE BALINSKI)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: More Ammo for the 220 fight!
Keywords: Reply Comments of the Dec Amateur Radio Club


                  Before the
          FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
            Washington, DC  20554

In the Matter of                       )
                       )   General Docket No. 87-14
Amendment of Part 2 of the             )
Commission's Rules Regarding           )
Allocation of the 216-225 MHz          )
Band                                   )

To:  The Commission

              Reply Comments of
            DEC AMATEUR RADIO CLUB
        Submitted by Fred R. Goldstein, Vice President

     Pursuant to Section 1.415 of the Commission's Rules, 47CFR ^g
1.415, on behalf of the DEC Amateur Radio Club I hereby submit Reply
Comments in response to Comments filed by United Parcel Service of
America, Inc.  The DEC Amateur Radio Club is a group of radio amateurs
employed by Digital Equipment Corporation.  (The comments below are
comments only of the individuals who are members of the club, and
should not be construed as representing the opinions of Digital
Equipment Corporation.)  Currently the club has approximately 30 full
members in the Eastern Massachusetts and Southern New Hampshire area,
plus about 150 corresponding members throughout the United States,
most of whom hold Extra or Advanced class licenses.

     Late-filed comments by United Parcel Service are fundamentally
flawed in their inability to distinguish between voice and data
transmission and the spectrum needs for each.  Although most of UPS'
comments are devoted to expounding the alleged benefits of new
"narrowband" technology, employing 5 kHz channelization,
UPS Comments, p.8, "The adoption of narrowband technology by the
marketplace will permit the 220-222 MHz band to employ 5 KHz
channelization, giving it four to five times as many channels
within the same spectrum band as current FM channelization."
F, these
remarks are only applicable to voice technology.

     Most present-day land mobile operation utilizes narrowband FM
voice transmission (16F3 emission).  Narrowband FM bandwidth is
typically computed as the sum of twice the nominal deviation frequency
and twice the maximum audio frequency.  Given 5 kHz deviation and
3 kHz audio, a 16 kHz bandwidth is required.  So-called narrowband
radio (ACSSB) utilizes single-sideband transmission with a vestigial
pilot carrier, with a net bandwidth equal to the audio bandwidth (3-4
kHz).  In both cases, these bandwidths are based upon that required to
transmit intelligible human voice.

     UPS, however, appears to be primarily concerned with deploying a
data service.  On page 4 of its Comments, UPS states,

     The proposed private land mobile data network will allow UPS to
     increase the quality of its service to the public...

     Second, UPS will be able to have fully up-to-the-minute
     information on the delivery status of customer packages through
     use of a terminal aboard each delivery vehicle...

The technical characteristics of data transmission by radio, however,
are entirely unlike those of voice transmission, and the required
spectrum bandwidth is substantially different.  UPS fails to show that
they cannot make use of existing spectrum for this purpose; indeed,
their principal competitor, Federal Express, operates just such a
mobile data system using frequencies already allocated for that
purpose.

     Although voice has a well-understood effective bandwidth of
3 kHz, the amount of bandwidth required for data transmission is a
function of the quantity of data to be transmitted and the amount of
time available for such transmission.  Unlike voice, however, multiple
data terminals are capable of sharing a single channel by use of
various multiplexing techniques.  Thus there are two separate data
rates that must be considered, the "burst" rate at which a transmitter
operates, and the "throughput" rate averaged over time.

     Given both a throughput and a burst rate, one can then select an
appropriate modulation technique.  Several well-known techniques are
available for transmitting digital information by radio.  In terms of
spectrum efficiency, some are clearly superior to others.

     One particularly crude technique, widely used by radio amateurs
in the 144 MHz band, is to utilize audio frequency shift keying over
an FM carrier.  Such systems typically provide 1200 bps burst data
rate while using 15 kHz radio bandwidth.  This technique is primarily
used because existing voice radio equipment can be recycled by the
addition of a simple AFSK modem circuit.  A far more efficient use of
bandwidth can be obtained at fairly low cost by utilizing simple
Frequency Shift Keying.  Using the optimal frequency shift (1/2 the
bit rate, known as Minimum Shift Keying, MSK), the required radio
bandwidth is approximately 1 Hz per bps.  Such a figure (1 bps/Hz) can
be taken as a bare minimum of efficiency for any purpose-built radio,
and utilizes conventional FM radio circuitry.  Commercially-available
radio implementing this technique have recently become available for
amateur radio operation in the 220-222 MHz band.

