World of Ham Radio 1994 January/AMSOFT_1994.iso/packet/docs/pd198805.doc

Text File | 1993-12-31 | 99.6 KB | 2,321 lines

2-May-88 05:13:38-EDT,1508;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 2 May 88 05:13-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 2 May 88 04:17:41 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 2 May 88 04:17:25 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 5101; Mon, 02 May 88 04:19:28 EDT
Date: Mon, 02 May 88 10:13:56 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Return-Receipt-To: [e-mail]
Subject: mail to unknown node


>Date:         Mon, 02 May 88 16:44:32 JST
>From:         Takayuki Kushida <KUSHIDA@JPNTSCVM>
>Subject:      Request NORD><LINK TheNet from JAPAN.
>To:           DK4EG <c0033003@dbstu1>


>Would you send me the software of NORD><LINK. I'm interesting
>in your excellent software and examine it in Japan.
>I am on BITNET, therefore can receive both NETDATA and PUNCH
>format.
>If some LISTSERV for Japane is available, please let me know it.

>Many thanks,

>Tak (JG1SLY)

I have to apologize for this way of response.

Your node-ID is unknown to our mail-server here. Maybe it's new on the
net.
I have to know a path or at least your nearest neighbours on the net.
( there is an EXEC on bitnet. Type QPATH DBSTU1 , if it's available ).

73s Detlef ( DK4EG )
c0033003 @ dbstu1.bitnet
 2-May-88 12:47:01-EDT,872;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 2 May 88 12:46-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 2 May 88 10:45:51 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 2 May 88 10:45:38 EDT
Received: from Riesling.ms by ArpaGateway.ms ; 02 MAY 88 07:47:27 PDT
Sender: "Anthony_O._Cardenas.ESM1"@Xerox.COM
Date: 2 May 88 07:46:54 PDT (Monday)
Subject:  No more packet-radio please...
From: "Anthony_O._Cardenas.ESM1"@Xerox.COM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: "ANTHONY_O._CARDENAS.ESM1"@Xerox.COM
Reply-To: "Anthony_O._Cardenas.ESM1"@Xerox.COM
Message-Id: <880502-074727-2925@Xerox>

Please remove me from the  packet-radio  distribution list.

***PLEASE  NOTE!    I  WISH TO REMAIN ON THE HAMRADIO DL.***

Thank You.
Anthony O. Cardenas
WA6IGJ
 3-May-88 10:22:06-EDT,1654;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 May 88 10:22-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 3 May 88 09:24:43 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 3 May 88 09:24:30 EDT
Acknowledge-To:  Kelvin Hill <[e-mail]>
Date:  Tue, 3 May 88 09:21 EDT
From: Kelvin Hill <[e-mail]>
Subject:  PK-87 funny.
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>


All,
    I don't know if this will help anyone but I thought I would mention
it anyway. I have been running the tcp/ip software for a little while
now and occasionally discovered that the whole world had gone deaf to my
PK-87 tnc. I appeared to be sending ax25 frames according to the trace
dumps but no one would reply.
    I have since discovered a nasty tendency for the tl084 op-amp in the
output stage of the tnc to self oscilate at about 750khz. This seems to
be fairly random but I had noticed it more when the tnc was heavily
loaded as it often is when running FTP. When in this self oscilating
mode the afsk totally fails to leave the tnc but reception is not
impaired, hence the confusion.
    The solution was to replace the TL084 with another one of the same
type but I suspect that the configuration has an inbuilt tendency to
oscilate in the presence of high levels of rf.
    As I said, don't know if this info is any use out there in netland
but someone somewhere might benefit!

      73,
    Kelvin.  (G1EMM)

KHill at BCO-MULTICS.ARPA
 3-May-88 18:53:43-EDT,3411;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 3 May 88 18:53-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 3 May 88 17:26:15 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 3 May 88 17:25:49 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA28376; Tue, 3 May 88 14:27:40 PDT
From: uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow![e-mail]
Return-Path: <uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 May 88 16:43:17 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: KA9Q TCP/IP s/w in the Amateur Radio domain
Summary: need a better domain name
References: <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jem Taylor et al.)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gareth Howell) writes:
>AMPRNET UK is alive and kicking.  As the address allocation authority
>for the uk (under the auspices of RSGB) I have allocated approx. 150
>IP addresses so far.  AMPRNET is still fairly thin on the ground in
>some areas, but in others it is growing rapidly.  The uk is split into
>22 regions for addressing purposes and I think I have allocated at
>least 1 IP in 90% of regions.
>--
>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]
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    :-) I was not aware of the top-level domain 'AMPR'. Is it registered
with the Network Information Centre (NIC) in accordance with the appropriate
RFCs ?

Seriously, it is a MISTAKE to encode the network technology (ISO level 3)
in the name of a domain (ISO level 7 - Mail Application). I seriously
recommend that you organise a legitimate domain name inside the domain
naming scheme;

    [e-mail]

would be more in keeping with the domain name system, since all the domain
names you allocate are subdomains of the RSGB-administered subdomain of the
UK national domain, and Callsigns are unique inside that subdomain.

The allocation strategy you use for IP addresses (level 3) need not be
in any way linked to your allocation strategy for user interface (level 7)
names such as mailbox O/R names.

Of course, since Callsigns are globally unique, [e-mail] would give
you a unique name; if you understand why the .ARPA and .UUCP domains are to
eventually be phased out you will understand why this is a bad idea.

The British Standards Institute should be able to tell you who administers
the UK domain and therefore who can allocate you a subdomain of UK.

The reason for wanting you to allocate sensible domain names is to make it
possible in the future for messages to be gatewayed from AMPRnet to/from
other networks. This is the same rationale that says that you should allocate
IP addresses in a controlled way, to make interworking with other subnetworks
of the IP internetwork possible - even if it isn't actually done today.


-Jem Taylor.

--
ARPANet: [e-mail]  Mail: J.A.Taylor, Computing Science,
JANET:   [e-mail]  17 Lilybank Gardens, GB-GLASGOW G12 8QQ
UseNet:  mcvax!ukc!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!postmaster


 4-May-88 00:35:43-EDT,1396;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 00:35-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 3 May 88 23:47:48 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 3 May 88 23:47:35 EDT
Received: from huey.udel.edu by Louie.UDEL.EDU id aa24140; 3 May 88 23:38 EDT
Date:     Tue, 3 May 88 23:39:01 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: "Jem Taylor et al." <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  KA9Q TCP/IP s/w in the Amateur Radio domain
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>

Jem,

Please confirm that the BSI knows who administers the Internet domain
system for the UK. I'm sure you do know that this is not a Rainbow Book
and not an ISO enterprise. I would be pleasantly flabbergasted if the
BSI even admitted that the Internet existed, even if they had Suns
scattered all over the office. Try Peter Kirstein and his warriors
at University College London. Meanwhile, be advised my namecaller cannot
resolve either the top-level name AMPR nor RSGB.UK for that matter.
Remember, the rules would require that the RSGB establish and maintain
a domain name server for their corner of the universe. I would be in
even more awe if that managed to happen than to hear that the BSI knew
what an internet was.

Dave W3HCF ex GM5AWF
 4-May-88 09:42:27-EDT,1136;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 09:42-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 08:49:45 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 08:49:27 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Wed, 04 May 88 08:50:17 EDT
Received: from WVNVMS.BITNET (MU164742) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 7916; Wed, 04 May 88 08:50:14 EDT
Date: Wed, 4 May 88 08:50 EDT
From: Stop these messages to this account <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Domains
To: [e-mail]
X-Vms-To: IN%"[e-mail]"

Please stop these message going to MU16xxxx accounts.

                   Robert O. Johnson
                   Professor of Computer Science
                   Marshall University
                   Huntington, WV  25755
                   USA
                   [e-mail]
 4-May-88 11:52:07-EDT,1139;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 11:51-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 08:49:31 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 08:49:11 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Wed, 04 May 88 08:49:56 EDT
Received: from WVNVMS.BITNET (MU164742) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 7905; Wed, 04 May 88 08:49:47 EDT
Date: Wed, 4 May 88 08:49 EDT
From: Stop these messages to this account <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Networking
To: [e-mail]
X-Vms-To: IN%"[e-mail]"

Please stop these message going to MU16xxxx accounts.

                   Robert O. Johnson
                   Professor of Computer Science
                   Marshall University
                   Huntington, WV  25755
                   USA
                   [e-mail]
 4-May-88 13:10:12-EDT,1476;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 13:09-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 12:06:28 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 12:06:04 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA00239; Wed, 4 May 88 09:06:38 PDT
Return-Path: <somewhere!:@june.cs.washington.edu>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 4 May 88 06:30:54 GMT
From: :ucsd![e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: the Amateur Radio domain
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)

The domain applied for from the Darpa NIC is AMPR.ORG.  It is
international in scope, and there are no subdomains except at the
callsign level.  Typical addresses are therefore:

    wb6cyt.ampr.org
    pc.wb6kdt.ampr.org

Since it unnecessary to include common parts of enclosing domains,
people in the AMPR.ORG domain need only address each other by their
callsigns, just like hams do now.  For example, you might wish to telnet
to
    wb6cyt
or to
    pc.wb6kdt

Host UCSD.EDU is an authoritative nameserver for this domain reachable
>from the internet, although at last test, the root nameservers weren't
pointing at it yet.

