World of Ham Radio 1994 January/AMSOFT_1994.iso/packet/docs/pd199009.doc

Text File | 1993-12-31 | 180.2 KB | 4,472 lines

Tue,  4 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #133
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Tue,  4 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 133

Today's Topics:
                 ka9q

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Sep 90 11:17:02 MET
From: [e-mail]
Subject: ka9q
To: [e-mail]

How about adding the possibility to define a directory in the command
line to specify where to put the tmp files?
I don't like to see the "tmpXX.$$$" every time a make a "dir" command
with net.exe and with incoming smtp sessions etc....

73
Vincenzo

[e-mail]

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Wed,  5 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #134
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Wed,  5 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 134

Today's Topics:
                   AmigaNOS
              AX.25 State Tables
                e-mail gateway

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 31 Aug 90 18:52:20 GMT
From: bacchus.pa.dec.com!deccrl!decvax.dec.com!zinn!ubbs-nh!wa1omm![e-mail]  (Paul MacDonald)
Subject: AmigaNOS
To: [e-mail]

Anyone out there with the latest AmigaNOS. Mine is version 900214.
Thanks and 73!

Paul
--

                /\  /\
                   //\\//\\
        +--------------------------------------------+
        | From the shack of WA1OMM -- Paul MacDonald |
        | Using the power of the multitasking Amiga! |
        |                                            |
        | Compuserve: 70411,626   PLink:  UPPERCRUST |
        | Amateur Packet Radio:   [e-mail] |
        +--------------------------------------------+

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

Date: 4 Sep 90 20:16:44 GMT
From: altos!altos86![e-mail]  (Jerry Gardner)
Subject: AX.25 State Tables
To: [e-mail]

I've heard that the state tables (Appendix D) in the AX.25 Version 2.0 spec
published by the ARRL have errors.  Is this true?  If so, where are the errors
and what are the corrections?


--
Jerry Gardner, NJ6A                                     Altos Computer Systems
UUCP: {sun|pyramid|sco|amdahl|uunet}!altos!jerry        2641 Orchard Parkway
Internet: [e-mail]                               San Jose, CA  95134
Guns don't kill people, bullets do.                     [phone]

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

Date: 29 Aug 90 01:04:43 GMT
From: uhccux![e-mail]  (Antonio Querubin)
Subject: e-mail gateway
To: [e-mail]

I recall seing some mention of a gateway for sending e-mail from Internet to a
Packet BBS a few weeks ago.  If anyone still has that info on-line , could you
send it to me please?

73's
ah6bW

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Thu,  6 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #135
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Thu,  6 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 135

Today's Topics:
                Administrivia

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 5 Sep 90 13:15:33 -0700
From: brian (Brian Kantor)
Subject: Administrivia
To: info-hams-digest, packet-radio-digest

I have made a change to the digest software to limit submissions to a maximum
of 500 lines of text.  Articles larger than that will be silently truncated.

I hope this will avoid the huge-digest problem that has occured in the past.

Info-hams digests will continue to be issued when 32k of articles have
been accumulated;  packet-radio digests will be issued once a day.
    - Brian

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Fri,  7 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #136
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Fri,  7 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 136

Today's Topics:
               ?: 19200 Baud for TNC-2
          digipeaters vs repeaters (2 msgs)
           dsp-group mailing list defunct?
            MBL 5.14 Documentation  Needed

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 5 Sep 90 14:14:05 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]  (Gary Coffman)
Subject: ?: 19200 Baud for TNC-2
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] () writes:
>How do I modify a TNC-2 to run 19200 baud to my PC?  Is it as simple as
>doubling the clock rate for the host port, or do I need to change out the
>KISS rom to keep up with the data?
>
>thanks,
>  Mike Westerhof
>  [e-mail]         #include <standard.disclaimer>

It depends on the brand of TNC2 you have, the Paccomm already has a dip
switch for 19.2kb. The Original TAPR and MFJs need a simple wiring change,
run a wire from U1 pin 10 to the baudrate switch pin 1. Cut the existing
trace to SW pin 1. Now the 300 baud switch is a 19.2kb switch. Unless you
do the other modifications to speed up the TNC, you may drop characters. The
other mod is more extensive, but basically doubles the CPU clock and
replaces the CPU, SIO, RAM, and ROM with 6 Mhz parts. If you are using
a high speed modem, you will also need a modified KISS ROM that is
optimized to handle high speeds.

Gary KE4ZV

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

Date: 6 Sep 90 03:28:10 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

It seems that one of the local hams, Robb, KJ6YT, was wondering whether
or not digipeaters, net/rom nodes, and the like count as repeaters or
not, and whether they therefore have to be confined to the repeater
subbands.

Since none of the local Part-97-in-hand types could answer the
question, Robb dutifully called the local FCC office and asked them.
Not getting a satisfactory answer there, he has written the Chief of
the FCC Private Radio Bureau asking for clarification.

So if all of a sudden those of you who have been operating your nodes,
digipeaters, and suchlike on non-repeater frequencies find yourself in
violation of the rules, you will have hereby been warned.

Note: arguing about it HERE is profitless.  It's what the FCC thinks
that matters.  Perhaps it will wind up becoming the NEXT rulemaking
petition.  Sigh.

    - Brian
    "It is always easier to obtain forgiveness than permission."

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

Date: 6 Sep 90 14:31:18 GMT
From: agate!linus!philabs!briar![e-mail]  (Robert Casey)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian Kantor) writes:
>It seems that one of the local hams, Robb, KJ6YT, was wondering whether
>or not digipeaters, net/rom nodes, and the like count as repeaters or
>not, and whether they therefore have to be confined to the repeater
>subbands.
>
> he has written the Chief of
>the FCC Private Radio Bureau asking about this
>
>       "It is always easier to obtain forgiveness than permission."

The sort of repeater the FCC knows about receives & transmits at the same
time.  The digipeaters, nodes, etc, receive and transmit at different times.
And only ties up one freq, and stay quiet unless someone specifically
addresses them.  The funny cookie corp probably never gave any thought about
digipeaters, nodes, etc before, and hopefully this guy's question wont make
'em think much about it, and leave things be.

If there's no rule forbidding something, than you can do it.

73 de WA2ISE

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

Date: 6 Sep 90 14:31:39 GMT
From: idacrd![e-mail]  (Robert McGwier)
Subject: dsp-group mailing list defunct?
To: [e-mail]



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

Date: Thu, 6 Sep 90 06:19 PDT
From: "RICHARD HAREL <[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MBL 5.14 Documentation  Needed
To: [e-mail]

If someone can please forward any new documentation on MBL 5.14 sortware,
I would appreciate it.
Thanks es 73,
rich Harel

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
Dan:

To the best of my knowledge, all the folks really interested in it at the
time were all busy off doing Microsat, etc.  TAPR and AMSAT are only
NOW finishing their plug in board to give to the ALPHA testers and code
writers.  AEA will be releasing their proprietary hardware this fall
so DSP has not gone away, it just got put into the background by more
pressing demands.  DSP will be on an amateur satellite soon.  RS-14,
which will be the 21-st OSCAR (RO-21 upon launch), will carry a Harris
RTX-2000 and it performs a DSP function as modem demod-remod or repeater
or whatever.  Should be interesting to say the least.

DSP has not gone away, it is truly about to (FINALLY) explode on the
amateur seen in a big way, it is just that Mike Horn's list was started
at the wrong time and never gained enough momentum to be useful.

Bob

--
____________________________________________________________________________
    My opinions are my own no matter    |       Robert W. McGwier, N4HY
    who I work for! ;-)                 |       CCR, AMSAT, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sat,  8 Sep 90 04:30:06 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #137
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sat,  8 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 137

Today's Topics:
              DigiCom/sp -> IBM
          Digipeaters vs repeaters (4 msgs)

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 7 Sep 90 07:59:54 GMT
From: usc!samsung!umich!sharkey!wyn386!wybbs![e-mail]  (Richard Pestrue)
Subject: DigiCom/sp -> IBM
To: [e-mail]

Does anyone know were I can get ( or ftp ) a version of digicom
or sp for the ibm? I already have digicom for the C-64 if anyone needs it :)

  73 all... n8ilf

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

Date: Fri, 07 Sep 90 10:37:50 PDT
From: "Roy Engehausen" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

This is a good reason NEVER to ask the FCC about anything.  Otherwise they
may give an answer we don't want.  Digipeaters have been outside the repeater
subbands for years and no one has ever been cited.  Let sleeping dogs lie.

Roy, AA4RE

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

Date: 7 Sep 90 16:22:19 GMT
From: shlump.nac.dec.com!carafe.enet.dec.com![e-mail]  (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brian Kantor) writes...
>It seems that one of the local hams, Robb, KJ6YT, was wondering whether
>or not digipeaters, net/rom nodes, and the like count as repeaters or
>not, and whether they therefore have to be confined to the repeater
>subbands.
>Since none of the local Part-97-in-hand types could answer the
>question, Robb dutifully called the local FCC office and asked them.
>Not getting a satisfactory answer there, he has written the Chief of
>the FCC Private Radio Bureau asking for clarification.

>       - Brian
>       "It is always easier to obtain forgiveness than permission."

Obviously, Robb doesn't believe in following Grace Hopper's advice,
quoted in Brian's signature.

This type of looking-for-trouble will be the death of ham radio.
Everytime somebody decides that maybe, something he's doing is
wrong, so let's make sure we're punished, we get punished.

I personally don't think a digipeater is a repeater.  A repeater
operates in real time; digipeaters are a special case of third-party
traffic.  (In America, of course.  In other countries, ham-originated
messages aren't viewed as third party, which is often not allowed.)

But asking the FCC in writing?  INSANE!  It's called "asking for
trouble."

BTW, a full-duplex repeater can get about FOUR TIMES the data throughtput
as a digipeater, using only twice the frequencies, so it's FAR more
efficient.  Digis are a dumb idea.  They largely exist because nobody
has the balls to put a packet repeater on the air where the FM boys
have "claimed" all available pairs and the "coordinator" has an eternal
waiting list.

But we've argued that out previously.
---
Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]
            voice:  [phone]
opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission

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

Date: 7 Sep 90 19:13:00 GMT
From: usc!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

If you ask the FCC if you are allowed to do XYZ, what will the underpaid and
understaffed FCC people do with your request?  They won't do much with it.
If you are lucky they will trash it.  Eventually they will get around to
answering it.

If XYZ is blatantly and obviously legal, they will tell you so.  You will be
making their job at least a bit more humorous in this case.  The kind of
questions that fall in this category are also eligible for being on the
written exam anyway.  You are supposed to know better.

If there is any doubt whatsoever that XYZ is legal; if there is any chance
at all the XYZ might not be legal, they will NOT tell you that it is legal.
No government agency will ever do this for anything, EVER!  Who would?
Your lawyer and the courts.  That's their function.

The FCC staff lawyers do not have the authority to interpret FOR YOU what
the meaning of the rules is.  They never will.  They are not "yes men"
either.

The FCC enforcement people are not out to get you.  If you want to do XYZ
and are not sure if it is legal or not, you can find out by just doing XYZ.
If in the eyes of the FCC it is illegal, they will tell you so.  More often
than not, if there is a doubt, they won't bother; they have other things
to do.  You can go on happily doing XYZ.

Before you do XYZ, apply a simple sanity check to it.  Will doing XYZ cause
interference to any other communication, amateur or otherwise?  If so, then
you should not do XYZ.  Will it get complaints from OTHER THAN the "armchair
lawyer" types?  If so, reconsider doing XYZ, or try XZY instead.

Also, examine XYZ closely with respect to the national, regional, and/or
local band plans, as appropriate.  Make sure that you are conforming to
the bandplan if there is any use of the band in your area.

But what if the "armchair lawyer" type complains to the FCC?  Let him.
The FCC will ask you what you are doing.  They don't take people's word
for it, they investigate.  Tell them exactly what you are doing.  If they
believe it is illegal, they will tell you and you can stop.

What if someone starts jamming you while doing XYZ?  Treat it as jamming
in any other case.  Ask them to stop, quoting chapter and verse.  If they
don't, file an interference complain through the appropriate steps.  It would
probably help greatly to start with local official observers first since the
FCC really doesn't want to hear about it if there is a chance it can be
resolved by hams themselves.

Talk to other hams about XYZ.  You almost certainly will get some negative
responses.  Listen to those responses and see how logically they are derived
from the actual rules.  And by all means read the rules IN THEIR ENTIRETY.
Then make your own decisions about doing XYZ.  If you still aren't sure,
then consult a lawyer (a real one).

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 7 Sep 90 23:21:41 GMT
From: vsi1!wyse![e-mail]  (Steve Wilson x2580 dept303)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein) writes:
> stuff deleted...
>(In America, of course.  In other countries, ham-originated
>messages aren't viewed as third party, which is often not allowed.)

I do believe that the latest rewrite of Part 97 has changed the
definition of 3rd party to accomidate this point.

73's de Steve KA6S

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sun,  9 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #138
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sun,  9 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 138

Today's Topics:
             Packet-Radio Digest V90 #137

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 8 Sep 90 11:59:43 CDT
From: Jay Maynard <[e-mail]>
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #137
To: [e-mail]

--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
[e-mail]  | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"It's a hardware bug!" "It's a    +---------------------------------------
software bug!" "It's two...two...two bugs in one!" - _Engineer's Rap_

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 90 04:30:04 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #139
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Mon, 10 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 139

Today's Topics:
              Choosing an SSID (2 msgs)

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 9 Sep 90 08:47:22 -0700
From: brian (Brian Kantor)
Subject: Choosing an SSID
To: packet-radio, tcp-group

Originally the AX.25 SSID (secondary station identifier) was more or
less intended for those who had multiple stations to be able to
differentiate between them even though they had the same callsign.
Thus WB6CYT-1 and WB6CYT-0.

However, they're immensely useful in selecting the FUNCTION that a
particular connection provides.  For example, -0 is a person, -1 is a
digipeater, -2 is a BBS, -3 is TCP/IP, etc.  Whether these are just
logical separations or whether it is actually utilising different
equipment is usually moot from the standpoint of the person connecting.

Of course, with net/rom complementing the SSID every time it
masquerades as a connecting user, such distinctions may well make no
difference.  But in more enlightened areas where net/rom does not hold
sway, the differing SSIDs could be useful.

The examples above are somewhat common in my area, but not universal.

Is there any sort of consensus as to which SSID should be used for what?
    - Brian

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

Date: Sun, 9 Sep 90 23:31:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (D. Crompton)
Subject: Choosing an SSID
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

For whatever reason we in the Mid Atlantic area are (generally) using
-8 as TCP/IP SSID with IPxxx as netrom ID - I.E. wa3dsp - IPDSP

Doug

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #140
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Tue, 11 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 140

Today's Topics:
             SSIDs and NETROM IDs

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Sep 90 9:53:02 CDT
From: Jay Maynard <[e-mail]>
Subject: SSIDs and NETROM IDs
To: [e-mail]

There's not much standard around here, except for TCP/IP users using -8 (and
up for multiple stations). We have no standard for NETROM IDs yet, but I've
proposed one which may gain some acceptance:
Take the low order 24 bits of the IP address. Use the top 4 bits to form one
hex digit, and then take the remaining 20 bits in groups of 5 to make 4
base-32 digits in the range 0-9a-v. Put a leading # to make the name private.
Example: My IP address is 44.76.0.92. This makes:
    44              76              0               92
0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0|0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0
(ignore this)  |   4   |    O    |    0    |    2    |    S

This is guaranteed to be unique for all AMPRNET hosts. The bit-twiddling
can be done by a simple C routine, and might even be built into the netrom
commands in NOS. I know there's been a similar scheme mentioned on
Compu$erve, but that one (using the hex representation of the low 16 bits)
would break down at the edges of the assignment areas.