     Commercial radio systems used by telephone common carriers
achieve far higher bandwidths.  By using such techniques as quadrature
partial response signaling and 16-level phase shift keying, data can
be transmitted at approximately 3 bps per Hz.  Such modulation schemes
are, however, more costly to implement at the present time.  Within a
few years, however, the falling cost of digital signal processing
technology may make them cost-effective for land mobile radio service.
Telephone line modems using similar techniques are currently sold in
the $1500-3000 range.

     One cannot simply apply telephone modem technology to a radio
transmission system designed for voice.  High-efficiency modems are
dependent upon the phase relationships within the transmitted
waveform.  This information, while preserved by a carrier-based radio,
is lost when an audio modem is fed into a single-sideband radio.
While modems over FM radio systems are inefficient of bandwidth,
all but the crudest, slowest (FSK) modems simply won't work over SSB
("narrowband") voice radios.

     Amplitude Compandored Single Sideband is particularly
inappropriate for data transmission.  Its compression and expansion
effects will not help data integrity and will make packet
synchronization harder than other methods which utilize the same
bandwidth.  Its use of a "pilot tone" further complicates data
transmission and reception.

     Given UHF spectrum with 20 kHz minimum channelization, it is
perfectly reasonable to expect digital radios to operate with a burst
data rate of at least 20 kbps, and possibly much higher.  A narrowband
voice channel, however, would be hard-pressed to carry more than about
1200 bps, based upon AFSK technology (which does not require the phase
information missing in SSB).  UPS therefore seems to be proposing a
system that is less than one-fourth as efficient as FM (MSK) digital
radio, yet at far greater cost and lower reliability.  Indeed, it is
likely that for the cost of the propose ACSSB system, digital radios
could be built with a bandwidth efficiency of at least 2 bps/Hz.

     Given the burst nature of data transmission, a number of mobile
units can easily share a single channel.  Indeed, amateur packet
operators typically have several separate connections established at
any one time over a single channel.  Evaluating the likely data
requirements of a mobile data terminal, even using a simple MSK radio,
reveals a rather small requirement for spectrum bandwidth.

     UPS has failed to state the quantity of data that will be
transmitted using the proposed service.  While UPS has not
characterized the size of individual data packets, it appears unlikely
that any given message will require more than 100 octets (800 bits) of
data to be transmitted in order to report the status of a parcel.  If
a single delivery vehicle needed to report on the status of an average
of one parcel per minute, then its actual data throughput requirement
would be no more than 800 bits/minute, or 13.3 bits per second.
Applying a 35% overhead for error detection and correction bits
results in 18 bits per second per truck.

     The least efficient of the widely known techniques for packetized
data channel contention is known as Aloha.  This presumes that
individual tranmitters do not wait until the channel is clear before
transmitting, and retransmit at intervals until an acknowledgement is
received.  This results in a maximum channel utilization of 17%.
Carrier-sense multiple access, which results from a master-slave
relationship (i.e., mobiles communicate only through a full-duplex
repeater), doubles this.  Amateur packet networks utilizing single
frequency "digipeaters" typically achieve results in between these two
numbers, or about 25% efficiency.  Mobile data terminals would appear
to have similar characteristics if a single frequency is used.

     Thus, given a single 20 kHz channel using MSK techniques and a
net per-vehicle throughput requirement of one parcel per minute (18
bits per second), and a single-frequency packet radio system, over 250
delivery vehicles can share a single FM channel in a single
metropolitan area.  MSK transmission, along with other members of the
FM family of emissions, has a "capture effect" as well and is thus
amenable to cellular techniques for frequency reutilization.  ACSSB is
not.

     Given these facts, it thus appears clear that UPS' need is not
effectively fulfilled by providing new narrowband voice spectrum in
the 220-222 MHz space.  In all likelihood, a total bandwidth of less
than 100 kHz can meet all of their fleet requirements, at less cost,
simply by applying the appropriate digital technology to other
allocated frequencies.  This does not require the reallocation of
frequencies presently being utilized by the Amateur Radio Service.

Respectfully Submitted,



DEC Amateur Radio Club (WA1VBE)
by
Fred R. Goldstein (K1IO)
Digital Equipment Corporation
550 King St.  LKG2-1/Y4
Littleton MA  01460


27-Mar-88 17:26:03-EST,1681;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 Mar 88 17:26-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 27 Mar 88 16:04:51 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 27 Mar 88 16:04:33 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA17385; Sun, 27 Mar 88 13:05:15 PST
Return-Path: <hou2d![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Mar 88 07:42:58 GMT
From: hou2d![e-mail] (G.BEATTIE)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: ROSE Software
Keywords: OSI RATS Open Systems Environment

 The Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society has several
pieces of software which we are willing to place here in both
source and executable form.  We have a few questions for the
crew before we proceed.