    Brian Kantor    WB6CYT  UC San Diego   [e-mail]
    AMPR.ORG Domain Administrator


 4-May-88 14:47:02-EDT,2321;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 14:46-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 13:34:15 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 13:33:55 EDT
Received: from ROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by VALLECITO.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 228863; Wed 4-May-88 13:35:38 EDT
Date: Wed, 4 May 88 13:35 EDT
From: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: the Amateur Radio domain
To: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>

    Date: 4 May 88 06:30:54 GMT

    The domain applied for from the Darpa NIC is AMPR.ORG.  It is
    international in scope, and there are no subdomains except at the
    callsign level.  Typical addresses are therefore:

        wb6cyt.ampr.org
        pc.wb6kdt.ampr.org

    Since it unnecessary to include common parts of enclosing domains,
    people in the AMPR.ORG domain need only address each other by their
    callsigns, just like hams do now.  For example, you might wish to telnet
    to
        wb6cyt
    or to
        pc.wb6kdt

    Host UCSD.EDU is an authoritative nameserver for this domain reachable
    >from the internet, although at last test, the root nameservers weren't
    pointing at it yet.

        Brian Kantor        WB6CYT  UC San Diego   [e-mail]
        AMPR.ORG Domain Administrator


Can you explain more about what you mean by UCSD.EDU being a
nameserver?

I recall a discussion a while ago where it was clear that we didn't
want any packets from radio-land getting on the arpanet. The consensus
was that maybe when we had a fully interconnected network that we could
start talking to the arpanet.

There was some discussion also about how since AMPR is a class A
network, that we would HAVE to be fully connected in order to be
properly interfaced to the arpanet. I am still a bit confused about why
this is.

Could you please try and straighten me out on some of these confusing
issues? (BTW, I ordered the Doug Comer TCP/IP book, so I can be better
informed. In the meantime, I have read Tannenbaum's COMPUTER NETWORKS
book.)

Henry, N1EZP
 4-May-88 17:49:44-EDT,858;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 17:49-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 16:53:37 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 16:53:26 EDT
Received: by Louie.UDEL.EDU id ai03808; 4 May 88 16:06 EDT
Received: from [192.5.39.1] by Louie.UDEL.EDU id aa01674; 4 May 88 14:37 EDT
Date:     Wed, 4 May 88 14:35:01 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: Brian Kantor <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  the Amateur Radio domain
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>

Brian,

I get no response at all from 128.54.0.5 (ucsd.edu) with any protocol,
domain, ping or otherwise, from either the NSFNET Backbone or ARPANET
hosts. Where is the backup name server?

Dave
 4-May-88 18:17:59-EDT,1014;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 18:17-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 17:17:33 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 17:16:55 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Wed, 04 May 88 17:17:40 EDT
Received: from UNLVM.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 3901; Wed, 04 May 88 17:15:28 EDT
Received: by UNLVM (Mailer X1.25) id 3195; Wed, 04 May 88 16:14:42 CST
Date:         Wed, 04 May 88 16:10:53 CST
From: "Gregory W. Smith" <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Mass mailings about mass mailings RE: Stop!
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

I sent Professor Johnson a note about his 'newsletter' problem.  I will
let the net know what kind of results come back.
                Greg Smith, WD9GAY
 4-May-88 18:30:59-EDT,1321;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 4 May 88 18:30-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 17:38:30 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 4 May 88 17:37:52 EDT
Resent-Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 May 88 17:23:44 +0300
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject:   Eagle Boards.
Resent-From: [e-mail]
Resent-To: Info-Hams, [e-mail]
Resent-Date: Wed 4 May 1988 15:39-MDT

Could someone mail me the price and the address when we can buy an
EAGLE board (the one that can be operated with the KA9Q software).
TNX 4X6OJ.
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
| Ofer Lapid 4X6OJ               | AX.25: 4X6OJ @ 4X1GP                      |
| Internet:  [e-mail] | AMPR : [e-mail]  [44.138.40.04] |
| Bitnet  :  ofer@TAURUS         | Phone: [phone]                       |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
 5-May-88 10:27:52-EDT,1036;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 5 May 88 10:27-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 5 May 88 09:28:17 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 5 May 88 09:28:04 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU ; Thu, 05 May 88 09:28:56 EDT
Received: from UNLVM.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 7978; Thu, 05 May 88 09:28:52 EDT
Received: by UNLVM (Mailer X1.25) id 4837; Thu, 05 May 88 08:13:30 CST
Date:         Thu, 05 May 88 08:06:26 CST
From: "Gregory W. Smith" <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Stop! --- Resolved
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]

Professor Johnson and the student who was delegated to send out the
'STOP!' message have been properly informed about how to use LISTSERV
to remove a subscription request.
                Greg Smith, WD9GAY
 6-May-88 16:35:28-EDT,1613;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 May 88 16:35-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 6 May 88 14:53:39 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 6 May 88 14:52:03 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 0561; Fri, 06 May 88 14:53:25 EDT
Date: Fri, 06 May 88 14:17:40 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Subject: RFC: TheNet Rel 1.0

          NORD><LINK
The northern Germany packet-radio development group

Meanwhile our NETROM (*) compatable  TheNet Rel 1.0 is (said to be )
available at:

 SIMTEL20.ARPA  MISC.PACKET   ( BITNET-access via RPICICGE )
 COMPUSERVE
 K4NGC's landline BBS
 FINHUTC.BITNET PACKRAD       ( LISTSERV GET PACKRAD ...)

(* NETROM is a trademark of Software2000 )

You'll find a hexdump and a patchlist.
The usermanual addendum was posted here some weeks ago.

Feel free to redistribute and copy it as long as it is not for
commercial purposes.

You're invited to send your comments or bugreports to me or post it here.

73s de Detlef ( DK4EG )

Detlef J.Schmidt
Steinbrecher Str.22
D3300 Braunschweig
F.R.G.

C0033003 at dbstu1.bitnet
 [e-mail]
 [e-mail]")
 [e-mail]
 CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU![e-mail]
etc...
 6-May-88 23:39:47-EDT,1078;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 6 May 88 23:39-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 6 May 88 22:31:02 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 6 May 88 22:30:14 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA14861; Fri, 6 May 88 19:28:43 PDT
Date: Fri, 6 May 88 19:28:43 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Clifford Neuman)
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Request for maintainers

I have recently had less and less time to spend maintaing the internet
side of the packet radio mailing list.  As a result, requests have
occasionally taken several weeks to be answered.  As such, if there is
anyone out there who is interested in taking over that responsibility,
please let me know.  If you aren't sure whether you want to or not,
let me know anyway, and I can tell you what is involved.

73 de N1DMM/7.

 8-May-88 13:22:35-EDT,1548;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 8 May 88 13:22-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 8 May 88 12:44:44 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sun, 8 May 88 12:44:27 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA28412; Sun, 8 May 88 09:42:46 PDT
Return-Path: <hplabs!hpda!hp-sde!hpcea!hpnmd!hpsrla![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 3 May 88 15:32:36 GMT
From: hplabs!hpda!hp-sde!hpcea!hpnmd!hpsrla![e-mail] (Glenn Elmore)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TCP/IP available for Atari


                 TCP/IP on the Atari ST

   I have just received source and object disks from Walter, DG2KK, with
his port of the KA9Q and W9NK code. A number of you have responded to me
via e-mail that you are interested in getting a copy. To further this, I
have sent copies of the disks to Dan, W9NK. He will try to get them
(appropriately formatted or encoded) onto louie.ud1.edu.
   Although I have not fully tested the code since I don't yet have KISS updates
on my PK232, it appears to function correctly. If someone knows of a better
distribution technique and wants to volunteer to get it there, please contact
me. Many thanks to Walter for his effort and willingness to share with the
amateur ST/packet community here stateside.

73,
Glenn Elmore -N6GN-

N6GN @ N6IIU-1
[e-mail]


10-May-88 00:22:15-EDT,1349;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 10 May 88 00:22-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 May 88 23:23:13 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 9 May 88 23:22:47 EDT
Resent-Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, 2 May 1988  20:44-MDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Dave Horsfall)
From: [e-mail] (Dave Horsfall)
To: "Newsgroups: comp.sources.wanted" <[e-mail]>
Subject:   PC packet radio software
Resent-From: [e-mail]
Resent-To: [e-mail]
Resent-Date: Mon 9 May 1988 21:24-MDT

[ Yes - this probably should be in rec.ham-radio.packet, but we don't get
  it in VK-land.  Perhaps someone could re-post? ]

Anyway, a colleague has a 212-type modem on his XT-compatible, and would
like some software to run the PC as a software-only TNC.  Yes - he knows
about the HAPN board, but can't afford it since buying the PC!

Anyone got/heard of anything?  Nothing fancy, just AX.25 at 1200 bps will do.

--
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU), Alcatel-STC Australia, [e-mail]
[e-mail], ...munnari!stcns3.stc.OZ.AU!dave
14-May-88 01:06:56-EDT,5489;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 May 88 01:06-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 13 May 88 22:40:24 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 13 May 88 22:39:58 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 5822; Fri, 13 May 88 22:39:29 EDT
Date: Fri, 13 May 88 14:14:32 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Return-Receipt-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TheNet, further information

         NORD><LINK,
 the Northern Germany Packet Radio Development group

Some friendly US-OMs informed us about the following posted file.
Thanks to all who kept us informed.

Anyway I was realy surprised about this style of discussion.

>   08-May-88  19:09:01
>Sb: #NET/ROM Ripoff!
>Fm: Mike Busch [W6IXU] 76337,727
>To: All

>When NORD><LINK announced their NET/ROM look-alike called "THENET"
>a couple of months ago,  I remained publicly silent on the subject
>because I did not want  to risk making any false accusations of
>plagerism. However, a  few days  ago  we  received a copy of the hex
>object file for  THENET and  Ron Raikes  WA8DED (author of NET/ROM)
>spent a considerable time analyzing  its contents in detail.  As a
>result, I can no longer remain silent.

>THENET is THE NET/ROM.  The code is 99%+ byte-for-byte identical to
>NET/ROM 1.3...verbatim!