Comments, anyone?

--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
[e-mail]  | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"It's a hardware bug!" "It's a    +---------------------------------------
software bug!" "It's two...two...two bugs in one!" - _Engineer's Rap_

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 90 04:30:02 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #141
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Wed, 12 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 141

Today's Topics:

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Sep 90 09:25 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

SET PACKRAD NOACK
REVIEW

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 04:30:04 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #142
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Thu, 13 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 142

Today's Topics:
         56 kbit Heatherington modem (2 msgs)
          digipeaters vs repeaters (3 msgs)
                 KA9Q Wanted
            MAXFRAME, PACLEN parms
           multispeed fdx packet repeater (2 msgs)
           PC LAN card and FSK receiver chip needed
              Phase IIID report
            SSIDs and NETROM IDs (2 msgs)
                 THENET 1.50
                 UNSUSCRIBE!

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 8 Sep 90 21:19:34 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]
Subject: 56 kbit Heatherington modem
To: [e-mail]

I am looking for a copy of the schematic,personal experiences,kits,etc.
for the Dale Heatherington modem as in ARRL 6th computer conferance
on Communication.Does anyone know Dale network address?
regrds Norman Gillaspie

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

Date: 9 Sep 90 06:55:12 GMT
From: snorkelwacker!usc!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc![e-mail]  (Doug Drye KD4NC)
Subject: 56 kbit Heatherington modem
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] writes:

>I am looking for a copy of the schematic,personal experiences,kits,etc.
>for the Dale Heatherington modem as in ARRL 6th computer conferance
>on Communication.Does anyone know Dale network address?
>regrds Norman Gillaspie

Please address correspondance to {gatech,emory}!kd4nc!dug
I handle such requests..


--
Doug Drye KD4NC

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

Date: 10 Sep 90 22:10:42 GMT
From: hpcc01!col![e-mail]  (Bdale Garbee)
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

>1) Digis are also much simpler to build and operate than full-duplex
>radio repeaters, since you don't have to keep the transmitter out of the
>receiver.

It's interesting, though, that when you get interested in using a repeater
instead of a digipeater, it's a lot easier to enlist help from an existing
repeater organization, often accompanied by bits and pieces of hardware
becoming available that you couldn't find otherwise... and if you can convince
a repeater club that a digital repeater is a neat way to one-up the other club
in town...  :-)  We may actually have a digital repeater in the Springs soon
as a result of this approach...

>2) FLAME ON:
>"Nobody has the balls" to start repeater wars, huh? Damned right! We've
>outgrown that stage. Plopping a radio on an occupied frequency is simply
>bad practice.

Don't disagree with you at all.  But, I'd like to add my voice to those of the
others who have spoken on this subject, including Phil and Brian, to complain
about the attitude I personally have run into that digital devices "don't
belong on repeater frequencies", and that "all the frequencies are in use so
don't bother asking".  It *is* tiresome continually dealing with a class of
individual that believes the only useful amateur mode is FM voice.

Fortunately, I've found some locals in a position to help who are tolerant of
"the cause".  But, it's taken me 4 years of almost constant effort...

This is preaching to the converted, I realize.  If nothing else, know that it
*is* possible to make things happen if you try hard enough!

Bdale

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

Date: 9 Sep 90 20:36:34 GMT
From: uop!milton!dali.cs.montana.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!lobster!splut![e-mail]  (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fred R.
Goldstein) rants once again about how bad frequency coordination is:
>BTW, a full-duplex repeater can get about FOUR TIMES the data throughtput
>as a digipeater, using only twice the frequencies, so it's FAR more
>efficient.  Digis are a dumb idea.  They largely exist because nobody
>has the balls to put a packet repeater on the air where the FM boys
>have "claimed" all available pairs and the "coordinator" has an eternal
>waiting list.

1) Digis are also much simpler to build and operate than full-duplex
radio repeaters, since you don't have to keep the transmitter out of the
receiver.
2) FLAME ON:
"Nobody has the balls" to start repeater wars, huh? Damned right! We've
outgrown that stage. Plopping a radio on an occupied frequency is simply
bad practice. You may hate repeater coordination - and from your
repeated unreasoning ranting about the subject, I suspect you hold a
personal grudge against your local coordinator - but, DAMMIT!!, it's the
way things get done in ham radio. You'd best put up with it, for YOU
will get the pink slip if your uncoordinated repeater interferes with
someone's repeater who has jumped through the few hoops required.

Have you ever even submitted an application for coordination? I doubt
it. You hold too many preconceived notions on the subject that just
plain don't match the facts.

>But we've argued that out previously.

Then why the hell don't you let it drop? Your anti-coordinator flamage
is as tiresome and offensive as Phil Karn's unreasoning anti-OSI
flamage. We've heard it all before, and we're tired of it. Give it a
rest.

--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL   | Never ascribe to malice that which can
[e-mail]       (eieio)| adequately be explained by stupidity.
"I can't believe I really wrote     +----------------------------------------
this." - Henry Spencer, about awf, his nroff -ms subset written in awk

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

Date: 11 Sep 90 05:07:18 GMT
From: swrinde!emory!kd4nc![e-mail]  (Doug Drye KD4NC)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes:
>2) FLAME ON:
>"Nobody has the balls" to start repeater wars, huh? Damned right! We've
>outgrown that stage. Plopping a radio on an occupied frequency is simply
>bad practice. You may hate repeater coordination - and from your
>repeated unreasoning ranting about the subject, I suspect you hold a
>personal grudge against your local coordinator - but, DAMMIT!!, it's the
>way things get done in ham radio. You'd best put up with it, for YOU
>will get the pink slip if your uncoordinated repeater interferes with
>someone's repeater who has jumped through the few hoops required.

>Have you ever even submitted an application for coordination? I doubt
>it. You hold too many preconceived notions on the subject that just
>plain don't match the facts.

>>But we've argued that out previously.

>Then why the hell don't you let it drop? Your anti-coordinator flamage
>is as tiresome and offensive as Phil Karn's unreasoning anti-OSI
>flamage. We've heard it all before, and we're tired of it. Give it a
>rest.

>--
>Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL   | Never ascribe to malice that which can

Jay,

 I have been the victim of flagrant prejudiced against packet
radio use of FM channels.. I have a valid coordination of a
repeater pair in two meters.. it had been on the air as a packet repeater
for a year.. I didn't disclose
the operating mode to the coordinator (none of his business, actually
as long as I operate it as a repeater and USE both frequencies)..
To him RTTY was OK
but packet wasn't.. He (incidentally to our packet use of the pair)
drew up a 20 kHz plan for the
146 mHz sub-band and wrote our club repeater out of
existance saying, quote:

"Oh, 146.73?.. you guys are packet and belong in the the 145.0X band anyway..
You'll have to move!!!"

Lucky for our packet club, he was ousted and a new organization was installed
(for various reasons).. which ended the problem..

I agree one should work within the system, but I and others had to do quite a
bit of "missionary work" with our repeater council to get a favorable
climate for packet repeater operators to compete for spectrum on a
fair and equitable basis with voice (and even RTTY) users...

I agree with what the overall idea of your message.. Fair Coordination
is the only way to fly.. But I have suffered under two coordinators who
were predujiced against packet and tried to do something about it
so unfortunately the PEOPLE in a number of locations are a problem..
not necessarily the system of coordination.. I believe that is what
Fred was referring to.... I for one am NOT "tired" of discussing
problems that we face as packet repeated trustees...

I don't think your threat about a pink ticket was unnecessary, Jay..
I've heard that before from a coordinator.

I doubt that many people
in this day and age disagree with a Fair Coordination system..
I just wish that we didn't have "voice" repeater coordinators that are
prejudiced against packet and other "non-voice modes" of communications..

Doug, KD4NC
--
Doug Drye KD4NC

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

Date: 11 Sep 90 05:30:56 GMT
From: crash![e-mail]  (Jim Burnes)
Subject: KA9Q Wanted
To: [e-mail]

Hi All:

I need two things:

A machine that contains executables for ka9q for Xenix386/Amiga/PC
and that is pc pursuitable.  I may be able to have it ftp'ed to
my account here at pnet01 if I can figure out how to ftp etc.

Also ...are the sources available for it on these machines?

Also ...is the TCP/IP code that it uses usable in any tcp/ip
situation or only for packet radio?

Respectfully,
Jim Burnes

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

Date: Wed, 12 Sep 90 15:53 CDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: MAXFRAME, PACLEN parms
To: [e-mail]

Someone recently mentioned that the MAXFRAME parameter should always be
set to 1.  Why?  On user links and backbone links?  What if your link
is a backbone link ("solid") and you want to send more than 256 bytes/shot?
It's still not a good idea since you will still have some collisions?

When tcp/ip (ka9q package) backs off due to channel congestion, does it
wait longer between frames, reduce frame size, both, or what?

(First paragraph refers to Net/ROM links.)


73, Charles AA5AV @ W5AC.TX.USA.NA

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

Date: 11 Sep 90 15:42:58 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)
Subject: multispeed fdx packet repeater
To: [e-mail]

I've put together a full-duplex two meter packet repeater that
regenerates the FSK tones by the simple expedient of hooking a TNC's
demodulator to its modulator.  That works really well for 1200 bps
but for all practical purposes, is limited to that speed.

I'd like to encourage the growth of other speeds, primarily 9600 bps,
and I think having the repeater capable of that speed would be a boost.
I don't want to put up a repeater that is 9600 bps only, because it
would receive little use and simplex 1200 bps would probably continue to
occupy its input and outputs.

I've come up with two schemes for multi-speeding the repeater:

1) have another modulator/demodulator hooked in, such as a hacked K9NG
or G3RUH modem, and OR the 1200 and 9600 bps DCDs into PTT, and use each
one to gate the audio from the respective modulator into the transmitter.

2) simply make the audio passband between receiver and transmitter flat
and linear over 30Hz to 15kHz or thereabouts, so that it would be
able to repeat either the AFSK 1200 bps stuff OR the direct-FSK output
from the K9NG modems.  I'm not sure what I'd do to key the transmitter
- a simple noise squelch is out because I don't want people talking
through the thing.

I can do either, I think.  The receiver is that wide, and the
transmitter is a direct-FM widget, so it ought to be possible to do #2,
which I'm leaning towards because it's cheaper.

Suggestions?  Anyone tried anything like this?
    - Brian

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

Date: 11 Sep 90 16:15:52 GMT
From: usc!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!helios![e-mail]  (William Gunshannon)
Subject: multispeed fdx packet repeater
To: [e-mail]

With all this searching for a full duplex packet repeater, why hasn't
anyone tried running a linear translator yet??  You know, like the
headend on a broadband LAN (any Localnet 20 people out there?)
I would think that with all the experimenting done by AMSAT, we
should be able to put together something reasonable.

Any comments??

bill  KB3YV
[e-mail]

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

Date: 4 Sep 90 17:50:11 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!news.funet.fi!ousrvr![e-mail]  (Ari Husa OH8NUP)
Subject: PC LAN card and FSK receiver chip needed
To: [e-mail]

Ok, now.. I am getting desperate.

Does ANYONE know ANY pointers as to where to get the Sytek 6120 (IBM
PC Lan Adapter) cards - for free or for money? I would need half a
dozen, but even one would help.

Give a name of the company that has used (or still uses) them, give me
a dealer who has carried (or still carries) them.. anything.

Another missing part is an FSK receiver chip MC13055. The local import
company didn't have them. Hate to call the factory and order 3000
pieces...

Please, help me to find these gadgets! And please, do realize that I
REALLY don't care if I have to call overseas to U. S., to some exotic
ever-never-land.. or whatever. In fact I don't care AT ALL where they
might be found - as long as I can find them.

Thank you for your time,

    Luru

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

Date: 10 Sep 90 20:04:25 GMT
From: eru!hagbard!sunic!news.funet.fi!funic!santra!hila.hut.fi![e-mail]  (Kaj Wiik)
Subject: Phase IIID report
To: [e-mail]

SB AMSAT @ EU < DJ0HC $318006DB0AAA
N4HY:Phase III D report


de DJ0HC @ DB0AAA

[aus HamNet bei CompuServe, DJ0HC]

#: 25939 S5/Amateur Satellites
    30-Aug-90  22:11:08
Sb: Phase III D reportin DL
Fm: Bob McGwier N4HY 74615,1366
To: ALL

HI! I am very happy to see Peter's note translated by Don Moe.  I have had a
storm of letters, notes, etc. requesting further information, wondering
why we decided to do this and that, etc.  He brought out many details
that I had forgotten about, I am extremely grateful he did this. It is
perhaps not completely clear from Peter's extremely detailed report that
ALL THE ITEMS HE METIONED ARE STUDY ITEMS.  They are on the `action item
list' for the experimenters and in each case it is said `study' or
`investigate'.  I take as an example:
N4HY wants to INVESTIGATE the possibility of P-III-D carrying a high speed
hard limiting digitaltransponder with L band up and S band down.  The
highest possible speed above 64 Kbps and up to 1.55 Mbps should be considered.
This I have done or am doing.  I am proud to say I have achieved getting the
aid of some very good microwave nuts and I hope son to enlist other aid in
getting digital types and microwave types to work with us on a DESIGN
experiment.
In no case has AMSAT-NA, AMSAT-DL, or AMSAT-SA or anyone else cast ANYTHING
into concrete except that we have an action item list of things to study
and that we will meet again next spring or early summer at a place yet to
be determined.  You have plenty of time to comment, put your own thoughts
into the process, contribte to the study items, etc.  At this fall's AMSAT-NA
annual meeting, the newly constituted board of directors will take up III-D
as a future project and vote at that time whether or not to commit to it.
I suggest if you like what is implied in Peter's extemely nice report, you
write to your directors and show your support.  If you are opposed then of
course do the same.  We are your elected representatives and we want a new
project to lead AMSAT into the future.  I believe this is the one we should
do butI do believe we need to hear from you.   73, Bob


/EX

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

Date: 11 Sep 90 01:18:46 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!mcdphx!phx.mcd.mot.com![e-mail]  (Dave Fritsche)
Subject: SSIDs and NETROM IDs
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Jay Maynard writes:
>We have no standard for NETROM IDs yet, but I've
>proposed one which may gain some acceptance:
>Take the low order 24 bits of the IP address. Use the top 4 bits to form one
>hex digit, and then take the remaining 20 bits in groups of 5 to make 4
>base-32 digits in the range 0-9a-v. Put a leading # to make the name private.
>Example: My IP address is 44.76.0.92. This makes:
>        44              76              0               92
>0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0|0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0
>(ignore this)  |   4   |    O    |    0    |    2    |    S
>
>This is guaranteed to be unique for all AMPRNET hosts. The bit-twiddling
>can be done by a simple C routine, and might even be built into the netrom
>commands in NOS. I know there's been a similar scheme mentioned on
>Compu$erve, but that one (using the hex representation of the low 16 bits)
>would break down at the edges of the assignment areas.