1. We would only send it via a single distribution/newsgroup,
   which one ?

2. Since binary is not acceptable what form is most welcome ?
   (we have been thinking of the PC BTOA programme if it is
    popular.  Should we use a UNIX utility ?)

3. We will also post the DOCUMENTATION...should we pack it up
   or since it isn't too large just post each file ?

4. Is there any demand for the source ?


Comments anyone ?

By the way, the mailing has started to flow out the door...
We would like to post the stuff here to help distribute the
software more rapidly.


Thanks,
        J. Gordon Beattie, Jr.
E-mail:    ihnp4!hou2d!n2dsy (Unix)  [e-mail]
Telephone: [phone] (Office)     201-615-4669 (Office FAX)
Telephone: [phone] (Home)


28-Mar-88 07:45:32-EST,825;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 88 07:45-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 28 Mar 88 06:30:02 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 28 Mar 88 06:29:38 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU ; Mon, 28 Mar 88 06:30:50 EST
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 88 12:28:17 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Return-Receipt-To: [e-mail]
Subject: xfer trouble

What happend to the mailer? Last week it worked, this week my mailes
are returned back to me or get lost ( or is it not ? ).

Detlef DK4EG
C0033003 @ dbstu1.bitnet
28-Mar-88 11:08:57-EST,3012;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 88 11:08-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 28 Mar 88 09:58:28 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 28 Mar 88 09:57:40 EST
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU ; Mon, 28 Mar 88 09:56:14 EST
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 88 15:37:15 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Return-Receipt-To: [e-mail]
Subject: 4-DPSK-modems & THE NET

This is the answer to several questions about our NORD><LINK-modems
and NET-firmware-source I received via e-mail.
I've tried to answer direct to some OMs via crossnet-mail but
this failed to some destinations.

About the modems:
There are about 50 DPSK-modemboards distributed in Europe and Canada.
Documentation is translated to an english version in Vancouver B.C.,
but I don't know about the actual status there.
If you'd like to ask for the status of the translation you should
contact Richard, ve7cvs in Vancouver B.C. ( USERRICH at SFU.BITNET)

A small amount of 0-release boards are still available from me
while all newest release boards are all given.
There are 5  patches neccessary on 0-release-boards, but these are
well documented so it should be no problem to be done by a real
electronic freak.
I had the extraordinary chance to get the boards produced under special
conditions so I can offer those boards for 10 DM per piece ( about
7 US$, double sided epoxy, plated trough, tinned ) plus postage and
cost of fotocopies. I only have handdrawn circuit diagramms, so there
is no chance to xfer it via e-mail.
I'm afraid airmail-postage will be more expensive than the boards.

But remember (if someone is interested): your transceiver has to
produce 'clean' FM with no significant AF-restrictions below 3.5 kHz
for 4800 bps ( or 7kHz for 9600 bps) while the 3dB bandwidth of the
emitted spectrum is still only 1800 Hz at 4800 bps.
Some of our TRXs worked without any modifications,
others had to be fixed befor use ( similar problem for AMTOR TRXs ).

Now for the NET-firmware:
We have THE NET running here and it works stabil since a few months.
But there are some historical relicts in the source which should
be cleared b4 release. Binary versions should be available short
after easter holidays, source about july.
Source will be available on IBM-PC-floppies 360KB. It's too large
to post it via e-mail.

I'll post some info when THE NET is available.

p.s.:can someone tell me, where I can get some detailed infos about the
WA4DSY 56 kbps modems ?


73s de Detlef

Detlef J.Schmidt   DK4EG                      NORD><LINK
C0033003 at DBSTU1.BITNET               The Northern Germany
Computing center                   packet radio developement group
University of Brunswick
28-Mar-88 16:21:35-EST,9423;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 28 Mar 88 16:21-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 28 Mar 88 14:16:01 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 28 Mar 88 14:15:29 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA16447; Mon, 28 Mar 88 11:16:14 PST
Return-Path: <ucsd!telesoft![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Mar 88 04:54:43 GMT
From: ucsd!telesoft![e-mail] (Bruce Bergman @spot)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: RFI: Packet work with H&W, Red Cross, Disasters
Keywords: packet, DWI, H&W, Red Cross, CDF, Disaster

################################################################################
This article is a Request For Information regarding the use of Packet Radio
in Disasters.  Information can be about both planned usage and actual usage,
past or present.