IT IS NOT ] TheNet is a complete rewrite of NET/ROM written by
DF2AU and DC4OX ( see older postings ).
Plus there is more:
new features are added,
 e.g. INFO-command with upload-message from remote,
      two additional hardwarecontroll-channels are added (for antenna-
      switch, powerswitch or whatever you like),
      fallback to default password after powerfail
      RESET-command changed
      fullduplex facility
      etc.
* * * * * So TheNet is a superset of NET/ROM. * * * * *

But it is functional compatable to NET/ROM, otherwise it could not play
together with the NET/ROM-neighbours.

It's impossible to add further features to a given binary without having
the source (which is written in C, not Z80-Assembler).
Just a view to the manual-addendum of TheNet (posted to the nets some
weeks ago) will make this clear to everyone who might be interested.

So don't believe in such flames. Take a look to the binary and decide
for yourself which version might be true.

>It  is apparent that NORD><LINK made no
>effort whatsoever to  conceal  the  origins  of THENET (by
>rearranging code or reordering procedures,  for example). For all
>intents and purposes, the Germans simply removed our copyright
>notice,  relocated a block of constants to the  front of the ROM,
>put their name  on it, and started distributing it.

It makes no sense to relocate a block of constants and leave all
references to these constants unchanged. It could never work if not the
whole source would be recompiled.
Again: take a look at it and decide for yourself. You'll find the
real answer.

>Folks,  let  me make myself perfectly clear.   This is unabashed
>theivery. THENET is a ripoff of NET/ROM plain and simple.
>Detlef J. Schmidt DK4EG and his German NORD><LINK cohorts are
>thieves. THENET is stolen property.

No comments about this style.
I'm acting as a postmaster and forward infos to both directions. My
personal interest in PR is hardware-development ( highspeed-modems
etc. see older postings).

>I  appeal  to  all radio amateurs of conscience to  shun  THENET. If
>you wouldn't accept a stolen Rolex on the street from a shady-looking
>character in a trench coat, then you shouldn't touch THENET with a
>ten-foot pole.

>If  you  are a BBS sysop,  please don't allow THENET to be posted
>to  your database.   If you do,  you are inadvertantly fencing stolen
>property. And please help get the word out by posting this message or
>a synopsis thereof. Your help is much appreciated.

If you are a BBS sysop you have to decide what's Amateur Radio. TheNet
was born in the idea of Ham Spirit, it should be available to everyone
who is interested. And it's FREE.

>I  am  told  that  these are the same bums that  ripped  off  TAPR's
>TNC-2 circuitry  and firmware in Europe.   They are ripping us off
>now,  and will continue  to steal the intellectual property of creative
>radio amateurs  in the future unless they are exposed and discredited.
>Allowing this sort of thing to continue can only hurt amateur radio.

Who told you ?
In fact there are german versions of TNC2s. The circuitry is different,
mostly CMOS-devices are used, all matches to an Eurosize board and the
bare boards are sold for about 20 $ (not aware about the exact price).
And I've heard about dutch versions called DTNC (Dutch TNC), which are
said to be totaly different, with complete rewritten firmware ( but
again still compatable).

>Thank you for listening]

I agree.

>Mike Busch W6IXU / Software 2000, Inc.

So it's up to everyone to make up your mind. Don't let others tell you
what you have to think about things.
Further information will be posted the next days.

(please excuse if I misspelled something or expressed something in a
strange way, it's my kind of english)

73s de Detlef (DK4EG)
14-May-88 05:45:47-EDT,3909;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 14 May 88 05:45-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 14 May 88 04:58:22 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 14 May 88 04:58:05 EDT
Received: by tecnet-clemson.arpa (5.52/SMI-3.2)
    id AA12382; Sat, 14 May 88 04:54:47 EDT
Date: Sat, 14 May 88 04:54:47 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Posted: May 14 04:49 EDT
Cc:
Subject: NORD><LINK vs Software 2000

>   08-May-88  19:09:01
>Sb: #NET/ROM Ripoff!
>Fm: Mike Busch [W6IXU] 76337,727
>To: All

>When NORD><LINK announced their NET/ROM look-alike called "THENET"
>a couple of months ago,  I remained publicly silent on the subject
>because I did not want  to risk making any false accusations of
>plagerism. However, a  few days  ago  we  received a copy of the hex
>object file for  THENET and  Ron Raikes  WA8DED (author of NET/ROM)
>spent a considerable time analyzing  its contents in detail.  As a
>result, I can no longer remain silent.

>THENET is THE NET/ROM.  The code is 99%+ byte-for-byte identical to
>NET/ROM 1.3...verbatim!

>Folks,  let  me make myself perfectly clear.   This is unabashed
>theivery. THENET is a ripoff of NET/ROM plain and simple.
>Detlef J. Schmidt DK4EG and his German NORD><LINK cohorts are
>thieves. THENET is stolen property.

>I  appeal  to  all radio amateurs of conscience to  shun  THENET. If
>you wouldn't accept a stolen Rolex on the street from a shady-looking
>character in a trench coat, then you shouldn't touch THENET with a
>ten-foot pole.

>I  am  told  that  these are the same bums that  ripped  off  TAPR's
>TNC-2 circuitry  and firmware in Europe.   They are ripping us off
>now,  and will continue  to steal the intellectual property of creative
>radio amateurs  in the future unless they are exposed and discredited.
>Allowing this sort of thing to continue can only hurt amateur radio.

>Mike Busch W6IXU / Software 2000, Inc.

I have to admire the author of the above. He has managed to convey a
feeling of filth and perversion without one single profanity! Truly
a rare gift, and I must say this gentleman is destined for a great
political career should he ever desire one.

There are certain anomalies in the text that are worth mentioning. First,
shady-looking characters in trench coats don't GIVE AWAY Rolex's, they
sell them. The NORD><LINK folks are giving their software away. Since
the Software 2000 folks won't publish THEIR code, we only have W6IXU's
opinion of the closeness of the two versions to go by, and for that you
have to discount NORD><LINK since they are stating that it is NOT an
identical copy.

True Amateurs don't try to make a profit off of their hobby at the cost
of progress. There is nothing wrong with making a profit mind you....
I just object to the inference that the NORD><LINK people are out to
RUIN amateur radio. The only thing they may ruin is the profit margin
of Software 2000, Inc. and I don't blame W6IXU for being upset at that.

By all means let our conscience be our guide with all things. Keep in
mind the proliferation of IBM clones. By all means stick with IBM and
NEVER purchase a clone of ANY sort. It may be too close of a copy.

PBBS operators: Hey guys, how much did YOU pay for the software you are
presently using?

I admire WA8DED for his contribution to Amateur Radio by transferring
LAN protocol to Packet Radio. I also wish him and Software 2000 a
continuing success. However I also think that there are a lot of savvy
hams out there that will be able to improve the NETROM concept even
further than WA8DED, and for the chance to do that I thank you NORD><LINK.

Mark Bitterlich
[e-mail]
16-May-88 11:38:43-EDT,2187;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 16 May 88 11:38-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 16 May 88 10:26:52 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 16 May 88 10:26:40 EDT
Received: from ROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM by VALLECITO.SCRC.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 232134; Mon 16-May-88 10:27:30 EDT
Date: Mon, 16 May 88 10:26 EDT
From: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Subject: New digital RF communication stuff seen in the rags
To: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>

Here is some stuff I ran across in the June, 88 "73 magazine" pertaining
to fast rf modems.

[1] There is an article on a "Pulsed Bi-Phase Digital Communications
System", by William Hotine, K6HH

The author has schematics for a phase modulated digital modem. (Actually
just schematics for the transmitter, and block diagrams for both the tx
and rx, they said the receiver schematics would be next issue). The
transmitter puts out rf at an I-F at 21 Mhz, and the reciever takes in
455 Khz I-F.

The article says you can recieve 19.2 Kilobaud in a 3 Khz receiver
bandwidth.  There is something a little strange about this whole thing.
I suspect that the tiny pahse deviation in the thing makes for very poor
performance under noisy channel conditions or something. Maybe someone
who understands modem theory could explain what story behind this thing
is?


[2] Hamtronics advertisment for Mo-96 FSK 9600 baud transmitters for 220
and 440 Mhz. The add says "low-cost 9600 baud packet-networking system.
Our new MO-96 MODEM and direct FSK transmitters and recievers for 220
and 440 Mhz interface directly with most TNC's. Fast diode switched PA's
output 15 or 50W."

There was no more technical info in the ad. It said call or write for
more details.

[3] New "PC*Packet Adapter" from DRSI Inc. A TNC card for IBM PC's.

[4] GLB Netlink 220 Mhz 19.2Kb digital txcvr. This has been advertised
prematurely before. Maybe they actually have it released by now.


Henry, N1EZP
16-May-88 18:05:27-EDT,1428;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 16 May 88 18:05-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 16 May 88 16:57:43 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 16 May 88 16:56:52 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA27379; Mon, 16 May 88 13:54:58 PDT
Return-Path: <bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 May 88 19:29:13 GMT
From: bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail] (Phil R. Karn)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: NORDLINK accused of being a NET/ROM ripoff
Slogan-Of-The-Week: "Just say NO to astrology!"

Mike Busch W6IXU of Software 2000, Inc (the company that markets
NET/ROM) has stated publicly on Compuserve that the recently released
"NORDLINK" code from Germany is nothing more than a slightly modified
ripoff of NET/ROM version 1.3.  He invites people to compare the two for
themselves by tracing the code pointed to by the jump instructions in
low memory.

Since the German group denies that this is so, and because I have not
yet had the opportunity to do the comparison myself, I am not taking any
personal position in this controversy at the present time. I simply wish
to inform people so they can follow up the issue themselves if they
wish.