What we are all using here in Arizona and New Mexico, is something that
sounds similar to the Compuserve method.  Instead of just the lower
16 bits though, we convert the lower 24 bits to hex and just use that
as the NETROM node ID.  I don't see any good reason to include the "#"
in the node ID.  In fact, with some versions of "The Net", IDs that
begin with a "#", don't get rebroadcast.  Some people here were using
IDs with the "#" and couldn't figure out why they had such a high
quality at a node, but weren't being passed on to the next one.  Once
they simply dropped the "#", everything worked as expected.

The string of HEX digits as an ID is certainly unique.  You can then
"pick out" the TCP/IP nodes at a glance, instead of having to search
for "IP" or "TCP" burried in the sea of alphabet soup.  It also allows
someone else that has spotted your ID on the air, to go ahead and add
the IP address to their "domain" table, or hosts.net file.

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

Date: 11 Sep 90 01:18:46 GMT
From: wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!mcdphx!phx.mcd.mot.com![e-mail]  (Dave Fritsche)
Subject: SSIDs and NETROM IDs
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Jay Maynard writes:
>We have no standard for NETROM IDs yet, but I've
>proposed one which may gain some acceptance:
>Take the low order 24 bits of the IP address. Use the top 4 bits to form one
>hex digit, and then take the remaining 20 bits in groups of 5 to make 4
>base-32 digits in the range 0-9a-v. Put a leading # to make the name private.
>Example: My IP address is 44.76.0.92. This makes:
>        44              76              0               92
>0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0|0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0
>(ignore this)  |   4   |    O    |    0    |    2    |    S
>
>This is guaranteed to be unique for all AMPRNET hosts. The bit-twiddling
>can be done by a simple C routine, and might even be built into the netrom
>commands in NOS. I know there's been a similar scheme mentioned on
>Compu$erve, but that one (using the hex representation of the low 16 bits)
>would break down at the edges of the assignment areas.

What we are all using here in Arizona and New Mexico, is something that
sounds similar to the Compuserve method.  Instead of just the lower
16 bits though, we convert the lower 24 bits to hex and just use that
as the NETROM node ID.  I don't see any good reason to include the "#"
in the node ID.  In fact, with some versions of "The Net", IDs that
begin with a "#", don't get rebroadcast.  Some people here were using
IDs with the "#" and couldn't figure out why they had such a high
quality at a node, but weren't being passed on to the next one.  Once
they simply dropped the "#", everything worked as expected.

The string of HEX digits as an ID is certainly unique.  You can then
"pick out" the TCP/IP nodes at a glance, instead of having to search
for "IP" or "TCP" burried in the sea of alphabet soup.  It also allows
someone else that has spotted your ID on the air, to go ahead and add
the IP address to their "domain" table, or hosts.net file.

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

Date: Wed, 12 Sep 90 09:53:54 edt
From: [e-mail]
Subject: THENET 1.50
To: [e-mail]

CEO summary:
I just picked up what purports to be THENET 1.50 from WA5RDH's BBS.
Does anybody have any info as to what it does/does not/fixes/breaks?
Last I heard, 1.01 was the latest and it was supposedly broke.
---
Kurt Freiberger, WB5BBW / voice 713.877.8222 / FAX [phone]
amprnet 44.76.0.1 / PBBS: WB5BBW @ WB5BBW.#HOU.TX.USA.NA
Data General Corp.  Houston, TX / "Anyone for Iraq of Lamb"??
Get someone else's opinion.  I'm keeping mine.

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

Date: Thu, 13 Sep 1990 08:26:52 +0200
From: Karl Georg Schjetne <[e-mail]>
Subject: UNSUSCRIBE!
To: <[e-mail]>

I have several times tried to get out of this list, but in vain so far.  May be
I am known to the system under some strange address?  My original address
was <[e-mail]>, and my present one <[e-mail]>.

PLEASE HELP ME TO GET OUT!

PS!  I have tried the <[e-mail]> without any luck!

LA8GE, Karl Georg Schjetne.

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #143
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Fri, 14 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 143

Today's Topics:
            multispeed fdx packet repeater
              Packet Broadcast Protocol
                 UNSUBSCRIBE

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 13 Sep 90 17:07:50 GMT
From: ncrlnk!ciss!lawday![e-mail]  ([e-mail])
Subject: multispeed fdx packet repeater
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian Kantor) writes:
>[text deleted]
>
>2) simply make the audio passband between receiver and transmitter flat
>and linear over 30Hz to 15kHz or thereabouts, so that it would be
>able to repeat either the AFSK 1200 bps stuff OR the direct-FSK output
>from the K9NG modems.  I'm not sure what I'd do to key the transmitter
>- a simple noise squelch is out because I don't want people talking
>through the thing.
>

I'm very interested to see the followup to this, Brian.  We're thinking of
doing the same thing ourselves, for a high-speed UHF link.  There, the idea
was simply to keep the cost down, not to provide multi-speed pass through.
As cheap as 1200 baud modems are, you could probably put one in line and use
only the dcd from it to key the transmitter.  I don't know if it would be
possible to kludge a simple dcd that would respond to the 9600 baud signal.
If you find out that it is, please let me know!!!
--
John R. Ackermann, Jr.                                           [phone]
Law Department, NCR Corporation                              VoicePlus 622-2966
Dayton, Ohio                                      [e-mail]
     ***** Amateur Radio: ag9v@n8acv or [e-mail] *****

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

Date: 13 Sep 90 04:41:12 GMT
From: julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!helps!bongo![e-mail]  (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Packet Broadcast Protocol
To: [e-mail]

    The latest Doc from Jeff Ward and Harold Price on the Packet
Broadcast Protocol is available on the WB6YMH BBS.


    The phone number is: [phone]

    The file is called: PACDOC.ARC
    The file is on the A0 drive

    I believe this package is also on COMPUSCURVY.

    This stuff which will be published in the next issue of the "ARRL
Computer Networking Conference" proceedings.

    If none of the above meets your needs you can get it via the
USMAIL.LAN. Just do the following:

    Self Addressed Stamped Disc Mailer
    360K 5 1/4 MS-DOS Formatted disc
    A note saying what you want

    I will then mail you a copy of the above.

    Send the mailer to:

Julian Macassey, N6ARE
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue
Hollywood
California 90046-7142

--
Julian Macassey, n6are  [e-mail]  ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian
N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 13:45:24 -0400
From: Louis Graue<[e-mail]>
Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE
To: [e-mail]

Please unsubscribe me.

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #144
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sat, 15 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 144

Today's Topics:
               Choosing an SSID
               digipeaters vs repeaters
            Pac-Comm 9600 Problems
               routing on higher speeds
            TAPR synthetic squelch
             TCP/IP for Macintosh
            Telnet Flow Control in MacNet

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 14 Sep 90 18:12:31 GMT
From: usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast![e-mail]  (Terry Bell)
Subject: Choosing an SSID
To: [e-mail]

TCP/IP NETROM ID's in North East Ohio come in two flavors

1) XXXIP
2) The HEX abbreviation

-SSID's for TCP/IP are generally -4.

--
******************************************************************************
Terry Bell   [e-mail]       AMSAT-NA        N8HSP.AMPR.ORG [44.70.4.10]
UUCP: usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!tbell   Internet: [e-mail]
******************************************************************************

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

Date: 15 Sep 90 02:00:24 GMT
From: ubc-cs!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!attcan!lsuc!becker![e-mail]  (Bruce D. Becker)
Subject: digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

In article <S7R.&_&@splut.conmicro.com> [e-mail] (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes:
|[...]
|Then why the hell don't you let it drop? Your anti-coordinator flamage
|is as tiresome and offensive as Phil Karn's unreasoning anti-OSI
|flamage. We've heard it all before, and we're tired of it. Give it a
|rest.

    If Phil ever decides to stop, I for one (among others)
    would be more than willing to pick up where he left off.
    OSI is an even worse set of architectural mistakes than
    Intel CPU's.

    BTW, for a great rant on this subject, read "The Elements
    of Networking Style", by M. A. Padlipsky, Pretice-Hall 1985...


--
  ,u,    Bruce Becker   Toronto, Ontario
a /i/    Internet: [e-mail], [e-mail]
 `\o\-e  UUCP: ...!uunet!mnetor!becker!bdb
 _< /_   "I still have my phil-os-o-phy" - Meredith Monk

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

Date: 14 Sep 90 14:10:54 GMT
From: hpl-opus!hpccc!hpcc01!hpdmd48![e-mail]  (Steve King)
Subject: Pac-Comm 9600 Problems
To: [e-mail]

I made an observation with my Pac-Comm 9600 baud modem which has left me a
little bothered.  It may also be the cause of some strange problems which
I have seen.

Using the modem as a standard TNC and turning MONITOR ON and PASSALL ON,
the terminal starts printing out random data.  I figured that the SIO
chip would not receive data unless the DCD line was asserted.  Pac Comm
says that the DCD line is used to determine when to send a packet and
not used to determine when the serial data is valid.

On the  Pac-Comm modem, the RX Data line and RX Clock line are always
sending signals to the TNC, even when the PLL is not locked.  This seems
to be the reason for the TNC to be seeing data even when the PLL is not
locked.

This design bothers me.  I have noticed garbage calls showing up in my
MHEARD and I have also noticed times when I have problems communicating
with the other 9600 baud station (it is set up the same way).

What I want to do is qualify the RX Data line with DCD or Lock Detect
(same signal).  This way, I will be sending all zeros until the PLL is
locked.  It bothers me that I would need to do this and thought I'd
ask around before getting too carried away.

Is this the same observation that others have made?  There is a status
word in the Pac-Com TNC program which counts the number of bad frames
the TNC has received (don't remember the name here at work). I looked
at this number and it was about 30000.  I looked again about one minute
later and it was about 200 higher.  The firmware I am running in the
TNC is TINY-2 PMS 2.3.  We would like set this equipment up as a
digipeater between Pendelton OR. and here in Boise ID.  But I want it
working a little better than this (maybe TheNet and/or NetRom firmware
will not have this problem).

I would welcome suggestions as to how to address this problem.  Winter
is comming and I always seem to put my mountain top projects off until
October for some reason.

Thanks,  Steve King  KD7RO
[e-mail]

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

Date: 14 Sep 90 14:07:28 GMT
From: mcsun!hp4nl!tuegate.tue.nl!rc6.urc.tue.nl!rw7.urc.tue.nl![e-mail]  (Annard "Icon" Brouwer)
Subject: routing on higher speeds
To: [e-mail]

I was wondering what happens when packet becomes common running 56kbaud with
routing. Isn't it possible to use routing programs available for Internet at
that time (i.e. dynamic routing)? Shouldn't we use AX25 as a transport layer
to the nearest possible access-point for a backbone?
The reason why I'm wondering is that at the moment the NETROM configuration
doesn't work in Europe (to be more specific: in Holland & Belgium) because
of bad cooperation. For instance a lot of people over here use #TCPIP as
their netrom routing "nick" but in Belgium they use other names. If
routing takes place at the TCP/IP level we won't have any troubles with this
anymore...
What do you think? (Dynamical routing especially on such a scale as used
in amateur radio where links drop out from time to time might be a very
interesting subject for experiments!)
Please let me know...

73, Annard pe1koo
--
| Annard Brouwer                Bitnet             : rcgbbaab@heitue51
| Dreef 74                      UUCP               : [e-mail]
| NL-5504 LD  Veldhoven         packet-radio       : pe1koo@pi8mid
| The Netherlands                                    [44.137.28.6]

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

Date: Fri, 14 Sep 90 14:28:50 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Dave Pascoe)
Subject: TAPR synthetic squelch
To: "[e-mail]"@gte.com

Can someone send me an address for TAPR and the price for their synthetic
squelch kit?  A friend wants to get one of these and asked me to help him out.

Thanks -Dave KM3T
[e-mail]

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

Date: 13 Sep 90 23:48:13 GMT
From: hpda!hpcupt1![e-mail]  (Ray Terry)
Subject: TCP/IP for Macintosh
To: [e-mail]

>I've heard there's a version of ka9q tcp/ip for the Macintosh; if
>you know of a source for it, I'd appreciate hearing about it.  I'd
>prefer a list-server site, since I don't have internet access for
>anonymous ftp.

Try MacScience BBS on 408-866-4933.  The latest version of ka9q for the Mac
(sources, too) is available there.

Ray

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ray Terry      GEnie = R.Terry      CIS = 71150,735      HPDesk = /HP4700
Domain = [e-mail]    SysOp = MacScience BBS 408-866-4933
Packet = N6PHJ @ N6IIU.#NOCAL.CA.USA  UUCP = ...!sun!hpda!hpcupt1!rterry
UFGate = ...!apple!camphq!36!ray.terry
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

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

Date: Fri, 14 Sep 90 11:18:04 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Doug Yuill)
Subject: Telnet Flow Control in MacNet
To: [e-mail]

  I'm having a problem halting a scroll during a telnet session on the Mac using NET.
More correctly, I'm unable to RESTORE a scrolling display after halting it with a
cntr-S. Normally I assume that cntr-Q would resume the scroll after I've had a chance
to catch up. The problem on the Mac is, cntr-Q causes the program to QUIT!
Is there any way to disable this? Can I issue a command to the Unix machine I'm
telneted into that will remap cntr-Q to another set of key?
--dy
Doug Yuill, [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 90 04:30:07 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #145
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Tue, 18 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 145

Today's Topics:
             220 MHz transverters
          Digipeaters vs repeaters (2 msgs)
         Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
          K9NG modem bandwidth and spectrum?
         N.E.D.A. Board Meeting Announcement
            Pac-Comm 9600 Problems
              Phil Karn help ME
            radio-packet protocols
            Telnet Flow Control in MacNET

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 18 Sep 90 01:06:27 GMT
From: dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!cs.pitt.edu![e-mail]
Subject: 220 MHz transverters
To: [e-mail]

For those of you who have been looking for 220 MHz transverters to use
with the WA4DSY modem, Sinclair Radio Labs (Sinclabs) has begun production
of both 144 MHz and 220 MHz models (but not 432 MHz) with 28 MHz IF.
I recently purchased one through East Coast Amateur Radio, but they
may be available elsewhere.

Relevant addresses:

  Sinclabs, Inc.
  Specialty Products Division
  85 Mary Street
  Aurora, Ontario
  L4G 3G9

  East Coast Amateur Radio, Inc.
  496 McConkey Drive
  Tonawanda, NY 14150
  [phone]  (after 1PM EDT)

I have not used the transverter with the DSY modem yet, so have no
information on how well it works as compared with Microwave Modules or
other units.

   Ken Mitchum KY3B
   [e-mail]

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

Date: 15 Sep 90 06:06:52 GMT
From: swrinde!emory!kd4nc!km4ba![e-mail]  (Alan Barrow)
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] writes:
stuff deleted....