Specifically, I'm interested in use of packet in Health and Welfare Traffic,
Disaster Welfare Inquiry, any work with the Red Cross or California Department
of Forestries (or similar organization), Mass Care Shelter Management, or any
other usage of packet that you feel is close enough to my request.

If you have NO input regarding this, please feel free to continue to the next
article.  Any input at all will be greatly appreciated, however.
################################################################################
(Ed. note: all unusual terms are outlined at the end of the article...)


Overview
--------

My call is N7HAW and I'm a past ARES Emergency Coordinator for San Diego
county.  I am currently involved with the San Diego/Imperial Counties Chapter
of the Red Cross at the local level as a DAT Team Leader and Mass Care Task
Force Chairperson.

A group of local folks are working hard to develop the best and most useful
packet DWI and H&W system in use today.  Most of our effort has been directed
by the work previously outlined by the Red Cross National DWI working group,
however many of our concepts and implementations have been derived from the
Amateur community's work with packet systems in Disasters.

We have reached the near completion of Phase One of our DWI plan and will
be testing the system near the end of April.  This test will be a local
drill in conjunction with the NDMS drill (a national drill) scheduled for
April 23rd.  The drill will take place on two consecutive days.  Four packet
stations will be involved.

After completion of Phase One (which ends with the drill), we will be doing
a Critical Design Review of our system.  In this review, I would like to have
the accumulated information of any and all activities related to this effort
to date.  To accomplish this, I need the help of those folks who already have
experience in these matters.

I have already collected a great deal of information regarding the use of
packet in Disasters, however I would prefer it if everyone considered that
I have NO information.  This way, it's unlikely that I'll miss anything that
you might feel sure that I "already have."

Once all the input has been collected, we can begin Phase Two of our plan
and implement the remaining parts of our system.  Phase One is the proverbial
"tip of the iceberg" and the remaining parts of our system are large.

For those of you who provide me with information, I'll be glad to summarize
our results at the completion of the CDR if you request it.  Ultimately, I
feel that we will be making a presentation at some National Institutes in
the later months of the summer, so you may want to wait until then, however.


Baseline
--------

Currently, our plan revolves around the development of a Mass Care Shelter
System: a package for an IBM (and clone) computer.  This package, written in
Modula-2, will be initially available only for IBM and clones.  Later work
in this realm shows the need for versions which run on Atari ST's.  Beyond
that, the choices have not yet been determined.

Some definitions.  Our package is known as the Mass Care Shelter System
(MCSS).  It primarily works with packet radio as it's transfer medium.
Keeping this in mind, any occurance of the term "network" can be construed
to mean a loosely defined packet radio network.  Our networks consist of
individual "sites."  Each site is comprised of a computer, a packet device,
and a radio.  The network is NOT a TCP/IP network.

A "remote node" is a site which will collect and forward information to
a different site, usually a server node.  A "server node" is a site which
will collect information from up to three remote nodes (currently).  A
server node has the ability to forward information to other server nodes
if the network heirarchy dictates an information overload.  The baseline
breakoff point for this predicted information overload is three nodes.

The intent of the MCSS package is to collect and forward (if needed) MCC
Shelter information.  Once the information is collected at a specified
site, a DWI activity MAY occur.  The program operates in several modes:

    1) As a self-contained site (encompassing any of the items below)
    2) As a remote node in a network
    3) As a server node in a network
    4) As a DWI inquiry center
    5) As a DWI inquiry server

Input to any of the modes can be from:

    1) The keyboard of the computer
    2) A "batch file" of information on the computer
    3) A remote node in a network to a server node
    4) A server node in a network to another server node
    5) A remote node via the phone lines to a server node
    6) A server node via the phone lines to a server node

The program "is aware" of a limited number of packet TNC devices right now,
but plans are being made to use a package which allows complete freedom
to select any popular TNC device when described in a fashion similar to
the Unix "/etc/termcap" method.

The program is intended to be self-contained, needing no further programs
to perform ANY of the functions.  It is intelligent in that it "knows"
what purpose it needs to perform given a scenario, and can be used by a
lay person (if needed).  It communicates with server nodes and remote
nodes by a handshaking and registration process.

The data stored by the system is dynamic, thus the number of person that
information can be kept about is limited only by available media space.
Current limits are:

    A remote site can control up to 500 registrants.
    A server site can control up to 13,000 registrants.
    A server node can listen to up to three remote nodes.
    A phone line transfer can occur only between two nodes.
    (The MAXIMUM remote nodes for each server is ALWAYS 26.)