Phil Karn, KA9Q


17-May-88 14:56:25-EDT,1175;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 May 88 14:56-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 17 May 88 13:02:04 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 17 May 88 13:01:49 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 3199; Tue, 17 May 88 13:00:32 EDT
Received: from CARLETON.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 3198; Tue, 17 May 88 13:00:31 EDT
Received: from DYUILL by CARLETON.BITNET on 17 May 88 12:42:19 EDT
X-Msg-Id: <17124131_CU00>
Date:     17 May 88 12:34:00 EDT
From: Doug Yuill <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Mac TCP/IP request

Greetings
      I am in need of Phil Karn's TCP/IP for the Mac. Could someone
please E-mail it to me in Binhex/StuffIt/PackIt format. I hope to have
a 56Kbps RF modem on the air in a month..
 Many thanks in advance.
             Doug Yuill, VE3OSL at Carleton U. Ottawa
             [e-mail]
17-May-88 14:56:26-EDT,1175;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 May 88 14:56-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 17 May 88 13:02:04 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 17 May 88 13:01:49 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 3199; Tue, 17 May 88 13:00:32 EDT
Received: from CARLETON.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 3198; Tue, 17 May 88 13:00:31 EDT
Received: from DYUILL by CARLETON.BITNET on 17 May 88 12:42:19 EDT
X-Msg-Id: <17124131_CU00>
Date:     17 May 88 12:34:00 EDT
From: Doug Yuill <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Mac TCP/IP request

Greetings
      I am in need of Phil Karn's TCP/IP for the Mac. Could someone
please E-mail it to me in Binhex/StuffIt/PackIt format. I hope to have
a 56Kbps RF modem on the air in a month..
 Many thanks in advance.
             Doug Yuill, VE3OSL at Carleton U. Ottawa
             [e-mail]
17-May-88 16:34:38-EDT,5552;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 17 May 88 16:34-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 17 May 88 15:06:32 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 17 May 88 15:06:06 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA06843; Tue, 17 May 88 12:06:20 PDT
From: tsdiag!ka2qhd![e-mail]
Return-Path: <tsdiag!ka2qhd![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 May 88 16:05:17 GMT
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Indiana Packet NTS Newsletter
Keywords: indiana,packet,nts,news



=============================================================================
April, 1988             Indiana Packet NTS Newsletter          Vol. 2 Issue 4
=============================================================================
       A monthly forum for ideas about packet traffic handling
             Jay Farlow, WB9MDS, Editor

MORE COMPUTER PROBLEMS AT IPNN OFFICE

    For the second month in a row, IPNN missed its 15th-of-the-month
deadline...because of serious computer problems.  Thank you for your
patience.

TYPO'S AREN'T PACKET'S ONLY ERRORS
    By Cal Sonderoth, W9ZTK
    PBBS SYSOP, Mendota, IL

[Ed. Note: An article in last month's issue encouraged packet traffic
handlers to use great care...to assure typographical errors don't change the
meaning of traffic they handle.  This month, W9ZTK points out another way
errors can creep into our "error free" mode.]

    Data transfer between two TNC's is indeed assured to be almost 100% error
free.  But there's another link involved...the asynchronous serial line
between the TNC and the terminal or computer.  Current PBBS software offers
no error checking on that link...and every character passes through it on its
way to the destination.
    Some operators argue that a hard-wired RS-232 line is perfect, but the
reality is something different.  I have often seen characters change in
messages, when the original file is correct.  I don't believe the now-common
practice of running multiple copies of a PBBS under DesqView has helped any,
either.
     It might be well to note that the folks that are experimenting with
TCP/IP are using the SLIP protocol for the asynchronous serial line between
their computers and the "TNC's" they use.  It gives them a measure of error
checking on the asynchronous data to and from the TNC.  I don't know if they
actively use the error checking available, but maybe they know something that
the rest of us might be ignoring.

TERRE HAUTE ADDS PBBS
    From: Dave Zeph, W9ZRX
    SYSOP, Indiana HF gateway

    The Wabash Valley Amateur Radio Association (WVARA) has put a new Packet
Bulletin Board System (PBBS) in operation in Terre Haute.  Its callsign is
W9UUU-2.  But Jim Osburn, WD9EYB is System Operator (SYSOP).  The PBBS stores
message on floppy disks only...so it can only take a limited number of
bulletins.  W9UUU-2 is within range of the W9UUU Net/ROM node at Terre Haute.
Your editor as yet has no information regarding traffic takers on the new
PBBS.

KEEP RADIOGRAM FORMAT ON PACKET
    By Keith Brandt, WD9GET @ KD9HT
    WD9GET.AMPR [44.48.0.9]

    I am opposed to sending formal NTS traffic in any but the standard ARRL
format.  This traffic is *NTS* traffic, not packet traffic.  We don't have a
special format for CW, another for phone, and yet a third for RTTY.  The only
difference is the procedures external to the message proper, such as the
"CFM" line on RTTY.
    Since we don't have a packet network that reaches everywhere we might
want to go, we can't be sure of the path or modes by which the traffic will
arrive at its destination.  Even if the traffic is going to a destination that
you *know* can be accessed via packet, it is still possible it will be
intercepted and passed over another mode.  We should therefore keep the
uniformity of the ARRL format in the system in the interest of giving the
traffic the best possible chance of arriving at its destination with minimal
operator intervention.

TRAFFIC FORWARDING BY ZIP CODE IN FLORIDA
    By Al Vesce, K4CY @ N4LDG

    NTS Leaders in Florida have officially adopted ZIP code forwarding for
radiograms sent via packet radio.  The format they specified is shown below,
in example form.  I'd appreciate any comments.

FOR TRAFFIC FROM FLORIDA, TO OTHER STATES:

ST 06082 @ NTSCT
QTC ENFIELD CT 203 745 1234
NR 127 R K4CY 5 BROOKSVILLE FL 0815 EST MAR 26
MR MRS JOHN SMITH
27 BROAD STREET
ENFIELD CT 06082
203 745 1234
BT
ARRIVED SAFELY X WEATHER GREAT
BT
FRANCES
AR
K4CY @ 34613
<CR><CTRL Z><CR>

FOR INTRA-FLORIDA TRAFFIC:

ST 33177
QTC MIAMI FL 305 233 1234
NR 128 R K4CY 5 BROOKSVILLE FL 0816 EST MAR 26
(etc., as above)

    Florida NTS officials recommend putting YOUR callsign, the "@" sign, and
YOUR ZIP code after the "AR" when you introduce traffic to the packet
network.

EDITOR INVITES COMMENTS, DUPLICATION

    WB9MDS sends this newsletter to every PBBS in Indiana, and to HamNet on
the CompuServe Information Service (C.I.S.).  Feel free to duplicate all or
any part...as long as you credit the source.  Send comments and questions to
WB9MDS @ N9BAC, or 72737,157 on C.I.S.
--
Return mail via:
UUCP: ucbvax!ihnp4!hotps!ka2qhd!wb2hbz   or   PACKET: wb2hbz@wb2hbz


18-May-88 12:17:50-EDT,2570;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 18 May 88 12:17-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 18 May 88 11:13:09 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 18 May 88 11:12:53 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 9340; Wed, 18 May 88 11:13:57 EDT
Date: Wed, 18 May 88 17:08:28 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Return-Receipt-To: [e-mail]
Subject: re: info about PR developments

at Thu, 12 May 88 19:29:13 GMT
  "Phil R. Karn" <bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail] writes:    >

>Subject:      NORDLINK accused of being a NET/ROM ripoff

>Mike Busch W6IXU of Software 2000, Inc (the company that markets
>NET/ROM) has stated publicly on Compuserve that the recently released
>"NORDLINK" code from Germany is nothing more than a slightly modified
>ripoff of NET/ROM version 1.3.

Phil,
maybe it would be better to be carefull when posting statements,
forwarding infos and answer questions as long as Software 2000 is
concerned.
I've tried it in a similar way and you may have seen the results:

>>   08-May-88  19:09:01
>>Sb: #NET/ROM Ripoff!
>>Fm: Mike Busch [W6IXU] 76337,727
>>To: All
....................(some text omitted)
>>Folks,  let  me make myself perfectly clear.   This is unabashed
>>theivery. THENET is a ripoff of NET/ROM plain and simple.
>>Detlef J. Schmidt DK4EG and his German NORD><LINK cohorts are
>>thieves. THENET is stolen property.
....................
>>Mike Busch W6IXU / Software 2000, Inc.

I was not personaly envolved in this project because I'm mostly
engaged in hardware development and don't like NETROM that much.
What I've done is forwarding the infos, answering to questions etc.
You see what happened.

But I know it took the programmers of TheNet an enormous effort of
about a year of continous work to REWRITE all the source ( in C ) and
include further features. I know it really exists as a source and
that's what I've posted as information for all out in netland.

>I simply wish to inform people so they can follow up the issue
>themselves if they wish.

Basicaly a good idea ( I guess ), but see above.
It seemes to me that some don't like others to be informed.
Or do we only have to inform about the 'right' things ?

73s de Detlef (DK4EG)
18-May-88 13:31:36-EDT,22245;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 18 May 88 13:31-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 18 May 88 10:38:05 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Wed, 18 May 88 10:37:03 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA18033; Wed, 18 May 88 07:38:51 PDT
Return-Path: <husc6!ukma!rayssd!raybed2![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 17 May 88 17:29:55 GMT
From: husc6!ukma!rayssd!raybed2![e-mail] (EUGENE BALINSKI)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: DOD reply to UPS 220 GRAB

Subject: d.o.d on 220 snatch by ups

    Here is the complete text of the DOD's filing in 87-14.  I have tried
    to keep the original spacing as much as possible.  There are a few
    differences in the vertical spacing, and I used dashes instead of
    underlining. There are probably a few typos too (some of them are in
    the original).