>ATV'ers are also subject to similar abuses.  ATV is certainly a difficult
>situation.  The problem involves both the spectrum planning aspect (where
>FM repeater owners are trying to force all ATV use to 23cm and up) to actual
>repeater coordination problems (there already is an ATV repeater within 200
>miles of you, so you cannot have one [ATV'ers are good at sharing spectrum
>and ATV usage patterns allow it much more than FM]).

While I am not an ATV hater, I do not feel that ATV is quite the same.
FDX packet would be the same bandwidth as the voice channels. (kd4nc's
situation.)

ATV is looking at 12 Mhz of occupied space, if I remember correctly.
(correct me as neccessary, it is still *real* wide) at 25khz spacing, 240
voice repeater channels for the 6Mhz output.

I feel ATV has a place, and I don't mind sharing 440 with ATV. I *do*
feel strongly that a 440/900 or 440/12xx plan would make alot of sense.
It also makes things technically much easier. (Think about a duplexer)
One reason that you hear 56k packet types discussing split band repeaters.

Otherwise, the 2 available ATV 440 pairs use an inordinate percentage of
the spectrum. (dozens of 56k packet channels :-> )

BTW, the same coord that gave kd4nc such a problem did not coordinate
FM rptrs below 444.00 because the local ATV rptr monger ran non standard
pairs, so you could use a CATV ready TV to receive it. He would bring it
up every six months or so, to retain his freq. This ham had multiple offers to
put the ATV rptr on a much higher site, if he would move to a bandplan
pair. He refused. He now grumbles about the voice rptrs in 443.0+ and
talks about lack of interest in ATV.

There is also the problem of poor ATV RF design. Proper filtering of
both TX & RX will allow coexistence with FM rptr 440Mhx and up.
( for one pair, I believe) However, only one of the manufacturers
of ATV gear at Dayton build them that way.  They are not the
cheapest, nor the "big name". Users of the cheaper stuff walk into
a built in problem when they buy it, and 440 is in use in their area.

I think ATV could be really neat, but if I ever put one up, it will
be higher than 440!

73,

Alan Barrow km4ba
..!gatech!kd4nc!km4ba!alan
[e-mail]




stuff deleted...

>--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
><[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 17 Sep 90 04:12:00 GMT
From: snorkelwacker!bu.edu!rpi!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

> ATV is looking at 12 Mhz of occupied space, if I remember correctly.
> (correct me as neccessary, it is still *real* wide) at 25khz spacing, 240
> voice repeater channels for the 6Mhz output.

There are a lot of ATV'ers still operating that way.  Many are narrowing
down their spectrum.  The ARRL national bandplan uses 6 Mhz wide channels.

> I feel ATV has a place, and I don't mind sharing 440 with ATV. I *do*
> feel strongly that a 440/900 or 440/12xx plan would make alot of sense.
> It also makes things technically much easier. (Think about a duplexer)
> One reason that you hear 56k packet types discussing split band repeaters.

It does make sense and these things are being considered.

> Otherwise, the 2 available ATV 440 pairs use an inordinate percentage of
> the spectrum. (dozens of 56k packet channels :-> )

There are 3, but even *I* think 3 is too many for ATV on 70cm.  I base my
statement on the national ARRL bandplan.

> BTW, the same coord that gave kd4nc such a problem did not coordinate
> FM rptrs below 444.00 because the local ATV rptr monger ran non standard
> pairs, so you could use a CATV ready TV to receive it. He would bring it
> up every six months or so, to retain his freq. This ham had multiple offers to
> put the ATV rptr on a much higher site, if he would move to a bandplan
> pair. He refused. He now grumbles about the voice rptrs in 443.0+ and
> talks about lack of interest in ATV.

The ARRL national bandplan has ATV in 438-444 Mhz and FM repeaters in 442-445
Mhz.  All the ARRL TV channels already match up with cable ready tuners.  He
could choose to use one of the other 70cm channels and still be aligned with
cable ready tuners.

> There is also the problem of poor ATV RF design. Proper filtering of
> both TX & RX will allow coexistence with FM rptr 440Mhx and up.
> ( for one pair, I believe) However, only one of the manufacturers
> of ATV gear at Dayton build them that way.  They are not the
> cheapest, nor the "big name". Users of the cheaper stuff walk into
> a built in problem when they buy it, and 440 is in use in their area.

I'd call AEA a "big name".

The problem is tricky.  It requires very linear circuitry to maintain the
vestigial sideband, or a good filter after the final amplifier, or both.
It does cost money, but it is money you need to spend.

As to the guy operating the ATV repeater up to 444.  His carrier is probably
on 439.25 Mhz.  Check to see if his signal covers the 435-438 Mhz satellite
band where the FCC rules PROHIBIT REPEATER OPERATION.  Now you have something
in your arsenal?

> I think ATV could be really neat, but if I ever put one up, it will
> be higher than 440!

If I do a repeater it would be on the higher bands.  But I would be using
70cm for ATV DXing because that is where everyone is.  Remember, "low bands
are for DX-ers" :-)

Now back to packet.....

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 17 Sep 90 15:18:13 GMT
From: agate!linus!philabs!briar![e-mail]  (Robert Casey)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

Would the following idea be possible, sensible, legal, practical?

A system for distributing UUCP newsgroups:

Use an AM radio station (or an FM SCA or TV SAP channel) to broadcast
and distribute newsgroups late at night.  Connect a modem to a master
computer at the radio station.  Drive the transmitter's modulator with
the modem.  Obviously, the modem's protocol needs to be single
direction, it can't expect to hear any replies.  People at home would
have their PC's connected to modems which are in turn connected to
appropriate radio receivers.  The PCs would run appropriate software
that would listen for, and store articles from user preselected
newsgroups on hard disk.  The user would use a conventional phone modem
to call a central number to post articles, send e-mail, etc.  Probably
receive e-mail via phone, or would it make sense to deliver e-mail via
the radio station (this assumes that the sender (and receiver) isn't
too concerned about easedroppers.  Normally, the system wouldn't let it
be seen by others, but some hacker might defeat that).  Idea being that
most users read a lot more articles than they write, and you could
distribute articles to a lot of users quicker than tying up phone lines
and computers doing one-on-one one at a time.

What speed should the baud rate be?  4800? 9600?  And have some form of error
correction that doesn't depend on any feedback.

How to pay for it?
Subscription fees?  But some hacker will figure a way to pirate the system.
Maybe, make it free to receivers, and insert short commercials at the end of
every article?  Like: Enjoy Coca Cola!  Get your next printer from "Joe's
Computer Shop" at 5th and Main.

If this makes any sense at all, maybe it would give owners of AM stations
without listeners something to do.  Or is there an FCC rule that says that the
broadcasts must be directly human intelligible?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This Bud's for you!"  -- Budweiser Beer  (example of a short commercial)

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

Date: Mon, 17 Sep 90 20:54:32 -0700
From: brian (Brian Kantor)
Subject: K9NG modem bandwidth and spectrum?
To: packet-radio, tcp-group

Assuming a typical K9NG modem running at 9600 bps and set to +/- 3 KHz
deviation, what sort of channel bandwidth is it going to occupy?  I've
heard figures ranging from 16 to 20 KHz at the -60db points.  Any solid
numbers from actual measurements?

Also, what is LOWEST frequency to be expected?  Since there is a 17-bit
"scrambler" (pseudo-randomizer) in the modem, and there are limits to
the bit patterns that can occur in valid HDLC AX.25 frames, I would
guess that there is a calculable lowest modulation frequency that would
represent the coincidence of the worst-case transmitted bit pattern
with the scrambler pattern.  I've not seen any published info on that.

(Yes, it could be zero, if the bit pattern and scrambler pattern
matched exactly.  However, I believe the scrambler polynomial was
chosen to avoid that occurance.  Unfortunately, the info I have here
isn't specific enough to answer that question.)

Comments?
    - Brian

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

Date: 17 Sep 90 17:59:50 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!clarkson!clutx.clarkson.edu![e-mail]  (Tadd)
Subject: N.E.D.A. Board Meeting Announcement
To: [e-mail]

The North East Digital Association will have it's 4th board of directors
meeting on Sunday Sept 30 1990 in Albany NY.

This meeting is held quarterly in rotating cities throughout the area
of coverage of the club managed network.  The previous meetings were
in Albany NY, Concord NH and Rochester NY.

This meeting is to be held at the Tom Sawyer Motor Lodge on Rt 20 in
Albany.  This meeting is in place of one that was originally scheduled for
Sept 23rd in Poughkeepsie.  The Sept 23rd meeting was canceled as the
host (N2CJ) was hospitalized due to a health problem.

If you are planning in going to this meeting you must RSVP to WA2WNI @ WA2WNI
or phone WA2WNI, Dana, at 518-784-5482.
The meeting is open to Voting members of NEDA.    Membership may be applied for
or renewed at this meeting as well.

The North East Digital Association was formed in fall of 1989 to maintain and
document a TheNET & NET/ROM based packet network.  The network currently has
36 sites and spans Buffalo NY to the New Hampshire seacoast.  All of the
network sites are privately or club (other than NEDA) owned and maintained.
All network sites support multiple radios/ports and are linked using
dedicated HTS free circuits, all inter-site linking being on 440/220/1200 or
50mhz.

Membership is $15 for support and $25 for voting membership
(Voting membership is invited to board meetings)
The 6 board members are elected at the fall general meeting which is
open to all.  Board members are nominated from all voting members
who have attended 2 of the 4 preceding board meetings.
Minutes of each board meeting are published in the following NEDA Quarterly.

For more information on the club you may email me at [e-mail]
or USmail to NEDA  Box 563  Manchester NH 03105
The packet mail address for the club is NEDA @ W1NY.

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

Date: 17 Sep 90 15:21:30 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!rex!rouge!pc![e-mail]  (Dugal James P.)
Subject: Pac-Comm 9600 Problems
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve King) writes:
>I made an observation with my Pac-Comm 9600 baud modem which has left me a
>little bothered.  It may also be the cause of some strange problems which
>I have seen.
>
>Using the modem as a standard TNC and turning MONITOR ON and PASSALL ON,
>the terminal starts printing out random data.  I figured that the SIO
>chip would not receive data unless the DCD line was asserted.  Pac Comm
>says that the DCD line is used to determine when to send a packet and
>not used to determine when the serial data is valid.
>
>On the  Pac-Comm modem, the RX Data line and RX Clock line are always
>sending signals to the TNC, even when the PLL is not locked.  This seems
>to be the reason for the TNC to be seeing data even when the PLL is not
>locked.

I have some experience with tnc-2's.  I often find the PLL feeds
random garbage into the SIO chip, particularly those designs that use
an MF10 filter.  But the chip should ignore random input, until it receives
a SYN char (or several?)  So I don't think this behaviour is in itself
the problem.

I hope soon to install several 9600 baud modems (g3ruh design, from PacComm)
and I'll see if I can duplicate the problem.

73


--
-- James Dugal, N5KNX           Internet: [e-mail]
Associate Director              Ham packet: n5knx@k5arh
Computing Center                US Mail: PO Box 42770  Lafayette, LA  70504
University of Southwestern LA.  Tel. [phone]       U.S.A.

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 06:45:01 GMT
From: cs.utexas.edu!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ucselx!crash![e-mail]  (Jim Burnes)
Subject: Phil Karn help ME
To: [e-mail]

Phil:

I'm trying to make heads or tails of the directories/files on
your public ka9q files.  Would you do me a big favor and annotate
this stuff in some way.  I don't know what to FTP.


Thanks in Advance,

Jim Burnes


pub/ka9q:
total 7
drwxr-xr-x  2 karn          512 Jul  9 19:39 bm
drwxr-xr-x  2 karn          512 Jul 19 20:55 g1emm
drwxrwxrwx  2 karn          512 Jul 23 17:39 incoming
drwxr-xr-x  2 karn          512 Jul 19 20:46 msys
drwxr-xr-x  2 karn          512 Jul  5 20:17 nansi
drwxr-xr-x  2 karn          512 Jul 19 20:54 nos
drwxr-xr-x  2 karn          512 Jul 23 17:39 pa0gri

pub/ka9q/bm:
total 78
-rw-r--r--  1 karn        38547 Jul  8 10:24 bmexe.arc
-rw-r--r--  1 karn        40121 Jul  8 10:20 bmsrc.arc

pub/ka9q/g1emm:
total 928
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       315912 Jul 19 20:43 emm71410.exe
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       146203 Jul 19 20:43 emm71410.lze
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       454816 Jul 19 20:43 emm71410.zip

pub/ka9q/incoming:
total 0

pub/ka9q/msys:
total 352
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       344561 Jul 19 20:46 msys108.exe

pub/ka9q/nansi:
total 52
-rw-r--r--  1 karn        52479 Jul  5 20:17 crh_n.arc

pub/ka9q/nos:
total 1458
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       270768 Jul 19 20:48 net.exe
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       126621 Jul 19 20:54 net.lze
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       477763 Jul 19 20:48 src.tar.Z
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       427398 Jul 19 20:48 src.zip
-rw-r--r--  1 karn        91173 Jul 19 20:48 userref.nr
-rw-r--r--  1 karn        40033 Jul 19 20:52 userref.nr.Z

pub/ka9q/pa0gri:
total 664
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       180552 Jul 23 07:57 nose0716.zip
-rw-r--r--  1 karn       469506 Jul 23 07:56 noss0716.zip

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

Date: 17 Sep 90 11:23:00 GMT
From: cti1![e-mail]  (Mark Pledger)
Subject: radio-packet protocols
To: [e-mail]

I'm am interested in doing some research on currently available radio
modem protocols.  What I'd like is information on what protocols have
been developed, and a detailed explaination of their capabilities.

Any references would also be helpful.

Thanks in advance.




--
Sincerely,


Mark Pledger

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTI                              |              [phone] [voice]
2121 Crystal Drive               |              [phone] [fax]
Suite 103                        |
Arlington, DC  22202             |              [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 17 Sep 90 10:12:55 +0200
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telnet Flow Control in MacNET
To: [e-mail]

Hello Doug Yuill,

Which version of MacNET (or NET/Mac) do you use? Are you running NET on a
512K or a Plus?

Usually Command-Q (not control-Q) is QUIT, but I think on a 512K or Plus
the Command-key is interpreted as the control-key, am I right?

Maybe not the Command-key, but the Option-key should be the control-key
just to avoid these situations.

Meanwhile the latest version of NET/Mac is version 2.0, released some
time in april 1990. It can be downloaded from Apple.com and MacScience BBS.

I have made a number of fixes to NET/Mac. These fixes will probably be
included in the next release. Telnet is one of the things I have just
started looking at, so maybe I can try to solve your problem right away.
Please give me as many details as possible.

By the way, if you want my latest version, please let me know and I'll
e-mail it to you.