Obviously, since information is kept dynamically, these values can vary.
They are intended as the baseline for Phase One.  As the technology of the
system changes, so will these baselines.

The program will be contained completely on one 360K disk (no problem),
and should be able to work under contraints of disk space only.  Thus,
if a SMALL shelter is opened, it is theoretically possible to run a complete
remote node off of a single floppy based system.

Memory size is undetermined as yet, however we believe 512K is the minimum
that should be used.  A ANSI-compatible driver must be used with the program.


What I need
-----------

I would like to collect all the information that I can get on the use of
packet radio in Disasters, Health and Welfare, Disaster Welfare Inquiry,
and such things.

This information does NOT have to be actual usage.  It can be your own
personal thoughts or ideas, those of proposed systems, even just a simple
brainstorm of ideas.  "ANY" and "AS MUCH" are the key phrases here.

Obviously, if you are currently working on a system which is close in
concept or design to our system, we'd like to hear as MUCH as possible
about that system.  Any useful ideas we can incorporate into our system
will make it that much better.

If you've participated in the use of packet in Disasters, I'd like to
hear about how you felt it worked.  It's weak points, it's strong points,
etc.  Personal ideas for improvement are encouraged.

If you have any questions for me, please don't hesitate to get in touch
with me.  I'll accept information either through email or by USMail.  If
you have telex capabilities, you can forward information to the San Diego/
Imperial Counties Chapter Headquarters, attention Greg Smith, Coordinator
of Disaster Services.  It will be forwarded to me.

Your help is greatly appreciated!

Bruce Bergman, N7HAW
--
Email : {ihnp4,allegra,nosc,uunet,ucbvax}...!ucsd!telesoft!bruceb
USMail: TeleSoft, Attn: Bruce Bergman
    5959 Cornerstone Court West
    San Diego, CA.  92121-9891
    [phone] x123
################################################################################
--
allegra!\                         TeleSoft, Inc.
ihnp4!   \   crash!--\            [phone] x123
nosc!     \           \
       >--ucsd!---->--telesoft!bruceb (Bruce Bergman N7HAW)
scgvaxd!  /           /
ucbvax!  /  log-hb!--/            5959 Cornerstone Court West
uunet!  /                         San Diego, CA.  92121-9891
Any opinions are my own.  Make Wildfire a Thing of the Past.


29-Mar-88 19:33:34-EST,1294;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 29 Mar 88 19:33-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 29 Mar 88 17:26:11 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 29 Mar 88 17:25:52 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA22114; Tue, 29 Mar 88 13:51:57 PST
Return-Path: <sun!pitstop!sundc!netxcom![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Mar 88 16:08:40 GMT
From: sun!pitstop!sundc!netxcom![e-mail] (Joe Trimarchi)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: DIGICOM64 (W2UP) Mailing address needed

While reading the ARRL's new book on packet radio, I noticed that there
is a public domain program for the C-64 that runs software HDLC.
Does anyone have any experience with this program or know how I can get
mail to W2UP,(Barry Kutner) to receive the program and docs, as I don't
have access to a call book?

The article in the ARRL book says that you can build the modem for about
$15. This would seem like a nice inexpensive way to get introduced to
packet for C-64 owners without shelling out the bucks for a PK232 or the like.

Please reply via mail. TNX, Joe (AA4YD)


29-Mar-88 19:36:07-EST,1326;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 29 Mar 88 19:36-EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 29 Mar 88 17:25:45 EST
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 29 Mar 88 17:25:27 EST
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA22037; Tue, 29 Mar 88 13:50:06 PST
Return-Path: <hplabs!hpcea!hpnmd!hpsrla![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Mar 88 16:59:00 GMT
From: hplabs!hpcea!hpnmd!hpsrla![e-mail] (Glenn Elmore)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: re: 4-DPSK-modems & THE NET
References: <[e-mail]>

C0033003 at DBSTU1.BITNET               The Northern Germany
Computing center                   packet radio developement group
University of Brunswick
----------

Detlef,  DK4EG
   Information about WA4DSYs 56K modem boards is available from:
             Dale Heatherington WA4DSY
             10503 Jones Bridge Rd.
             Alpharetta, GA.  30201
   I believe a new version of the boards has just been made and are
now generally available ( I just got two).
73

Glenn Elmore -N6GN-

N6GN @ N6IIU-1
[e-mail]