                Paul, K1XM



                  Before The
              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                Washington, D.C. 20554


  --------------------------------------
  In the Matter of                      )
                    )        General Docket No. 87-14
  Amendment of Part 2                   )
  of the Commission's Rules             )        RM-4829
  Regarding the Allocation of the       )        RM 4831
  216-225 MHz Band                      )        RM-4983
  --------------------------------------


                REPLY COMMENTS
                --------------

                  McKENZIE WHITAKER
                Trial Attorney

                   CARL WAYNE SMITH
             Assistant Regulatory Counsel

                Office Of The
         Chief Regulatory Counsel-Telecommunications
                Department of Defense
              Washington, DC  20305-2000

                     For

               The Secretary of Defense

                     And

                  In His Capacity As

                 The Executive Agent

                     For

              The National Communications System








  April 28, 1988


                  Before The
              FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                Washington, D.C. 20554


  --------------------------------------
  In the Matter of                      )
                    )        General Docket No. 87-14
  Amendment of Part 2                   )
  of the Commission's Rules             )        RM-4829
  Regarding the Allocation of the       )        RM 4831
  216-225 MHz Band                      )        RM-4983
  --------------------------------------


                REPLY COMMENTS
                  --------------

    The Secretary of Defense, through duly authorized counsel pursuant

  to Executive Order 12472, on behalf of the national security emergency

  preparedness (NSEP) interests of the Department of Defense (DOD), and in

  his capacity as Executive Agent for the National Communications System

  (NCS),* hereby files these REPLY COMMENTS in response to the Commission's

  invitation contained in its Order Accepting Late-Filed comments (the

  "Order")(DA 88-310) released March 11, 1988.

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

  *Executive Order No. 12472, "Assignment of National Security and Emergency
  Preparedness Telecommunications Functions," April 3, 1984 (49 Fed. Reg.
  13471 (1984), established the NCS, which consists of an administrative
  structure involving the Executive Agent, Committee of Principals, Manager,
  and the telecommunications assets of the 23 Federal organizations which
  are represented on the Committee of Principals.  Section 1(e) of Executive
  Order No. 12472 designates the Secretary of Defense as Executive Agent for
  the NCS.  By direction of the Executive Office of the President (EOP), the
  NCS member organizations (which are represented on the Committee of
  Principals) are:  Department of Agriculture, Central Intelligence Agency,
  Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Energy,
  Federal Emergency Management Agency, General Services Administration,
  Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Interior,
  Department of Justice, National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
  National Security Agency, National Telecommunications and Information
  Administration, Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Department of
  State, Department of Transportation, Department of Treasury, U.S.
  Information Agency, and the Veterans Administration.  The Nuclear
  Regulatory Commission has been invited by the EOP and has elected to serve
  as an NCS member organization.  The Federal Communications Commission,
  Federal Reserve System, and United States Postal Service also participate
  in the activities of the NCS.  The vast majority of the telecommunication
  assets of these 23 organizations are leased from commercial communication
  carriers.  These assets serve the needs of the Federal government as
  well as State and local governments.

                     -1-


    By its Order, the Commission accepted comments in this proceeding

  from the United Parcel Service of America, Inc. (UPS) and is allowing

  until march 31, 1988, for replies to UPS's comments.  In response to UPS's

  comments, the Secretary of Defense states as follows:


                      I

         THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) NOTES THEIR NEED TO
        CONTINUE USING THE 220-225 MHz BAND FOR RADIOLOCATION
        -----------------------------------------------------

    On March 1, 1988, the National Telecommunications and Information

  Administration (NTIA) notified the Commission of DoD's interest in

  maintaining radiolocation service in the 216-225 MHz band on a primary

  basis beyond 1990.* DoD is currently conducting several sensitive research

  efforts that show the imperative need to continue Radiolocation as a

  primary service in the 216-225 MHz band.  These efforts deal with

  ground-based detection and tracking of targets with small radar cross

  sections.  Four of these efforts are performance studies for an eventual

  Advanced Tactical Surveillance Radar in support of a recently validated

  Tactical Air Force requirement.  Frequency is included as a parameter in

  the performance trade-offs including, specifically, the spectrum down to

  200 MHz.

    Two other efforts are studies in the optimization of dual band

  radar.  The principal goal in these studies is to maximize detection and

  tracking of very low cross section targets against high levels of clutter

  and jamming.  The contractors conducting the studies are also studying

  frequencies down to 200 MHz.

    The efforts described above deal with many factors.  In addition to

  target cross section, there are some other very important considerations

  ----------------------------
  *Reference letter of Mr. William D. Gamble, Deputy Associate
  Administrator, Office of Spectrum Management, to Mr. Wm. R. Torsk, Deputy
  Chief, Spectrum Engineering Division, dtd 3/1/88

                     -2-


  impacting performance which will also affect the choice of frequency such

  as spatial resolution, scanning technology, component availability and

  reliability, cost, size, etc.

    DOD also recognizes the utilization of this spectrum by the Amateur

  Service on a secondary basis in the 220-225 MHz band and their public

  service contributions.  DOD has no objections to a continued working

  relationship in the future on the same basis which presently exists.


                      II
        THE NCS OPPOSES THE PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF THE
         220-222 MHz  BAND TO THE LAND MOBILE SERVICE
         --------------------------------------------

    The NCS has long recognized that amateur radio operators are a

  valuable NSEP telecommunications resource and therefore strongly opposes

  the proposal to require amateurs to vacate the 220-222 MHz bandwidth and

  differs with the UPS assertion that the same functions can be performed

  elsewhere.

    Encompassed in the NCS mission is the requirement for coordination

  and planning associated with the provision of national security emergency

  preparedness communications for the Federal Government under all

  circumstances, including crises or emergencies.  In support of this

  mandate, the NCS and the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) have

  implemented a Memorandum of Understanding to establish a broad framework

  of cooperation and a close working relationship with volunteer radio

  amateurs for national emergency communications functions.  In addition,

  State and local government Emergency Operations Centers, using equipment

  that is 50 percent Federal Government funded, communicate with radio

  amateurs.  Furthermore, it is intended through joint coordination and

  exercise of resources of NCS, ARRL, and State and local governments to

                     -3-


  enhance the nationwide posture of telecommunications readiness for any

  conceivable national emergency.  For this reason, programs have been

  developed for the organized use of amateur stations to supplement residual

  telecommunications in the event of any crisis or emergency.  For example,

  the amateur community participated in exercise NIGHT TANGO (NIGHT TANGO

  was an exercise conducted several times per year which utilized amateur

  radio operators and their facilities to pass national security emergency

  preparedness telecommunications traffic in simulated emergencies or

  disasters).  Furthermore, the NCS is currently preparing proposed changes

  to pertinent portions of the code of Federal Regulations which will enable

  amateurs to operate on the 3-30, 50-54, 144-148, and 220-225 MHz amateur

  bands during crises or emergencies in support of NSEP.

    There is another reason why the UPS proposal is seriously flawed.

  It fails to consider the potential interference with land mobile services

  that would be caused along the Canadian and Mexican borders if the 220-222

  MHz band segment were allocated to Land Mobile Radio in the US and

  remained allocated to the amateur radio service in Canada and Mexico.

  This is especially a potential problem since the vast majority of Canadian

  amateur radio operations take place within radio range of the northern

  border of the United States.  The fixed frequency and high occupancy

  nature of land mobile service operations would almost certainly both cause

  interference to Mexican and Canadian amateur radio operations and

  interference to any US use of 220-222 MHz by the land mobile service in

  the vicinity of our northern and southern borders.

                     -4-



                     III
    THE PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF 220-222 MHz TO THE LAND MOBILE SERVICE
      WILL SERIOUSLY HARM THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING OPERATIONS
      ----------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission's proposal stands to seriously harm the development

  of existing operations, including repeater operations on bands other than

  220-225 MHz and new emergency communications technology.

    Contrary to the UPS assertions, the Amateur Radio Service has a

  variety of critical operations at 220-222 MHz, including fixed, auxiliary

  and control links for repeaters, beacons, weak signal propagation,

  research and experimentation and, most recently, an increasing number of

  high-speed data links for amateur packet radio operation.  These links must

  be situated at 220-222 MHz due to the bandwidth and path lengths required,

  and the high occupancy of the 144-148 MHz band and the likely full

  utilization of 222-225 MHz by repeaters in major metropolitan areas in the

  future.  Also, the 220 MHz band has become a "common denominator"

  available to all amateurs for voice and digital communication, thereby

  greatly increasing the importance of the band for other types of

  communications (for example, high-speed intercity digital links) which are

  necessary for the development of radio networks.

    One of the most significant communications assets provided by

  amateur radio is their repeater resources.  These resources are very

  pervasive in the 144-148 (2 meters) MHz band, and are becoming more

  prevalent in the 220-225 (1 1/4 meters) MHz band.  Repeaters in the 220

  MHz bands are expected to fully occupy 222-225 MHz soon in many parts of

  the country.  This leaves 220-222 MHz for remaining services described

  below.

    It is our understanding that the 220-222 MHz band contains many

  control and auxiliary links for repeaters operating in other bands,

                     -5-


  principally the 144-148 MHz band.  Also, it is our understanding that high

  speed intercity data links have become operational in the 220-222 MHz

  band.  Loss of the 220-222 band could significantly affect 2 and 1 1/4

  meter repeater operations as well as high speed packet data.  The

  deprivation of these types of communications resources, which would be

  vital in times of an emergency or crisis, could significantly hamper the

  ability of the NCS to carry out its responsibilities in the area of

  national security emergency preparedness pursuant to the provisions of

  E.O. 12472.

    The proposed deletion off 220-222 MHz amateur allocation stands to

  displace fixed-link auxiliary stations and intercity, high speed data

  links which support the burgeoning amateur packet networks.  What is

  important to note in this connection is that, contrary to UPS's claims,

  these fixed stations and high-speed data links cannot simply be

  reaccommodated in other amateur bands or shifted up to the 222-225 MHz

  band segment.  The same is true for weak-signal experiments now ongoing at

  220-222 MHz.