73 de
   __
  / /   /
 /-/ __/ __/ ____
/ / (_/ (_/ / / /


+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Please send your reply to:                  | Where  | Mac  | Software  |
|---------------------------------------------+--------+------+-----------|
| TNO ZP-LAN:   adam@tnoal1  (134.221.128.128)| office | SE   | NCSATelnet|
|   internet:   [e-mail]            |  same  | same |   same    |
|         or: [e-mail]            |  same  | same |   same    |
|     bitnet: [e-mail]          |  same  | same | DynaComm  |
|  Ham-radio: pa2aga@pa2aga   (44.137.32.9)   | at home| Plus | NET/Mac   |
|         or: pa2aga@pa2aga-2 (44.137.32.19)  | at home| 512Ke| NET/Mac   |
|         or: pa2aga@pi8mac   (44.137.32.22)  | at home| SE/30| NET/Mac   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #146
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Wed, 19 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 146

Today's Topics:
             220 MHz transverters
                 Bells in NOS
                CNC WX
               Digipeaters vs repeaters
         Distributing newsgroups on AM radio (2 msgs)
        Distributing newsgroups on AM radio? (4 msgs)
               routing on higher speeds
            TAPR synthetic squelch

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 18 Sep 90 18:22:00 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: 220 MHz transverters
To: [e-mail]

Could someone who is knowledgeable about such things do a comparative review
of transverters in the context of being used for packet radio.  I would not
need to see an "experiences" review, but one of "specs analysis" by someone
who knows the stuff better than I, would be useful.

I am also interested in the suitability of combining transverters to get up
on the higher UHF and SHF bands from the 28 Mhz IF of the WA4DSY/Grapes modems.
For instance a lot of these transverters will have IF at 144 or 432, so it
would be necessary to combine a couple of them in these cases.  Those that
work direct from 28 Mhz should be pointed out, though.

I am concerned about things like front-end overload from in band and out
of band signals, and just how narrow the IF strip is or should be, or if
that really matters much.  Potentially I might be putting, say, a system
like this up on a tower with a UHF voice FM repeater just a couple MHz away.

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 13:11:51 GMT
From: rochester!rit!cci632![e-mail]  ( co-op)
Subject: Bells in NOS
To: [e-mail]

Hi.

    When I use the local mini-convers node, (net/rom connected through
a neighbor node with NOS), some ass always insists on sending me 100 BELLs
in a row the instant I walk out of the room.  Each bell seems to be around
500ms, but they are NOT interrupt driven bells, and so a string of 120 bells
would TOTALLY IMMOBILIZE my computer for 60 seconds, etc.

    Anybody got a quick fix for this (other than shooting these idiots) ?


                            Chris/WZ2B

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 10:27:52 GMT
From: n8emr![e-mail]  (Gary Sanders)
Subject: CNC WX
To: [e-mail]

    Anyone have a weather forcast for the ARRL/CRRL computer
conferance this weekend? Should I pack my parka or suntan oil?
Also anyone know how far it is from the airport to the hotel and
is shuttle bus service available?

--
Gary W. Sanders (gws@n8emr or ...!osu-cis!n8emr!gws), 72277,1325
N8EMR @ W8CQK (ip addr) 44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address coordinator]
HAM BBS (1200/2400/9600/V.32/PEP/MNP=L5) 614-895-2553
Voice: 614-895-2552 (eves/weekends)

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 19:54:04 GMT
From: ubc-cs!alberta!atha!aupair.cs.athabascau.ca![e-mail]  (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Alan Barrow) writes:

>ATV is looking at 12 Mhz of occupied space, if I remember correctly.
>(correct me as neccessary, it is still *real* wide) at 25khz spacing, 240
>voice repeater channels for the 6Mhz output.

One of the US ATV manufacturers (AEA?) has announced a VSB 440 MHz
ATV transmitter that will help things out somewhat. It's going to
take a long time for the existing DSB transmitters to go away, though.

I like the idea of putting the ATV output where CATV televisions can
receive the transmissions, since it can provide an excellent PR tool.
(Imagine running weekly licensing classes over ATV on a CATV
compatible frequency. Publish the info in the local newspaper and
see what happens.)

--
    Lyndon Nerenberg  VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca University
    {alberta,cbmvax,mips}!atha!lyndon || [e-mail]

      The only thing open about OSF is their mouth.  --Chuck Musciano

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 18:30:00 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio
To: [e-mail]

> What speed should the baud rate be?  4800? 9600?  And have some form of error
> correction that doesn't depend on any feedback.

56K baud or higher, if you can get the bandwidth.

Definitely forward error correction methods are a must.

> How to pay for it?

Make it FREE!  Then you don't have to hire accountantss and so many lawyers.

> If this makes any sense at all, maybe it would give owners of AM stations
> without listeners something to do.  Or is there an FCC rule that says that th
> broadcasts must be directly human intelligible?

Alternatively, make it a satellite based service.  One satellite transponder
should handle the load easily.  Then it can be picked up all over the country
for local redistribution and reduce some network traffic.  And the local AM
and FM+SCA stations that carry it can get it that way as well.

Maybe we need to petition the FCC to create a service called "Digital
Broadcasting".

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 19 Sep 90 00:42:20 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!caen!umich!pmsmam![e-mail]  (Bill Meahan)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio
To: [e-mail]

The full citation for the CACM article I referred to in a previous posting:

  "Polychannel Systems for Mass Digital Communication"

   David K. Gifford, CACM, Vol 33, No. 2, February 1990

The system described was the "Boston Community Information System (BCIS)
run at 4800 baud on the 92KHz SCA channel on WERS-FM in Boston.
--
Bill Meahan WA8TZG              |"The freedom of human beings is not a condition
uunet!mailrus!umich!pmsmam!wwm  |but a task. What an absence of shackles means
                |is our duty to know and to establish our own
"I do NOT speak for anyone    |limits. It is often more difficult to be free
but me, myself and I!"        |than not to be free ...."  -Bela Varga

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 11:14:46 GMT
From: zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!samsung!umich!pmsmam![e-mail]  (Bill Meahan)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>Would the following idea be possible, sensible, legal, practical?
>
>A system for distributing UUCP newsgroups:
>
>Use an AM radio station (or an FM SCA or TV SAP channel) to broadcast
>and distribute newsgroups late at night.  Connect a modem to a master
>computer at the radio station.  Drive the transmitter's modulator with
>the modem.  Obviously, the modem's protocol needs to be single
>direction, it can't expect to hear any replies.  People at home would
>have their PC's connected to modems which are in turn connected to
>appropriate radio receivers.  The PCs would run appropriate software
>that would listen for, and store articles from user preselected
>newsgroups on hard disk.  The user would use a conventional phone modem
>to call a central number to post articles, send e-mail, etc.  Probably
>receive e-mail via phone, or would it make sense to deliver e-mail via
>the radio station (this assumes that the sender (and receiver) isn't
>too concerned about easedroppers.  Normally, the system wouldn't let it
>be seen by others, but some hacker might defeat that).  Idea being that
>most users read a lot more articles than they write, and you could
>distribute articles to a lot of users quicker than tying up phone lines
>and computers doing one-on-one one at a time.
>
>What speed should the baud rate be?  4800? 9600?  And have some form of error
>correction that doesn't depend on any feedback.
>
>How to pay for it?
>Subscription fees?  But some hacker will figure a way to pirate the system.
>Maybe, make it free to receivers, and insert short commercials at the end of
>every article?  Like: Enjoy Coca Cola!  Get your next printer from "Joe's
>Computer Shop" at 5th and Main.
>
>If this makes any sense at all, maybe it would give owners of AM stations
>without listeners something to do.  Or is there an FCC rule that says that the
>broadcasts must be directly human intelligible?
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"This Bud's for you!"  -- Budweiser Beer  (example of a short commercial)

Such a thing has actually BEEN DONE!.  A group of MIT students have put
together a system that uses SCA at 4800 baud (no commercials) on a Boston
Public Radio (as in National Public Radio") station.  A description of the
system and an analysis of the results appeared in CACM  (Communications of
the Association for Computing Machinery for the unaware) late this past summer.
Sorry, I don't have the exact reference with me.

In their system, one-way broadcasts of data (including, for a while, USENET)
were received by a home site, decoded and passed to a program running in the
user's PC/AT (the work was sponsored, in part, by IBM).  A program in the AT
would use 'filter rules' on subject and content established by the user to
only save information of interest, sending the rest to the bit bucket.

The user could query the info and, if something in the query referred to
something not on the local hard disk, an autodial telephone modem would dial
up a mainframe at MIT which would then download the requested info.
--
Bill Meahan WA8TZG              |"The freedom of human beings is not a condition
uunet!mailrus!umich!pmsmam!wwm  |but a task. What an absence of shackles means
                |is our duty to know and to establish our own
"I do NOT speak for anyone    |limits. It is often more difficult to be free
but me, myself and I!"        |than not to be free ...."  -Bela Varga

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 14:08:31 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!wang!tegra![e-mail]  (Johnathan Vail)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Meahan) writes:

   In article <[e-mail]> you write:
   >Would the following idea be possible, sensible, legal, practical?
   >
   >A system for distributing UUCP newsgroups:
   >
   >Use an AM radio station (or an FM SCA or TV SAP channel) to broadcast
   >and distribute newsgroups late at night.  Connect a modem to a master

   Such a thing has actually BEEN DONE!.  A group of MIT students have put
   together a system that uses SCA at 4800 baud (no commercials) on a Boston
   Public Radio (as in National Public Radio") station.  A description of the

Isn't this a part of the Stargate project?  As I understand it
Stargate was designed to use a satellite to distribute news to local
radio stations, one in each area, which would redistribute it to end
users in a manner similar to the above.  Posting news would be done to
regional uplink sites.  Any info on what happened to this project?


"Everything that gives us pleasure gives us pain to measure it by."
    -- The Residents, GOD IN THREE PERSONS
 _____
|     | Johnathan Vail | [e-mail]
|Tegra| [phone] | N1DXG@448.625-(WorldNet)
 -----  [e-mail] {...sun!sunne ..uunet}!tegra!vail

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 17:21:09 GMT
From: julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!umich!pmsmam![e-mail]  (Bill Meahan)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Johnathan Vail) writes:
>Isn't this a part of the Stargate project?  As I understand it
>Stargate was designed to use a satellite to distribute news to local
>radio stations, one in each area, which would redistribute it to end
>users in a manner similar to the above.  Posting news would be done to
>regional uplink sites.  Any info on what happened to this project?
>
>
>"Everything that gives us pleasure gives us pain to measure it by."
>    -- The Residents, GOD IN THREE PERSONS
> _____
>|     | Johnathan Vail | [e-mail]
>|Tegra| [phone] | N1DXG@448.625-(WorldNet)
> -----  [e-mail] {...sun!sunne ..uunet}!tegra!vail

Nope.  I have no idea what Stargate is about, but the CACM article indicates
that the objective was the development of a "community" resource system.
USENET distribution was only a small part of the project.  Other items,
e.g. financial tickers, etc., were used more than USENET was.  Kind of
an "over the air Prodigy" project.
--
Bill Meahan WA8TZG              |"The freedom of human beings is not a condition
uunet!mailrus!umich!pmsmam!wwm  |but a task. What an absence of shackles means
                |is our duty to know and to establish our own
"I do NOT speak for anyone    |limits. It is often more difficult to be free
but me, myself and I!"        |than not to be free ...."  -Bela Varga

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 21:54:57 GMT
From: mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu![e-mail]  (Perry G Ramsey)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Meahan) writes:
>
> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
> >Would the following idea be possible, sensible, legal, practical?
> >
> >A system for distributing UUCP newsgroups:
> >
> >Use an AM radio station (or an FM SCA or TV SAP channel) to broadcast
>
> Such a thing has actually BEEN DONE!.  A group of MIT students have put
> together a system that uses SCA at 4800 baud (no commercials) on a Boston

I remember hearing that someone was using the blanking bar between TV frames
to transmit data.  In the OLD days, they needed 36 lines at the end of
each frame for internal synchronization, but now it only takes 12, so some
bright guy got the idea that you could send data over that time at about
1200 baud.  It worked great until both the TV station and the cable company
tried to do it at the same time, and then the lawyers got rich.  I
haven't heard anything since.


--
Perry G. Ramsey           Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
[e-mail]   Purdue University
[e-mail]    We've looked at clouds from ten sides now,
              And we REALLY don't know clouds, at all.

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 00:03:29 GMT
From: hpl-opus!hpccc!hpcc01!hpcc05!col![e-mail]  (Bdale Garbee)
Subject: routing on higher speeds
To: [e-mail]

>What do you think? (Dynamical routing especially on such a scale as used
>in amateur radio where links drop out from time to time might be a very
>interesting subject for experiments!)
>Please let me know...

Yes.  Folks have played around with using RIP as a routing protocol for TCP/IP
on packet, and it works just as well/badly over the air as it does elsewhere.
Anders Klemets has writting an initial implementation of Fred Goldstein's
RSPF routing algorithm, and the G1EMM version of NOS includes this.  There are
still some problems, probably both with the protocol and the implementation,
but it's the right direction, I believe.

Bdale, N3EUA

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

Date: 18 Sep 90 00:04:39 GMT
From: hpl-opus!hpccc!hpcc01!hpcc05!col![e-mail]  (Bdale Garbee)
Subject: TAPR synthetic squelch
To: [e-mail]

>Can someone send me an address for TAPR and the price for their synthetic
>squelch kit?  A friend wants to get one of these and asked me to help him out.

I assume you mean the DCD mods.  The prices are all in the $11-$20 range,
there are different models for different modems/TNC's.

Call TAPR for more details.

TAPR
PO Box 12925
Tucson, AZ  85732
[phone]

Bdale, N3EUA

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 90 04:30:05 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #147
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Thu, 20 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 147

Today's Topics:
               ATV vs repeaters
               Digipeaters vs repeaters
         Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
            KA9Q Wanted for Amiga

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 20 Sep 90 06:04:27 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)
Subject: ATV vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

In this part of the world (So Cal), there are two ATV channels on
420-450.  One is around 42x somewhere, and the other is around 433.5.
(visual carrier freq; the aural carrier is 4.5 MHz higher)

The 1.2GHz band has 5 ATV repeater output channels on it, all of which have
their inputs on one or the other of the two 420-450 channels.

If it suddenly occurs to you that you can't do that because the 433.5
channel isn't in a repeater subband, you're right.  However, that's the
way the frequency coordinating committee assigned the channels.

Officially, I think, the 433.5 channel is simplex and not a repeater
input.  But at least one of the ATV repeaters I can receive is listening
there.

At least most of local guys I can hear/see are running with a somewhat-
-suppressed lower sideband.  I'm sorta amazed but well pleased.

The 433 video components play absolute Hob with trying to receive the
Microsats at 435 and 437.  They don't seem to hit the DSY modems running
56kb at 433.05 much.
    - Brian

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

Date: 20 Sep 90 04:55:05 GMT
From: swrinde!emory!kd4nc!km4ba![e-mail]  (Alan Barrow)
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] writes:

stuff deleted...

>The ARRL national bandplan has ATV in 438-444 Mhz and FM repeaters in 442-445
                       ^^^ this is the problem...  ^^^
The official band plans overlap by 2 Mhz... Why I feel 1 ATV pair in 440
is good enough. I think there is enough room also for a simplex freq also.

I have no problems with 438-442, if it is used appropriately. I still think
split freq is better.

stuffdeleted...

>> There is also the problem of poor ATV RF design. Proper filtering of
>> both TX & RX will allow coexistence with FM rptr 440Mhx and up.
>> ( for one pair, I believe) However, only one of the manufacturers
>> of ATV gear at Dayton build them that way.  They are not the
>> cheapest, nor the "big name". Users of the cheaper stuff walk into
>> a built in problem when they buy it, and 440 is in use in their area.

>I'd call AEA a "big name".

AEA is one of the culprits. From what I understand, the AEA unit will
not work on a non-interefence basis below 442. (IE, it's output will
still be in the FM band.) This is from a discussion with several hardcore
ATV'ers at Dayton.

I asked how I could run an ATV rptr in my area, while coexisting with 443+
fm rptrs. They named one unit that would work. It was not AEA. They liked
AEA package & price, but indicated it did not filter as well as it should.
This is their viewpoint. I would be interested in knowing more, as the AEA
will prob be the most popular.

Actually, the ATV rptr output is usually the higher freq, due to not
having the FM rptrs key it up. The ATV rptr will be the one needing the
extra filtering. Is this correct?

>band where the FCC rules PROHIBIT REPEATER OPERATION.  Now you have something
>in your arsenal?

good tip! I think this guy is not active any longer. Kindof a shame, as
he was sort of a pioneer. He just did not want to play ball.

>If I do a repeater it would be on the higher bands.  But I would be using
>70cm for ATV DXing because that is where everyone is.  Remember, "low bands
>are for DX-ers" :-)

Ok by me... ATV simplex seems like weak signal to me.. I do think we need
to use the 420-440 area more.

>Now back to packet.....

same here! :-)

>--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
><[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

Alan Barrow km4ba
..!gatech!kd4nc!km4ba!alan
[e-mail]

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

Date: 19 Sep 90 22:32:44 GMT
From: ubc-cs!alberta!myrias!aunro!aupair.cs.athabascau.ca![e-mail]  (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

>Use an AM radio station (or an FM SCA or TV SAP channel) to broadcast
>and distribute newsgroups late at night.

Actually, it's already being done via satellite by Norsat in British
Columbia. They sell a complete downlink kit for $2K (2 foot dish,
receiver, PC demodulator card, software). The link runs at 9600
baud, and carries a complete usenet feed. They also distribute PD
software between news batches.

--
    Lyndon Nerenberg  VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca University
    {alberta,cbmvax,mips}!atha!lyndon || [e-mail]

      The only thing open about OSF is their mouth.  --Chuck Musciano

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

Date: 20 Sep 90 04:36:17 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]  (Kevin - Nomura)
Subject: KA9Q Wanted for Amiga
To: [e-mail]

I am interested in the latest version of the ka9q package for the Amiga.
The last version I know of is the one on fish disk 225, which dates back
to 1987 and is quite buggy.

kevin nomura

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 90 04:30:07 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #148
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Fri, 21 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 148

Today's Topics:
        Distributing newsgroups on AM radio? (2 msgs)
            KA9Q Wanted for Amiga
          Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 21 Sep 90 03:21:34 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Talking Head)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:
>[e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:
>>Use an AM radio station (or an FM SCA or TV SAP channel) to broadcast
>>and distribute newsgroups late at night.
>Actually, it's already being done via satellite by Norsat in British
>Columbia. They sell a complete downlink kit for $2K (2 foot dish,
>receiver, PC demodulator card, software). The link runs at 9600
>baud, and carries a complete usenet feed. They also distribute PD
>software between news batches.

Hmmm... I'd like to pose a question:  I've seen devices in the market
that allow for "wireless LAN".  What if I just wanted to send IP packets
(or a TCP/IP link) across the street to a server (~600ft and some brick+
glass).  Is this possible?  If so, is it practical?  What about the
highest transmission rates?

>--
>    Lyndon Nerenberg  VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca University
>        {alberta,cbmvax,mips}!atha!lyndon || [e-mail]

>      The only thing open about OSF is their mouth.  --Chuck Musciano

\\Lee
[e-mail]

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

Date: 21 Sep 90 02:26:12 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

I belive Norsat quit broadcasting data as I tried to dial in and no answer
anymore.The system was broadcast on an canadian Anik satellite.The system
was also on K-2 transponder 12 for a while.I am very interested in
transmitting the data also as I am the president of a common carrrier
firm in Palo Alto Ca.I have been looking for a corporate sponser that may
wish to pickup the tab as I have to pay for transmission time from GE
Americom.Basically our service replaces telco lines via satellite.
I have been very interested in broadcasting information to people
instead of to display sign advertising etc. Regards Norman Gillaspie
415-967-0833

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

Date: 20 Sep 90 14:48:50 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!ni.umd.edu!sayshell.umd.edu![e-mail]  (Louis A. Mamakos)
Subject: KA9Q Wanted for Amiga
To: [e-mail]

The last version of the port that I've made available can be had via anonymous
FTP from Sayshell.UMD.EDU.  It's packaged in a .ZOO file, and is too large
to mail.

louie
WA3YMH

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

Date: 20 Sep 90 20:04:15 GMT
From: abvax!iccgcc![e-mail]
Subject: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tim Dayger) writes:
> OK, I hope you read the summary line above.  Here goes:
>
> I've used networks, online services, and BBS's for years, but I've never
> really paid much attention to packet radio.  This may change... depending
> on what kind of feedback I receive.
>
> Basically, I'm starting from scratch, and need to have some idea of where to
> begin.  I have a list of rudimentary questions like:
>
> 1) Just what *is* packet radio?

stuff deleted...

I would also like the above info. I do know that you will need a Ham
license, but beyond that, what can you do with it?


John Gibbons

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #149
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sat, 22 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 149

Today's Topics:
         Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
          Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
                 Nos-In-a-Box
            St. Louis information

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 20 Sep 90 11:36:22 GMT
From: uc!cs.umn.edu!kksys!edgar![e-mail]  (Bryan Halvorson)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:
>
>Actually, it's already being done via satellite by Norsat in British
>Columbia. They sell a complete downlink kit for $2K (2 foot dish,
>receiver, PC demodulator card, software). The link runs at 9600
>baud, and carries a complete usenet feed. They also distribute PD
>software between news batches.
>
Does anybody know what satellite and transponder this uses?
And is this a subscription service or can anybody with a dish and the
right modem receive it?

Bryan
N0BUU

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

Date: 21 Sep 90 13:45:22 GMT
From: usc!samsung!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]  (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tim Dayger) writes:
>OK, I hope you read the summary line above.  Here goes:
>
>I've used networks, online services, and BBS's for years, but I've never
>really paid much attention to packet radio.  This may change... depending
>on what kind of feedback I receive.
>
>Basically, I'm starting from scratch, and need to have some idea of where to
>begin.  I have a list of rudimentary questions like:
>
>1) Just what *is* packet radio?

Packet radio is a method of sending computer data over radio as the name
suggests. Data is combined into blocks called frames that contain an address
header and a checksum. The frames are transmitted in sequence with
acknowledgements being returned for each sucessful frame received by the
addressee. Timeouts without acknowledgement cause retransmission of
outstanding blocks. A complete link level protocol that does this plus
channel control is called AX25L2V2.

>2) What kind of equipment due I need, and how do I use it with my PC?

You need a PAD (Packet Assembler Disassembler) and a radio modem and a
radio and antenna. The PAD and modem are usually combined in a unit called
a TNC (Terminal Node Comtroller) which connects to your PC via a serial
port. Another method uses a plugin card for the PC that combines a HDLC
chip with a radio modem and uses software on the PC to do the PAD function.
A third method combines the radio modem with the radio in a single unit
and interfaces to the PC either via a plugin card or via a PAD that connects
to the PC via a serial port. Depending on the system you choose, there
are various software packages you can run as an application on the PC. There
is BBS software, terminal emulation software, and TCP/IP networking
software available. Most of it free.

>3) How much technical (hardware) proficiency is requied to manage a
>   packet radio system? (I have a general understanding of computer
>   hardware, but am more comfortable programming.)

In general most of this stuff is plug and play depending on how deeply
involved you want to get in the technical details of packet radio. If
you can solder a connector on a plug, you can hookup most packet equipment.

>4) Just what's out there for me to access via packet radio?  (This is
>   VERY important.  I'm not interested in this as a pure hobby, I'm more
>   interested in the resource potentials.)

Potential is the key word here. Other than sending Email via the BBS
network which operates sort of like fido net, and some file transfers
with neighboring operators, and some databases you can query, packet
remains a technique looking for an application. The potential is great
and work is being done on both the hardware and software ends of the
system, but it's not the internet yet.

>5) How much will a packet radio set-up cost me?  How COST EFFECTIVE is
>   packet radio?

Starting from scratch, costs range from $300 to $700 for systems ranging
in capability from 1200 to 56k baud. Cost effectiveness is a harder
question. It depends on how much you use the system. The up front costs
are it. There is no continuing charge other than electricity to use
the system.

>6) What legal issues do I need to consider regarding packet radio?  Do I
>   need a license?

Yes you need an amateur radio license to run packet. Well this is not strictly
true, you could get a commercial license and establish your own point to
point links, but unless you have a legitimate business need it wouldn't
be cost effective. The other legal issues concern message content. Over
any radio system you may not use profanity. And specifically over amateur
radio you may not use the channel for commercial purposes nor may you
use encryption to conceal the nature of your transmissions.

>Pointers to reading materials such as books and magazines that my campus or
>local libraries might carry would be nice.

Much of the material available in book form is outdated and describes systems
and operating techniques that were in vogue two years ago but do not represent
the way packet is done today. The field is in it's infantcy and is changing
daily. The best way to learn about packet is from people who are actively using
packet. The best techincal references are the ARRL Computer Networking
Conference Proceedings volumes 1 thru 8. Also consult your library for
back issues of the American Radio Relay League's magazines QST and QEX
and back issues of the late lamented Ham Radio Magazine.

>Personal comments and insights into the world of packet radio would also be
>appreciated.  I've tried reading the ham-radio newsgroups, but a *lot* of it
>is Greek to me.

I find the technical challenge of developing reliable high speed links and
networking systems form the bulk of my interest in packet radio. In many
ways we are charting virgin territory and that is always exciting. Others
use packet primarily for personal Email. Still others use a database and
bulletin system called Packet Cluster to aid their chase for DX contacts.
People active in our volunteer emergency response system ARES use a
hazardous materials database to retrieve on the scene information. ARES
folks also use the BBS system to handle emergency messages for local
officials and the Red Cross during earthquakes, fires, and severe weather.
Locally, we have an active Skywarn group that works with the National
Weather Service to report severe weather. We are integrating packet into
our operation. A great number of people simply use the system for keyboard
to keyboard chatting.

Gary KE4ZV

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

Date: Fri, 21 Sep 90 8:14:41 PDT
From: Peter Dahl <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nos-In-a-Box
To: [e-mail]

I have not heard anything about the NOS-in-a-Box project for a while.
Does anyone have any reports as to progress on it and when it may be
ready to distribute for use with the DE-56?

                Peter, WA7FUS

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

Date: 21 Sep 90 16:15:09 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!dranet.dra.com![e-mail]
Subject: St. Louis information
To: [e-mail]

Does anyone have information on packet activity in St. Louis?  In particular,
any NET/ROM or TCP/IP nodes?

73

Mike WA0SXV

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #150
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sun, 23 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 150

Today's Topics:
               ATV vs repeaters
               Digipeaters vs repeaters
        Distributing newsgroups on AM radio? (2 msgs)
          Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 22 Sep 90 18:02:00 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: ATV vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

> In this part of the world (So Cal), there are two ATV channels on
> 420-450.  One is around 42x somewhere, and the other is around 433.5.
> (visual carrier freq; the aural carrier is 4.5 MHz higher)
>
> The 1.2GHz band has 5 ATV repeater output channels on it, all of which have
> their inputs on one or the other of the two 420-450 channels.
>
> If it suddenly occurs to you that you can't do that because the 433.5
> channel isn't in a repeater subband, you're right.  However, that's the
> way the frequency coordinating committee assigned the channels.

If a repeater coordinator "coordinates" for repeater use a frequency that
is illegal for repeater use, that coordinator should IMMEDIATELY be put out
of business.  I won't be humble about that opinion.

> Officially, I think, the 433.5 channel is simplex and not a repeater
> input.  But at least one of the ATV repeaters I can receive is listening
> there.

That repeater is operating ILLEGALLY....

    97.205(b)  A repeater may receive and transmit only on the 10 m
    and shorter wavelength frequency bands except the 28.0-29.5 MHz,
    50.0-52.0 MHz, 144.0-144.5 MHz, 145.5-146.0 MHz, 220.0-220.5 MHz,
    431.0-433.0 and 435.0-438.0 segments.

....unless he is keeping his input bandwidth between 433 and 435 MHz.

The purpose of restricting even the INPUT frequency from the segments
above is to prevent the USER of the repeater from causing intereference
on the designated segments, not just the repeater itself.

Before notifying the FCC, I would suggest contacting your section manager
and/or the official observer people regarding this.  Brian, I know you know
about this; I'm just posting this for other reader's benefit.

> At least most of local guys I can hear/see are running with a somewhat-
> -suppressed lower sideband.  I'm sorta amazed but well pleased.

But are the people who transmit INTO a repeater on 433.5 MHz doing this
with at least 40db at 433 MHz and at least 70db at 432 MHz?  I just picked
those figures at random, but I think they would apply well to preventing
interference to 432 MHz weak signal work.

> The 433 video components play absolute Hob with trying to receive the
> Microsats at 435 and 437.  They don't seem to hit the DSY modems running
> 56kb at 433.05 much.

The scrambling probably has a lot to do with that.  Video tends to appear
in little spikes every 15734.265734 Hz plus or minus many Hz depending on the
frequency stability of the video source.

[ 15734.265734 Hz = (5 MHz) * 63 / 88 / 227.5 ]

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 22 Sep 90 17:39:00 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Digipeaters vs repeaters
To: [e-mail]

> >The ARRL national bandplan has ATV in 438-444 Mhz and FM repeaters in 442-445
>                                            ^^^ this is the problem...  ^^^
> The official band plans overlap by 2 Mhz... Why I feel 1 ATV pair in 440
> is good enough. I think there is enough room also for a simplex freq also.
>
> I have no problems with 438-442, if it is used appropriately. I still think
> split freq is better.

What is a good alternative?  The "usual" bandwidth is 6 Mhz when the
suggested vestigial sideband is used.  You could trim things even tighter,
but no one makes anything to do that yet, and the best you could hope for
would be about 4.8 MHz.  Suggest a place to fit that in.

> AEA is one of the culprits. From what I understand, the AEA unit will
> not work on a non-interefence basis below 442. (IE, it's output will
> still be in the FM band.) This is from a discussion with several hardcore
> ATV'ers at Dayton.

No, AEA is NOT the culprit, but rather the culprit is the bandplan which
puts the carrier at 439.25 MHz and that will generate signals all the way
up to nearly 444 MHz even if the filtering is working correctly.

> I asked how I could run an ATV rptr in my area, while coexisting with 443+
> fm rptrs. They named one unit that would work. It was not AEA. They liked
> AEA package & price, but indicated it did not filter as well as it should.
> This is their viewpoint. I would be interested in knowing more, as the AEA
> will prob be the most popular.