    Section 97.86(d) of the Commission's rules limits auxiliary amateur

  stations to frequencies above 220.5 MHz, and exempts 431-433 and 435-438

  MHz from such use.  Thus, amateur bands at HF, 50-54 and 144-148 MHz are

  (appropriately) not available to reaccommodate the fixed-link auxiliary

  stations which would be displaced.  Even if these bands were available for

  auxiliary operation, they are unsuitable for a number of reasons.  First,

  HF frequencies and the 50-54 MHz band are subject to irregular skywave and

  ionospheric propagation, and would therefore subject the control and

  auxiliary links to a serious lack of reliability and potential

  interference.  The 144-148 MHz band is completely saturated through much

                     -6-


  of the United States and could not accommodate those displaced 220-222 MHz

  auxiliary stations.

    Indeed, only the amateur bands at 220 MHz and above offer sufficient

  regulatory flexibility and permit sufficient bandwidths to accommodate

  auxiliary operations, and especially the high-speed packet relays.

  Propagation at 220 MHz, however, differs substantially from that at

  420-450 MHz, and even more so relative to the 902-928 MHz and higher

  frequency bands.  The ability of higher-frequency bands to reaccommodate

  displaced 220-222 MHz stations is limited by the path-length needs of such

  displaced stations versus the propagation limitations of higher frequency

  bands.

    The next higher frequency amateur allocation above 220-225 MHz is at

  420-450 MHz.  That band is allocated in the United States on a primary

  basis to the Government Radiolocation Services and only secondarily to the

  Amateur Radio Service.  There are serious limitations on the availability

  of that band for amateur use generally, and it is, overall, unavailable as

  a source of spectrum to reaccommodate either weak-signal stations or

  auxiliary stations from 220-222 MHz.  In many parts of the country, the

  portions of the 420-450 MHz band available to amateurs are saturated and

  cannot accommodate any other stations.

    There is another reason why the amateur auxiliary-links cannot be

  used effectively at 420-450 MHz, but rather are uniquely suited to the

  220-222 MHz segment.  The 220-225 MHz band is unlike the 144 or 420 MHz

  bands in that it is not presently adjacent to a land mobile band.  As

  such, amateur auxiliary links at 220-222 MHz can be co-located

  geographically with land mobile stations on the same support structures.

  This is impossible with amateur 420-450 MHz stations, due to proximity

                     -7-


  interference from land mobile 450-470 MHz stations.  Thus, even if the

  spectrum were available at 420-450 MHz, the available locations for

  auxiliary transmit and receive sites are far more limited than they are

  for 220-222 MHz stations.  This is no small problem in states such as

  Colorado, and in cities such as Dallas, Los Angeles and San Francisco,

  where antenna farms are few and heavily loaded.

    Above 450 MHz, propagation limitations preclude use of amateur bands

  for auxiliary and control functions.  As a repeater licensee is

  responsible for what is transmitted by his repeater, it is important that

  he be able to shut down a repeater quickly and reliably.  This requires

  the flexibility of omni-directional antennas to assure control from a wide

  area around the repeater.  It is apparent that, for path lengths necessary

  for both packet links and repeater auxiliary stations, the 902-928 MHz

  band is no substitute for 220-222 MHz, nor are higher frequencies.

  Furthermore, the amateur 902-928 MHz allocation status is even more

  complex than that of the 420-450 MHz allocation.  The primary allocation

  is for Government Radiolocation.  Secondarily, Government Fixed and Mobile

  Services, including low power radio control operations, are permitted.

  Microwave ovens and other Industrial, Scientific and Medical (ISM) devices

  centered on 915 MHz, plus or minus 13 MHz, are permitted in the band.

  Amateurs, allocated the band on a secondary basis, must tolerate

  interference from such ISM devices, and from Automatic Vehicle Monitoring

  Systems, as well as government primary stations.  In addition, in large

  portions of Texas, Colorado, Wyoming and New Mexico, 902-928 MHz is not

  available at all.

                     -8-


                      IV
                  CONCLUSION
                  ----------

    DoD requests that the Commission note our need and intention to

  continue using the 216-225 MHz band for radiolocation and the potential

  conflict between operations and the land mobile service.  DoD is

  conducting sensitive research efforts in which the frequency spectrum down

  to 200 MHz is involved.  The principal goal of these efforts is to

  maximize the capability to detect and track targets with small radar cross

  sections.  Continuing the primary allocation to the radiolocation service

  for government operations in the 216-225 MHz band is crucial to the

  development of an Advanced Tactical Surveillance Radar and other

  radiolocation systems.

    The NCS opposes the proposed allocation of 220-222 MHz to the land

  mobile services.  The transfer of the 220-222 MHz band would seriously

  impede the ability to utilize significant communications assets during

  times of diminished communications capability.  If the amateur service is

  forced to vacate the 220-222 MHz band, the present level of capability

  will be substantially diminished and future services will be greatly

  limited.

    Due to the nature of amateur radio and radiolocation operations,

  both have successfully shared the 220-222 MHz band segment for many

  years.  The UPS proposal to use the 220-222 MHz band segment for land

  mobile service, in our opinion, would not only force the relocation of

  amateur radio operations but also preclude the shared use of these

  frequencies by radiolocation, forcing two users to attempt to find other

  suitable frequencies.  As has been described, but the amateur radio and

  radiolocation services have no suitable alternate allocation to relocate

  to.

                     -9-


    WHEREFORE, the Secretary of Defense respectfully urges the

  Commission to issue a ruling in this proceeding consistent with the views

  expressed herein:

                       Respectfully Submitted,

                        (signature)
                     McKENZIE WHITAKER
                       Trial Attorney

                         (signature)
                       CARL WAYNE SMITH
                       Assistant Regulatory Counsel
                       Office of the Chief Regulatory
                    Counsel-Telecommunications, DoD
                       Attn:  Code 115
                       Washington, DC 20305-2000
                       [phone]

                           for

                       The Secretary of Defense



19-May-88 17:57:55-EDT,816;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 19 May 88 17:57-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 19 May 88 16:41:34 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 19 May 88 16:41:16 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 2031; Thu, 19 May 88 16:39:38 EDT
Received: from AUDUCVAX.BITNET (AGEN) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 2030; Thu, 19 May 88 16:39:34 EDT
Date:     Thu, 19 May 88 15:39 CST
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  request
To: [e-mail]
X-Original-To:  [e-mail], AGEN

Please add me to the mailing list...Bob...
20-May-88 14:23:33-EDT,2706;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 20 May 88 14:23-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 20 May 88 12:56:17 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 20 May 88 12:55:57 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA23011; Fri, 20 May 88 09:54:47 PDT
Return-Path: <ames!ncar!noao!mcdsun!nud!anasaz![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 May 88 15:32:15 GMT
From: ames!ncar!noao!mcdsun!nud!anasaz![e-mail] (John Moore)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: New digital RF communication stuff seen in the rags
References: <[e-mail]% <[e-mail]%

In article <[e-mail]% [e-mail] (Phil R. Karn) writes:
%% [1] There is an article on a "Pulsed Bi-Phase Digital Communications
%% System", by William Hotine, K6HH
%
%I saw this one too, but I haven't taken the time to fully analyze the
%technique. No matter how it works, if it puts so many bits into such
%a narrow bandwidth it is necessarily going to require an awfully good
%signal-to-noise ratio. You can't beat the Shannon limit
I also was a bit skeptical of this one. One way to look at it is
to subtract the carrier signal (which contains no information) from the
modulation, and see how much effective signal power is left. I haven't
done this numerically, but it looks like there might be about -20dB of
signal power. The other problem with the design is that his back-of-the-napkin
analysis of bandwidth is wrong. In ANY modulation scheme, if you introduce
instantaneous variations in the modulation variable (as he is doing) you
get an infinite bandwidth! Thus, I don't believe his claim for a 1 Khz
bandwidth. However, the effective bandwidth relative to carrier power is
certainly small, since the information power is small and one tends to
measure bandwidth at the -20dB skirts. But, I certainly wouldn't want
to share a repeater site with this thing!!! When one is looking at
colocation, bandwidth needs to be measured at about -150dB!

On the other hand, a system with a requirement for high S/N and which
really did have a narrow bandwidth (by the above measure) would certainly
be useful for many applications. There are certainly (at least out West here)
lots of paths where the path loss is low enough that a 30dB S/N requirement
or better would be no sweat.
--
John Moore (NJ7E)   hao!noao!mcdsun!nud!anasaz!john
[phone] (day or evening)
The opinions expressed here are obviously not mine, so they must be
someone else's.


20-May-88 18:01:56-EDT,1944;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 20 May 88 18:01-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 20 May 88 17:05:54 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 20 May 88 17:05:40 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 9314; Fri, 20 May 88 17:04:05 EDT
Received: from VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 9313; Fri, 20 May 88 17:04:04 EDT
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.25) id 9112; Fri, 20 May 88 16:03:21 CDT
Date:         Fri, 20 May 88 15:56:24 CDT
From: Phil Howard KA9WGN <[e-mail]>
Subject:      ready to choose a TNC
To: Packet-Radio <[e-mail]>

I am now ready to choose a TNC to buy.  Big problem.  The feature I want
is not advertised, and if even available, may be very difficult to get.
I need some practical advice on getting it.

That feature is:
  1.  documentation of the internal processor and its working environment
      that the writers of the software have to know to do their job.
  2.  source code to basic AX.25 software that runs on that TNC to serve
      as a basis for software experiements.

Also, guidance in the direction of the proper development software and PROM
burners would be nice.  If the processor is 68000, I can handle it now.
Somehow I doubt if anyone has stepped up to a 68000.

What I want to do is to experiment with some ideas of advancing the
nature of the TNC.  (some call this hacking)  At least 2 of the ideas
in mind involve a level low enough that the KISS protocol is inadequate
(because it delivers packets only after they are checked to be error free).