The AEA unit may or may not be filtering well, but even with a theoretically
perfect filter, you will be affecting more than half of one side of the FM
repeater subband.

> Actually, the ATV rptr output is usually the higher freq, due to not
> having the FM rptrs key it up. The ATV rptr will be the one needing the
> extra filtering. Is this correct?

Probably.

> >If I do a repeater it would be on the higher bands.  But I would be using
> >70cm for ATV DXing because that is where everyone is.  Remember, "low bands
> >are for DX-ers" :-)
>
> Ok by me... ATV simplex seems like weak signal to me.. I do think we need
> to use the 420-440 area more.

Not everyone can use that.  Remember that 420-430 is not available in all
parts of the country.  Try fitting just ONE ATV channel in 430-450 MHz that
can be used for repeater operation.  You do NOT want to put it on 432 MHz
and you cannot put it on 435-438 MHz.

The 70cm band is currently very poorly fragmented.

This issue, while being certainly packet related since packet needs to
definitely deal with coordination problems, should be moved over to the
main rec.ham-radio group.

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 23 Sep 90 00:26:06 GMT
From: decvax.dec.com!deccrl!bacchus.pa.dec.com![e-mail]  (Brian Reid)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

A few years ago the Stargate project set up and operated for one year a test
system for the distribution of USENET in the vertical blanking interval of
the cable version of WTBS Atlanta (the bits were injected into WTBS' signal
in the satellite uplink, so the feed was not available if you got WTBS via
normal UHF reception). There was a 16-bit field in, I think, Line 21 of the
VBI, which gave a raw throughput of about 500 bits per second. 500 bits per
second around the clock gives you about 5 megabytes per day of raw capacity.

Because there is no possibility of NAK/retry with a satellite link, every
packet of data was sent twice. If you missed both of them, then you didn't
get the data, and you just had to suffer.

There were seven subscribers. One of them was decwrl, and I was at the time
decwrl's usenet administrator, so I had lots of first-hand experience with it.

The project was a failure for these reasons:

   1) The downlink hardware was not reliable. It was manufactured for them
      by Zenith and the box was pretty shoddy. We have lots of world-class
      electronics and video experts in our lab, and we had a very hard
      time getting it working and keeping it working.

   2) Because the satellite links were tariffed by the US FCC as "common
      carriers", they were legally permitted to carry only moderated
      newsgroups. There wasn't enough interesting material in moderated
      newsgroups back then to keep anybody's attention.

   3) The satellite bandwidth was expensive. Satellites attract Big
      Business, and they weren't about to sell this service cheap.
      We paid about $1000/year for airtime fees and such.

   4) Although 500 bits per second is enough to get a lot of netnews
      through, it was awful with respect to latency. We got articles
      a fairly long time after they were posted. decwrl had a few other
      feeds, all by uucp/telephone, and never once during the entire year
      that the service was operating did we get our first copy of
      an article over the satellite feed. High-speed links are a lot
      like high-speed copiers: you want speed to have low delays rather
      than to have high volumes.

   5) The feed was read-only. Everybody needed to have ordinary land-line
      access to USENET so that they could post replies to articles that
      they had seen. The combination of (5) and (4) was the death of
      the project, actually: the Telebit Trailblazer was just becoming
      popular at that time, and since people were forced to have an
      ordinary USENET feed as well as a satellite feed, so they could
      post, people quickly did the arithmetic and figured out that it
      would be cheaper, easier, and faster to take the whole feed
      via the TrailBlazer rather than to take part of it over the
      satellite link and part of it over the phone.

I have two Stargate decodeer boxes sitting in my office as museum pieces. I
probably ought to mail them back to the Stargate people but I don't quite
know where they vanished to.

Brian Reid

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

Date: 23 Sep 90 05:29:11 GMT
From: vortex![e-mail]  (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Distributing newsgroups on AM radio?
To: [e-mail]

As the originator of the Stargate Experiment, I'd like to add a bit
to elaborate on what Brian said in his posting.

First, it's important to realize that the project *was* an
experiment.  It was unclear going in whether the technology was
really suitable for this sort of application, and we purposely
limited the number of subscribers (we turned away quite a few
potential subscribers).  Since it was all very new technology, there
was no way to determine how well things would work without actually
having receive points in a variety of locations in different
situations, which is what we did.

The Zenith decoding hardware had lots of problems.  We unfortunately
had no choice, since we had to use that hardware to make use of the
WTBS vertical interval, and there were no other choices available to
us at that time.  We did not have any indications before the
experiment that the equipment was so flakey--the information we were
able to get led us to believe that they'd perform OK.  Experience
taught us otherwise.  If we'd known in advance how bad they were we
probably would not have proceeded.  We never had direct control over
the decoders--they were addressed and controlled from the uplink
point, and we had to go through other persons to get anything enabled
or addressed.

One thing we learned is that the quality of the decoder is critical
given the highly variable nature of the received video signal after
being passed through satellite and cable hops.  The latter is
particularly important, since cable systems can do awful things to a
signal.  Of course, over-the-air systems are vulnerable to all sorts
of problems as well.  All of this means that a large burden is placed
on the decoding equipment, and in some situations with some signals
*no* decoding equipment can be expected to work satisfactorily.

Anyway, we did the best we could with them.  Sometime after the
project closed, I ran into some other people who had experience with
the same decoders.  Their experience was identical to ours.

So, we were all generally unhappy with the hardware.  That was one
reason not to continue the experiment.  Another reason was that the
uplink carrier we were using was bought out by another entity, which
caused a decision to be made to remove "outside" services such as us
from their vertical interval.  We, as "little guys", were in no
position to fight this or wave enough dollars at it to cause a
reversal.  To move to another carrier, even assuming we could have
found one that we could afford based on the subscriber fees at that
point, would have entailed uplink relocation and a complete change of
uplink and decoding hardware.  As Brian mentioned, the satellite
carriers are looking for people with big bucks when it comes to
selling time on their satellite transponders.

All in all, it just didn't make sense to continue, since there wasn't
other hardware around that seemed likely to perform any better anyway.

While the other factors definitely impacted our decision, the
loss of the uplink carrier which was the immediate reason why the
decision was made to terminate--there just wasn't a lot of point in
continuing, and there didn't seem to be any real interest on the part
of the subscribers to go through the hassles that would be involved
in new hardware, etc. in any case.

It is worth noting that nobody working on the project made a dime
from the effort.  All subscriber fees went to pay for direct project
expenses.  We ended up with a zero balance, and arranged to have the
carrier pull the plug as the money ran out.  All in all, not a bad
way to end an experiment.

And indeed, just because an experiment ends doesn't mean it wasn't
worthwhile.  I would not call the experiment a failure.  To learn
that a particular technology is not suitable for netnews is
meaningful information.  While it would have been interesting if the
results had been "positive", negative outcomes are useful too.

Brian's point about latency is quite significant.  Given the
structure of netnews flow today, it is quite possible that a
"centralized" broadcast topology as represented by Stargate would not
now be desirable for netnews distribution, even if a robust
technology were used.  Part of the problem is that netnews flow is
not naturally unidirectional.  The feed topologies have become
increasingly bidirectional, with logical network splits (such as the
"alt" distribution) further complicating the feed situation.

In the current network environment, the existence of high-speed (e.g.
Trailblazer) modem links have become very important.  Also of obvious
importance, in my opinion, is the presence of the NNTP links which
have effectively "absorbed" the backbone function of the netnews
network.  While the longterm stability of NNTP usage, and various
issues concerning the propriety of certain classes of material
flowing over certain elements of the backbone or certain local nets
must be considered, the importance of the NNTP feeds in the current
environment is obvious.  I doubt that any centralized "broadcast"
system can effectively compete (in terms of overall latency reduction)
given the current structure of article flow.

Stargate was an interesting experiment.  I'll never forget the fun of
the initial transmission when I sent "Hello Universe" (yes, that's
what I sent) over the satellite and watched it come through on my
screen.  Whether I should have attached any special significance to
the fact that this initial transmission took place while "The
Munsters" was on the main channel video is something I've never been
able to fully determine.

--Lauren--

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

Date: 22 Sep 90 15:48:59 GMT
From: usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast![e-mail]  (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR)
Subject: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
To: [e-mail]

As quoted from <[e-mail]> by [e-mail] (Gary Coffman):
+---------------
| In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tim Dayger) writes:
| >4) Just what's out there for me to access via packet radio?  (This is
| >   VERY important.  I'm not interested in this as a pure hobby, I'm more
| >   interested in the resource potentials.)
|
| Potential is the key word here. Other than sending Email via the BBS
| network which operates sort of like fido net, and some file transfers
| with neighboring operators, and some databases you can query, packet
| remains a technique looking for an application. The potential is great
| and work is being done on both the hardware and software ends of the
| system, but it's not the internet yet.
+---------------

Much of "not on the internet yet" has to do with third-party traffic
restrictions with respect to valid use in amateur radio, i.e. someone has to
monitor what comes in from the Internet to make sure it doesn't contain
business, profanity, or other illegal communications.  The Usenet almost
certainly wouldn't be safe as far as this is concerned.  And would *you* want
to spend all your time picking and choosing stuff that can legally be
forwarded from Internet to AmPR.ORG?

The local ham club recently tried an experiment, using packet radio to link
the endpoint and start of a local parade for which we were doing public-
service communications.  It worked well, and we're planning to expand the
technique.  One thing I'm planning on doing is getting a battery for my TNC
and picking up a Kodak Diconix printer or other battery-operated printer; used
with my HT and laptop, this would give me a complete packet system independent
of mains power which could be used during an emergency.

+---------------
| >5) How much will a packet radio set-up cost me?  How COST EFFECTIVE is
| >   packet radio?
|
| Starting from scratch, costs range from $300 to $700 for systems ranging
| in capability from 1200 to 56k baud. Cost effectiveness is a harder
| question. It depends on how much you use the system. The up front costs
| are it. There is no continuing charge other than electricity to use
| the system.
+---------------

A sample breakdown:

    $230.00 Kenwood TH-31BT (a discontinued model, hence cheap)
        This is a 220MHz radio, hence usable by Novice Class
        licensees.  Locally, we have packet on 223.70; other areas
        may use 223.40 MHz.  Both are within the Novice sub-band.
     130.00 AEA PK-88 TNC (a good, inexpensive TNC)
      30.00 Hustler 5/8-wave whip (better than the "rubber ducky" antenna
        that comes with an HT)
       0.00 Communications software; this can be a freeware/shareware
        comm program, or anything up to NOSNET.EXE which gives you
        TCP/IP.  Or you can spend $50-$100 on commercial programs
        which make controlling a TNC easier for a "novice".
       0.00 A computer; if you already own one, you're all set.  If you
        get serious about packet, you may want to dedicate a computer
        or run OS/2 or UNIX.  I've dedicated a 386 PC to my setup;
        it was sitting in a closet, unused.  If you decide to buy one
        specifically for packet, on the other hand, this will be the
        most expensive part of the system!
    -------
    $390.00 Total for my packet set-up

I will be erecting a better antenna soon; this will be relatively inexpensive,
as I will be fabricating an antenna mast from either aluminum or PVC (I prefer
aluminum, I can make it the antenna ground *and* the system ground by burying
it deep enough) and the antenna itself will be made from an SO-239 and some
brass rods.  This will let me get the most from the 1 watt out of the
inexpensive radio.  I may also pick up a preamp/power amp combination for 220.

+---------------
| >6) What legal issues do I need to consider regarding packet radio?  Do I
| >   need a license?
|
| Yes you need an amateur radio license to run packet. Well this is not strictly
| true, you could get a commercial license and establish your own point to
| point links, but unless you have a legitimate business need it wouldn't
| be cost effective. The other legal issues concern message content. Over
+---------------

You might be able to run a low-power, limited-range packet system on Part 15
frequencies, like 49 MHz.  CHECK FIRST!!!  I don't know if data communications
are permitted (although it would surprise me if they weren't).

I doubt that data communications are permitted in the Citizen's Band.  But it
might qualify as Class C (the remote control frequencies, as opposed to the
voice channels).  Again, check before setting up shop here.

You can (see above) run packet with a Novice Class amateur license.  This is
*simple* radio theory, Novice band plans (not difficult to memorize, as
Novices don't get much in the way of frequencies), and the inevitable 5WPM
code test.  Check with local ham clubs; they'll be happy to help you.

--
Me: Brandon S. Allbery                      VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440
Internet: [e-mail]                Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN
America OnLine: KB8JRR                      AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88]
uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery    Delphi: ALLBERY

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 90 04:30:05 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #151
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Mon, 24 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 151

Today's Topics:
            KA9Q Wanted for Amiga (2 msgs)
            KISS PROMs for GLB PK1

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 90 17:33:29 GMT
From: portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]  (Kevin - Nomura)
Subject: KA9Q Wanted for Amiga
To: [e-mail]

Got it, and it works great.  Thanks!

By the way, LhArc compresses the files to 450K, substantially better than
ZOO's 615K.

kevin nomura, wd9dmv

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

Date: 23 Sep 90 19:45:20 GMT
From: aplcen!haven!ni.umd.edu!sayshell.umd.edu![e-mail]  (Louis A. Mamakos)
Subject: KA9Q Wanted for Amiga
To: [e-mail]

>By the way, LhArc compresses the files to 450K, substantially better than
>ZOO's 615K.

Does anyone know of an archiver which is as portable as ZOO which has better
compression?  I use ZOO on MS-DOS, on the Amiga, and a pile o' UNIX platforms
of many architectures, (none of which are 8*86 based, thank god).  The source
to ZOO is freely available, and of reasonable good quality.  Thats why I use
it.  If there's a better alternative, I'd like to hear about it.

louie
WA3YMH

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

Date: 23 Sep 90 23:10:13 GMT
From: swlabs![e-mail]  (Jack Bonn)
Subject: KISS PROMs for GLB PK1
To: [e-mail]

I recently acquired a TNC made by GLB Electronics in Buffalo, NY.
It is their model PK1.  I purchased it thinking it was a TNC2 clone,
but I believe I was mistaken.  It _does_ have a Z-80 (or equivalent).
But rather than a USART, it appears to perform this function in
software.  [This is a real b*tch to accomplish, by the way, having
been down this path for a client who was more frugal than smart.]

Anyway, I assume that the TNC2 uses a real USART and what I have bears
no resemblance to a TNC2.  So, has anyone done a KISS PROM for this
beast, or am I left with a dodo?

-Jack
--
Jack Bonn, KC1UH, <> Software Labs, Ltd, Box 451, Easton CT  06612
uunet!swlabs!jack (UUCP)
jack@kc1uh        (TCP/IP)
kc1uh@wb1cqo      (AX.25)

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #152
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Tue, 25 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 152

Today's Topics:
        is TNC-2(or similar) source in public domain?
            KISS PROMs for GLB PK1
             Packet-Radio Digest V90 #142
         Thank you to CRRL/ARRL CNC (2 msgs)

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 24 Sep 90 22:02:04 GMT
From: uc!nachos.SSESCO.com![e-mail]  (Chris Elmquist)
Subject: is TNC-2(or similar) source in public domain?
To: [e-mail]

Is the TNC-2 source code (Z80) in the public domain??  I've got
a platform that's got all the same pieces as a TNC-2 (Z80, CTC, SIO,
ram, prom, etc) but all the stuff's at different addresses (it's
also got a 9600 baud v.29 modem in it...)  I'd like to make
the TNC-2 run on this platform perhaps by just working the code
over a little...