Who writes all this TNC code?  The individual manufacturers, or are they
just sticking the code into a box they make?
20-May-88 18:53:14-EDT,1006;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 20 May 88 18:53-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 20 May 88 17:51:35 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 20 May 88 17:51:08 EDT
Received: from DSL.CIS.UPENN.EDU by linc.cis.upenn.edu
    id AA05451; Fri, 20 May 88 17:51:04 EDT
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: by dsl.cis.upenn.edu
    id AA05793; Fri, 20 May 88 17:49:30 PDT
Date: Fri, 20 May 88 17:49:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Al Broscius)
Posted-Date: Fri, 20 May 88 17:49:30 PDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: netbios driver for ka9q IP ?
Cc: [e-mail]


    Sometime last year someone mentioned a datagram encapsulation
netbios driver for net.exe. Where can I FTP the source for this
driver from ?

Thanks
Al Broscius
n3fct
[e-mail]
23-May-88 12:18:47-EDT,1539;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 12:18-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 11:20:55 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 11:19:31 EDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 1988 11:10-EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: ready to choose a TNC
Message-Id: <580403418/[e-mail]>
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
 (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes:
>At least 2 of the ideas in mind involve a level low enough that the KISS
>protocol is inadequate (... it delivers packets only ... error free).
K3MC is probably the right person to clear this up, but here goes...

This wasn't my impression, I thought KISS knew nothing about AX.25, how
can it through out errors when it doesn't even know what the protocol is?

Speaking of 68000, I've always wondered why someone doesn't hook a simple modem
(with NRZI<->NRZ) up to the Mac's 8530-based serial ports, can't they handle
HDLC or SDLC or whatever it is?

I'd rather buy ONE modem (or DSP board, I suppose) for my computer, and
do almost EVERYTHING in software.
--
                    - 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
23-May-88 14:10:41-EDT,902;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 14:10-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 13:11:56 EDT
Received: from ai.ai.mit.edu by EDDIE.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet with SMTP with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 13:11:42 EDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 13:18:54 EDT
From: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Compiling NET under Microsoft C
To: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>

   Has anyone compiled Phil's NET.EXE package under Microsoft C?
I am in the process of converting the makefile, but I was wondering if anyone
else had been through this cycle before? If so, could you send me a description
of known incompatibilities between the distributed sources and microsoft's
compiler and assembler?

Thanks,
   Henry, N1EZP


23-May-88 17:30:29-EDT,752;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 17:30-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 16:03:32 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 16:03:08 EDT
Received: from huey.udel.edu by Louie.UDEL.EDU id aa14138; 23 May 88 15:03 EDT
Date:     Mon, 23 May 88 14:59:24 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject:  Re:  Compiling NET under Microsoft C
Message-Id:  <[e-mail]>

Henry,

Tinkle Eric Perkins ([e-mail]). He did the conversion to usoft C
last Summer as a class project.

Daver
23-May-88 17:31:53-EDT,1882;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 17:31-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 16:14:00 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 16:13:33 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 0007; Mon, 23 May 88 16:13:49 EDT
Received: from UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 0006; Mon, 23 May 88 16:13:27 EDT
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Received: from locke.hs.washington.edu (SYSTEM@UWALOCKE) by
 UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU (Mailer X1.24) with BSMTP id 5495; Mon, 23 May 88
 12:24:59 PDT
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by locke.hs.washington.edu; Mon, 23 May 88 12:22 PST
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 12:22 PST
From: PMDF Mail Server
 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Undeliverable mail
To: [e-mail]

Message had a bad or missing To address.
The entire text of the message follows:

Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.25) id 2994; Mon, 23 May 88 13:14:22 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 13:18:54 EDT
From: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Subject: Compiling NET under Microsoft C
Sender: Packet Radio <I-PACRAD@UIUCVMD>
To: Packet operator <BRUCE@UWALOCKE>
Reply-to: [e-mail]
X-To:         [e-mail]

   Has anyone compiled Phil's NET.EXE package under Microsoft C?
I am in the process of converting the makefile, but I was wondering if anyone
else had been through this cycle before? If so, could you send me a description
of known incompatibilities between the distributed sources and microsoft's
compiler and assembler?

Thanks,
   Henry, N1EZP


23-May-88 17:40:30-EDT,2269;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 17:40-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 16:15:20 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 16:14:48 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 0031; Mon, 23 May 88 16:15:02 EDT
Received: from UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with
 BSMTP id 0030; Mon, 23 May 88 16:14:26 EDT
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Received: from locke.hs.washington.edu (SYSTEM@UWALOCKE) by
 UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU (Mailer X1.24) with BSMTP id 5497; Mon, 23 May 88
 12:25:05 PDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 12:23 PST
From: PMDF Mail Server <[e-mail]>
Subject: Undeliverable mail
To: [e-mail]

The message could not be delivered to:

Addressee: Postmasterlocke.hs.washington.edu
Reason:
  %MAIL-E, no such user POSTMASTERLOCKE.HS.WASHINGTON.EDU at node LOCKE

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

Received: from JNET-DAEMON by locke.hs.washington.edu; Mon, 23 May 88 12:22 PST
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 12:22 PST
From: PMDF Mail Server
 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Undeliverable mail
To: [e-mail]

Message had a bad or missing To address.
The entire text of the message follows:

Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.25) id 2994; Mon, 23 May 88 13:14:22 CDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 13:18:54 EDT
From: Henry Minsky <[e-mail]>
Subject: Compiling NET under Microsoft C
Sender: Packet Radio <I-PACRAD@UIUCVMD>
To: Packet operator <BRUCE@UWALOCKE>
Reply-to: [e-mail]
X-To:         [e-mail]

   Has anyone compiled Phil's NET.EXE package under Microsoft C?
I am in the process of converting the makefile, but I was wondering if anyone
else had been through this cycle before? If so, could you send me a description
of known incompatibilities between the distributed sources and microsoft's
compiler and assembler?

Thanks,
   Henry, N1EZP


23-May-88 20:42:55-EDT,917;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 20:42-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 19:27:59 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 19:27:38 EDT
Received: from cpc-3.nosc.mil by cod.nosc.mil (5.58/1.27)
    id AA25081; Mon, 23 May 88 16:28:35 PDT
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 16:28:35 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey L. Coleman)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: sun!pitstop!sundc!netxcom![e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: DIGICOM64 (W2UP) Mailing address needed

I meant to write sooner, but better late than never.
Did you ever get W2UP's address?  I have it at home and can send
it if you still need it.  I also had fun building that project.

73,
Jeff Coleman, KI6NL
[e-mail]


23-May-88 21:18:51-EDT,4599;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 23 May 88 21:18-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 20:02:04 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Mon, 23 May 88 20:00:20 EDT
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.52.1/6.13)
    id AA08886; Mon, 23 May 88 17:01:19 PDT
Return-Path: <bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Date: 21 May 88 22:24:20 GMT
From: bellcore!faline!thumper![e-mail] (Phil R. Karn)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: ready to choose a TNC
Summary: TNC code origins
References: <[e-mail]>

The origins and availability of TNC source code is an involved and
somewhat controversial subject. Here's what I know about it.

The TNC-1 code was written by NK6K, KD4NL and KV7D in a combination of
Pascal and 6809 assembler. This code (or large portions thereof, if not
the whole thing) is available on disk from the authors. However, as a
pioneering effort it was written on a rather obscure development system
(an HP64000) and you're probably not going to be able to use it easily
on other systems (e.g., a PC).

The TNC-2 code was written by N2WX in Z80 assembler. Howie decided not
to release the source for general distribution, however, so it is
available only to those who have purchased TAPR's $5000 OEM kit for the
TNC-2. (This is how manufacturers obtain nonexclusive rights to produce
"clones" of the TAPR TNCs or to incorporate TAPR technology into their
own products).

In general, code for the non-TAPR-clone TNCs (e.g., AEA PK-232/PK-87,
Kantronics TNCs, etc) is written by employees of those companies and is
regarded as trade secret information. In other words, you can't get it
no how.  Just to give you an idea of how bitter the competition is among
certain TNC manufacturers, one such manufacturer got up in front of the
TAPR annual meeting earlier this year and described the troubles they
were having in FCC certifying one of their products. The problem was
that the FCC requires the gear to be used with in a representative
configuration, and in this case that meant it had to be connected to a
computer. And most computers are so noisy that the tests failed.
Finally, he said, they found a sufficiently quiet computer. "What was
it?" somebody in the audience asked. "Sorry, that's proprietary
information," the speaker replied.

Which brings us to the amateur TCP/IP development group. If there's one
characteristic this group shares, it is a strong dislike for impenetrable
black boxes and the word "proprietary". A basic ground rule of
this effort has been to make everything (i.e., full source code) freely
available to all to encourage experimentation. The authors of the KISS
TNC modules for the TNC-1 (WB6ECE) TNC-2 (K3MC) and VADCG (AJ9X) boards
have agreed to include their sources in the distributions of the KA9Q
Internet Protocol package. This should give you a start in understanding
how to program the TNCs. You are free to modify their code in any way
you wish, and I encourage you to contribute your results back into the
effort.

Some new products have recently become available that might interest
you. Several PC adaptor cards containing HDLC controllers and
specifically designed for amateur packet radio are now available. These
eliminate the need for an external TNC entirely. Right know I know of
three: PACCOMM's PC-100, with an 8530 and two low-speed modems, DRSI's
PCPA, with an 8530, a low speed modem and an RS-232/TTL port, and the
Hamilton Area Packet Network (HAPN) card, containing an Intel 8273 and a
low speed modem. If you're really out to keep costs low, various
non-amateur manufacturers have made HDLC cards for the PC that are
designed to work with external modems, and these are occasionally
available on the surplus market at very low prices. Drivers for the
PC-100 and HAPN card are already in the TCP/IP package courtesy of KE3Z,
N3EUA and myself, and a driver for the new DRSI board is in the works. A
driver for the Eagle HDLC card (8530, no modem) was contributed by
WA3CVG and NG6Q.

I think you'd find it much easier to use one of these boards for your
experiments than to fool around with standalone TNCs. I consider the
TNC to be a historical artifact that will disappear as more and more hams
get personal computers and higher speed modems; the KISS TNC was never
intended to be more than a temporary stopgap.

Phil


24-May-88 09:13:42-EDT,867;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 24 May 88 09:13-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 24 May 88 08:19:05 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 24 May 88 08:18:51 EDT
Date: Tue, 24 May 88 08:18:51 EDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id ag15118; 24 May 88 7:38 EDT
Received: from zix.gmd.dbp.de by RELAY.CS.NET id ag28059; 24 May 88 7:15 EDT
Received: from zix.gmd.dbp.de by .zix.gmd.dbp.de id a002007; 24 May 88 11:32 MET
From: gunter <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <284:[e-mail]>
Subject: change address from "dfn" -> "dbp.de"

Please change our address:

replace the last item "dfn" of our address with "dbp.de"

gunter
27-May-88 06:37:57-EDT,2908;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 May 88 06:37-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 27 May 88 05:40:50 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 27 May 88 05:40:32 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from DBSTU1.BITNET by CORNELLC.CCS.CORNELL.EDU ; Fri, 27 May 88 05:40:47 EDT
Date: Fri, 27 May 88 10:56:50 MEZ
To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Comment: CROSSNET mail via SMTP@INTERBIT
Return-Receipt-To: [e-mail]
Subject: TheNet, statusreport

            NORD><LINK
   The northern Germany packet-radio development group

This is intended as an interim status report of TheNet.

The number of requests for TheNet increased dramaticaly in the last few
weeks. TheNet was shipped into 16 different countries ( status friday
27th May ) worldwide and further requests arrive here every day.

So the authors of TheNet DF2AU and DC4OX like to thank all OMs
for their interest who requested for TheNet, sent hints etc.

They started distribution of the C-sourcecode about 2 weeks ago.

Thanks again to those OMs who sent a bugreport. There was a small
bug in the distributed hexdump version rel# 1.0 which you usualy won't
see. Anyway, it's repaired and not longer contained in the source.
Therefor the source has got the rel# 1.01.

So if you requested for TheNet and havn't got it yet please keep in
patience, it's nearly a fulltime job to make copies of the source,
burn EPROMs and prepare all the packages. All OMs who sent enough
IRCs to cover the expense of postage and floppies will be serviced in
one of the next days. Or just let your friend make a copy for you.
Remember, it's free for noncommercial use.

The actual activities here are to port TheNet-source to a multi-
processor nodecontroler of the Frankfurt packet group. This nodecontroler
( with up to 16 identical processor boards ) utilizes 6809s with 8530s
on an Euroboard which communicate to each other via an IEC-bus like
parallel-bus in a token-bus access-methode. This ensures maximum
xferspeed between the processors without the danger of lost bytes.
Can anyone out in netland name us a C-compiler running on
IBM-PC (clones) or ATARI STs which produces 6809-code and is not too
expensive? Any hints are appreciated.

If you have further questions, bug reports, or any other comments, feel
free to contact

NORD><LINK
c/o Hans Georg Giese DF2AU
Hinter dem Berge 5
3300 Braunschweig
FRG

or DK4EG

73s de Detlef ( DK4EG )
C0033003 at dbstu1.bitnet
 [e-mail]
 [e-mail]")
 [e-mail]
 CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU![e-mail]
etc...
27-May-88 21:01:39-EDT,2192;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 27 May 88 21:01-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 27 May 88 19:39:20 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Fri, 27 May 88 19:38:33 EDT
Received: by vax.cs.pittsburgh.edu (5.54/1.14)
    id AA09416; Fri, 27 May 88 10:26:44 EDT
Date: Fri, 27 May 88 10:26:44 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Bob Hoffman)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Seventh ARRL Packet Radio Conference Call for Papers
Cc: [e-mail]

AMATEUR RADIO NEWS RELEASE

May 16, 1988                            For more information contact:
                    Maty Weinberg
                    American Radio Relay League
                    Newington, CT   06111
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                   203-666-1541 weekdays


    Seventh ARRL Packet Radio Conference Call for Papers

    The American Radio Relay League will hold its Seventh
Amateur Radio Computer Networking Conference on Saturday, October
1, 1988 at Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in
the Laurel/Columbia, MD area.

    The deadline for receipt of camera-ready papers is August
25, 1988.  All papers should be mailed to Maty Weinberg, American
Radio Relay League, 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111.   If you
plan to present a paper, please request an author's kit and
identify the title of your paper immediately.  Proceedings will
be sold at the conference and by mail from ARRL HQ.

    Technical papers are invited on all aspects of Amateur Radio
digital communication via ionospheric, tropospheric, meteor-
scatter and satellite modes.  Topics may include network
development, architecture, protocols, standards, hardware,
software, modulation and encoding schemes, applications,
frequency planning, and practical experience (such as traffic
handling).  Of particular interest are digital signal processing,
digital speech and image transmission, and new space programs
employing digital communication.

--
Bob Hoffman, N3CVL       {allegra, bellcore, cadre, idis, psuvax1}!pitt!hoffman
Pitt Computer Science    [e-mail]
28-May-88 10:06:50-EDT,796;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 28 May 88 10:06-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 28 May 88 08:53:13 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 28 May 88 08:52:56 EDT
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 4093; Sat, 28 May 88 08:48:57 EDT
Received: from UWYO.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 4091;
 Sat, 28 May 88 08:48:37 EDT
Date:     Fri, 27 May 88 19:20:10 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Reid Fletcher)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  PACKET-RADIO Subscription Request
To: [e-mail]

SUB PACKET-RADIO Reid Fletcher WB7CJO

28-May-88 10:38:08-EDT,796;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 28 May 88 10:38-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 28 May 88 08:53:13 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Sat, 28 May 88 08:52:56 EDT
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 4093; Sat, 28 May 88 08:48:57 EDT
Received: from UWYO.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 4091;
 Sat, 28 May 88 08:48:37 EDT
Date:     Fri, 27 May 88 19:20:10 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Reid Fletcher)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Subject:  PACKET-RADIO Subscription Request
To: [e-mail]

SUB PACKET-RADIO Reid Fletcher WB7CJO

31-May-88 11:35:38-EDT,1287;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 31 May 88 11:35-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 May 88 10:10:00 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 May 88 10:08:22 EDT
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 1254; Tue, 31 May 88 10:06:08 EDT
Received: from UKACRL.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 1253; Tue, 31 May 88 08:55:10 EDT
Received: from RL.IB by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 7819; Tue,
 31 May 88 09:29:18 BST
Received:
Via:        UK.AC.UCL.EUCLID; 31 MAY 88  9:29:16 BST
From: David Howells (on GEC 4190 Rim-E at UCL) <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Date:       Mon, 30 May 88 10:27
Subject:    protocols
Message-Id: <30 MAY 1988 10:27:29 [e-mail]>

Hi!
I am looking for a definition of the protocols used in packet radio.
The books and magazine articles I have read just seem to say what
equipment is available - and I want to build my own!
I'd be very grateful if someone would point me in the right direction.

David.

([e-mail] is probably easier to send to)
Thanks.
31-May-88 11:43:30-EDT,1534;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 31 May 88 11:43-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 May 88 10:11:53 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 May 88 10:11:33 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 1283; Tue, 31 May 88 10:08:35 EDT
Received: from UKACRL.BITNET by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id
 1282; Tue, 31 May 88 08:56:07 EDT
Received: from RL.IB by UKACRL.BITNET (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 1069; Mon,
 30 May 88 11:09:40 BST
Received: from RL.IB by UK.AC.RL.IB (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 1066; Mon, 30
      May 88 11:09:40 BS
Via:      00000511168012.UCL-CS.FTP.MAIL; 30 MAY 88 11:09:37 BST
Received: from pyr1.cs.ucl.ac.uk by vs6.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK   via Ethernet with SMTP
      id aa01552; 30 May 88 11:05 BS
Date:     Mon, 30 May 88 11:04:18 GMT-0:00
From: David Howells <[e-mail]>
To: packet-radio <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Protocols

Sorry if this is a repeat of earlier messages...

Does anyone have details of the packet-radio protocol i.e. setting up
and clearing calls etc.
I've looked for books and in radio magazines but they all only seem
to say what equipment is available to buy - no fun for a hardware hacker
like me.
I'd be very grateful if someone could point me in the right direction!
David
31-May-88 11:52:57-EDT,1124;000000000000
Received: from EDDIE.MIT.EDU by DEEP-THOUGHT.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 31 May 88 11:52-EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 May 88 10:02:07 EDT
Received: by EDDIE.MIT.EDU with sendmail-5.45/4.7 id <[e-mail]>; Tue, 31 May 88 10:01:36 EDT
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.1) with BSMTP id 1033; Tue, 31 May 88 09:58:58 EDT
Received: from BNR.CA by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (Mailer X1.25) with BSMTP id 1032; Tue,
 31 May 88 08:34:39 EDT
Received: by BNR (Mailer X1.25) id 2223; Mon, 30 May 88 13:38:29 EDT
Date:     30 May 88 13:38:00 EDT
To: [e-mail]
From: Bernie (B.J.) Murphy <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: Port Of KA9Q Code to MSC
Sender: Bernie (B.J.) Murphy <[e-mail]>

Bill Doster has ported the KA9Q package using MSC 5.0 and ASM 5.0.
Please contact Bill for more information on getting the source code
changes...

    Bill Doster ([e-mail])

Regards,
Bernie Murphy
Bell-Northern Research