73, Chris  N0JCF

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

Date: 24 Sep 90 16:35:29 GMT
From: ub![e-mail]  (Devon E Bowen)
Subject: KISS PROMs for GLB PK1
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jack Bonn) writes:
> I recently acquired a TNC made by GLB Electronics in Buffalo, NY.
> It is their model PK1.  I purchased it thinking it was a TNC2 clone,
> but I believe I was mistaken.  It _does_ have a Z-80 (or equivalent).

GLB's TNC2A is a TNC2 clone. The PK1 and PK1-L are not. In fact, the
PK1 was commercially available before the TNC1 was. At least that is
what they tell me (I was in high school at the time 8-).

> But rather than a USART, it appears to perform this function in
> software.  [This is a real b*tch to accomplish, by the way, having
> been down this path for a client who was more frugal than smart.]

Tell me about it! You are correct. Everything in that box is done by
toggling the bits by hand. It was designed back when the correct hardware
would have added another $60 to the price tag.

> Anyway, I assume that the TNC2 uses a real USART and what I have bears
> no resemblance to a TNC2.  So, has anyone done a KISS PROM for this
> beast, or am I left with a dodo?

I'm hacking on one now. The hardest part is coordinating the rs-232
bit streams and the modem bit streams. The start bit on the rs-232 goes
right to the interrupt line. So if I'm in the middle of sending a packet
and the PC sends a character, I either screw up the packet or lose the
character. The way this is being fixed is by requiring the PC to use
hardware flow control. That way I can tell it to stop sending and hope
that it doesn't. Note that this goes against the official KISS specs
but should not be a problem. The only other solution is to constantly
poll all inputs multiple times per bit interval but I don't have the
time (or ambition) to implement something that precise.

Anyway, the ROM should be done in 1-2 months. I'll be making the source
and ROM image available via anonymous ftp then. Watch here for a release
announcement.

Devon

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

Date: Tue, 01 Jan 80 00:11:31 EDT
From: [e-mail] (WHOI Port Office)
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #142
To: [e-mail]

r 1

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

Date: 24 Sep 90 19:51:14 GMT
From: rochester!rit!cci632![e-mail]  ( co-op)
Subject: Thank you to CRRL/ARRL CNC
To: [e-mail]

Perhaps I could take this opportunity to thank our Canadian friends for
showing such tremendous hospitality for this 9th Computer Networking
Conference -- for those who didn't attend, it was my first time and it
was a wonderful experience that I will not soon forget.  (Especially
getting to watch Star Trek with Phil, Bob, and Tom :-) )

                    Best 73's

                        Chris, WZ2B

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

Date: 25 Sep 90 01:33:01 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Patty Winter)
Subject: Thank you to CRRL/ARRL CNC
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Christopher E. Piggott, WZ2B) writes:
>Perhaps I could take this opportunity to thank our Canadian friends for
>showing such tremendous hospitality for this 9th Computer Networking
>Conference -- for those who didn't attend, it was my first time and it
>was a wonderful experience that I will not soon forget.  (Especially
>getting to watch Star Trek with Phil, Bob, and Tom :-) )

Oh dear. His first Networking Conference and he's in with the wrong
crowd already.

:-) :-)



Patty

p.s. Chris, just be glad this was ST:TNG (I presume) and not the
old series, or they probably would have all been speaking the lines
before the actors did. :-)

--
*****************************************************************************
Patty Winter N6BIS                        INTERNET: [e-mail]
AMPR.ORG: [44.4.0.44]                     UUCP: {decwrl,nsc,sun}!apple!winter
*****************************************************************************

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #153
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Wed, 26 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 153

Today's Topics:
          Any comments on L.L. Grace DSP-12?
               maxframe and efficiency
            Nos-In-a-Box (2 msgs)
               PK232 to HW5400
              Thank you to CRRL/ARRL CNC
                You're Welcome

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 25 Sep 90 18:41:36 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!srcsip!msi-s0.msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!uc!nachos.SSESCO.com![e-mail]  (Chris Elmquist)
Subject: Any comments on L.L. Grace DSP-12?
To: [e-mail]

I see that L.L. Grace (of Kansas City Tracker fame...) is now
advertising their DSP modem.  Looks like a very nice box..

Anyone have any comments on this particular design as compared
to the TAPR or AEA designs (hello Bob N4HY...) ??

Chris N0JCF

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

Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 15:39 CDT
From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: maxframe and efficiency
To: [e-mail]

Someone recently mentioned that the MAXFRAME parameter should always be
set to 1.  What if your link is a "solid" backbone link and you want
to send more than 256 bytes/shot (Net/ROM link)?  In particular, what if
a 1200 baud Net/ROM network is converted to 9600 baud, and the data rate
transfer is less than 8 times as much?  How do you determine how long a
transmitter should be keyed for maximum efficiency?  Use tcp/ip?  :-)

When tcp/ip (ka9q version) backs off due to channel congestion, does it
wait longer between frames, reduce frame size, both, or what?


73, Charles AA5AV @ W5AC.TX.USA.NA

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

Date: 25 Sep 90 14:08:25 GMT
From: hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]  (Glenn Elmore)
Subject: Nos-In-a-Box
To: [e-mail]

See the 9th Computer Networking Conference proceedings for a report
by Bdale n3eua, Don Lemley n4pcr and Milt Heath.


Glenn Elmore -N6GN-

N6GN @ K3MC
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date: 25 Sep 90 14:20:36 GMT
From: hpcc05!col![e-mail]  (Bdale Garbee)
Subject: Nos-In-a-Box
To: [e-mail]

>I have not heard anything about the NOS-in-a-Box project for a while.
>Does anyone have any reports as to progress on it and when it may be
>ready to distribute for use with the DE-56?

NOSINABOX is available now as part of the PackeTen product from Grace
Communications, a 68302-based packet switch board.

I'm the one working on ports to the AEA PS-186 and Kantronics Data Engine.  I
am a couple of weeks work away from having an initial cut to pass around, but
I'm not likely to spend those couple of weeks for at least a month, because
we're trying to get some new RF gear up before snow closes our site... in
4-5 weeks.

See the paper I wrote with Don Lemley and Milt Heath of Grace in the ARRL CNC
proceedings from last weekend...

BTW:  Anyone sitting on a spare set of 2m cans they'd like cash for?

Bdale, N3EUA

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

Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 08:59 EST
From: Hey Rocky watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!
Subject: PK232 to HW5400
To: [e-mail]

Hello Packeteers!

I'm having trouble making a connection for my PK232 from my
HW5400. Reception is fine but for the transmitter I can key the
PTT but can't get any signal to go into the audio line.
Has anyone here had any dealings with the Heath HW5400? I have the
wires according to the book's diagrams (and hope thats the way the guy I bought
the rig from put it together :) )
but still am not getting any modulation (BTW, the microphone works fine)

73, Mike
N9IIT
Indianapolis,IN

[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date: 25 Sep 90 12:26:06 GMT
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!mnetor!ghp![e-mail]  (Jim Stewart)
Subject: Thank you to CRRL/ARRL CNC
To: [e-mail]

Christopher E. Piggott, WZ2B writes:

>Perhaps I could take this opportunity to thank our Canadian friends for
>showing such tremendous hospitality for this 9th Computer Networking
>Conference

Ditto, and thanks to the presenters and all those that came from
so far away to make it such an exciting day!
--
Jim Stewart, VE3SRJ
UUCP:  [e-mail]
BELL:  [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 21:41:45 GMT
From: toth!dave (David B. Toth)
Subject: You're Welcome
To: [e-mail]

Thanks to all who came to London to the CNC ... we enjoyed having you ...
However, I think the Dr. Death thing was a little over-sold. I don't
remember offing anyone for being a tad over-time (a  few came close ;-)  )

And patty is correct that Phil et al would be a bad crowd to fall in with !

73, Dave VE3GYQ
ria.ccs.uwo.ca!toth!dave

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #154
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Thu, 27 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 154

Today's Topics:
         Help with FTP to thumper.bellcore.c
Intro to packet (long) Re: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio (3 msgs)
        is TNC-2(or similar) source in public domain?
            MFJ 1278/KISS problem (2 msgs)
    Where can I get KA9Q for IBM PC Compatible ?? (2 msgs)

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 27 Sep 90 05:23:00 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!samsung!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Help with FTP to thumper.bellcore.c
To: [e-mail]

To the LOGIN: on FTP type in "anonymous".  For the password type in your
E-mail address.

Once in, use the "dir" or "ls" command to look at the files in the current
remote directory.  Use "cd" to switch directories.  Use "cd .." to go to
the parent directory (at least on UNIX).

See a file you like?  If it is NOT a text file, or if it ends in something
like  .arc  .tar  .zip  .zoo  .Z  then use the "binary" or "type image"
command to set binary transfer mode.

If you want to leave the name unchanged, just do "get" followed by the name
of the file.  To change the name, add yet another name on the same line as
the new name.

Type in "quit" when you are done.

If you want to get really fancy on UNIX, you can get the file and put it
into a pipeline.  Suppose you see a file you like for UNIX and it is a
group of files inside a single file called "foobar.tar.Z".  You can get
this file and uncompress it and untar it all at once with no temporary
files needed.  This is useful if you are tight on space but just barely
have enough to hold the intended files.  The command to do this in BSD UNIX
would be:

    get  foobar.tar.Z  "|zcat|exec tar xvf -"

It will list the names of the files being extracted.  Unfortunately the
UNIX versions of arc, zip, and zoo do not read from pipes due to being
ported from MS-DOS.

--Phil Howard, KA9WGN-- | Individual CHOICE is fundamental to a free society
<[e-mail]> | no matter what the particular issue is all about.

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

Date: 25 Sep 90 17:38:15 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!mirror!necntc!necis![e-mail]  ( NM1D)
Subject: Intro to packet (long) Re: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tim Dayger) writes:
> OK, I hope you read the summary line above.  Here goes:
>
> I've used networks, online services, and BBS's for years, but I've never
> really paid much attention to packet radio.  This may change... depending
> on what kind of feedback I receive.
>

Tim, I will do my best to answer your questions... I am posting to the net
because I have received several pieces of email asking this type of question
recently, and you seem to have asked some realistic questions....

> Basically, I'm starting from scratch, and need to have some idea of where to
> begin.  I have a list of rudimentary questions like:
>
> 1) Just what *is* packet radio?

  Packet Radio is (yet another) digital transmition method available for use
on Amateur Radio.  It provides 'error free' transmision and reception of
messages (information/data/etc.) between two stations.  This error free
capability is a prime consideration ('error free' in this context does not
mean that your 'typing or spelling' mistakes will be fixed, but that all
transmitted 'data' will be received 100% intact, as sent).  In fact, if
the data cannot be delivered 100% intact, the sending is aborted and the
user is informed that there is no longer a 'connection' between the two
stations.

  The 'Packet' in 'packet radio' comes from the method of transmitting your
information over the air.  Your 'data' is broken up into packets (or blocks)
that are transmitted.  Each packet contains the sending and the receiving
station callsigns and some optional 'routing' information.  A packet can
contain from 0 to 256 data (or information) bytes.  The users normally do
not need to be concerned with this 'packetizing' of their messages.  Each
packet is sent and then acknowledged by the receiver when received.   If a
packet is not received correctly, then it is automatically re-transmitted
(up to a maximum number of times).

  One of the more popular protocols used for Amateur Packet Radio is known
as AX.25.  This is very similar to the commercial X.25 standard.  There is
also a growing TCP/IP user base.  If you are not network oriented, then the
details of these protocols are not important to you as an operator of a
packet radio station.


Be aware that most packet radio operation at this time is at 1200 baud.  This
will seem slow when compared to what it happening on networks, and on telephone
BBS's.... but what is gained is world wide access, for NO COST.  Once you have
your equipment, and your license, there are no fees (except for the electricty
that your computer and other equipment use :-) )

> 2) What kind of equipment due I need, and how do I use it with my PC?

   Since you have a PC, you already own the most expensive part of an
Amateur Radio Packet Radio station.  The other piece of equipment that
you need is the TNC (Terminal Node Controller).  The TNC contains all
the software and special hardware that you need.  It actually contains
the MODEM (to interface with your radio) and (usually) a microprocessor
with the packet software contained in EPROM.  You interface your PC (or
even a simple dumb ASCII terminal) with the TNC via serial RS-232.  Use
your favorite 'terminal emulation software' on your PC (the same software
that you use with your telephone modem will probably work fine).

  Most 'primary' packet radio operations occur (in the USA) on the two meter
band.  Check out the following frequencies (they my be different in your
area, check with some local hams if you don't hear anything) even the typical
'police scanner' can be used to listen to these frequencies:

   145.01, 145.03, 145.05, 145.07, 145.09 MHz
      also, if the above are busy, many areas also use:
   144.91, 144.03, 144.95, 144.97, 144.00 MHz

  Yes, this is with a 'standard' FM radio set for SIMPLEX transmiting.
If there are packet radio transmitions you should hear a sound like:

   BBBBbbbbbrrrrraaaaaaappppppp


> 3) How much technical (hardware) proficiency is requied to manage a
>    packet radio system? (I have a general understanding of computer
>    hardware, but am more comfortable programming.)

  Well, if you can plug an RS-232 cable into a modem, and wire the TNC
to your radio (most TNC's connect to the microphone plug of an FM rig,
normally only needing Push To Talk, and Transmit Audio. Plus a connection
to the speaker audio output from the FM receiver), then you have all the
ability that you need.  If you are not comforatable with wiring a microphone
connector... I am sure that there are hams that would be glad to help you.

  It really is very simple, and once it is done, there is virtually no
maintenance.  Just plug in your TNC in place of your microphone and external
speaker jack, and you're on the air... to return to voice operation, plug
in your microphone.  If you like, build a simple switch box to allow easy
changing between your TNC and voice operation.  I don't recommend it, but some
wire the TNC and Microphone in parallel, so that they don't need to change
the plugs, or switch anything at all.

> 4) Just what's out there for me to access via packet radio?  (This is
>    VERY important.  I'm not interested in this as a pure hobby, I'm more
>    interested in the resource potentials.)

   Here comes the interesting part.... I believe that packet radio is still
in its infancy... It seems like every day a new application for packet radio
is announced... some are good ideas... others not.

 Here is a *simple* list that just highlights some of the available uses of
Amateur Packet Radio.. I am SURE that I have forgotten something and left it
off the list:

EMAIL:  At this time we have 'world wide' email distribution.  I personally
    have received email from a few continents, and from all over the USA.
    Of course, this is limited by the Amateur Radio rules/regs, so there
    can not be any commercial messages.

Local networks:  Here in New England we have connectivity over most of the
       6 states.   I can 'connect' to other stations from the following
       areas consistantly:  Canada (Quebec), Vermont, New Hamphire, Maine,
       New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island. I should note that I am located
       about 10 miles north of the MA/NH border (in Derry, NH).

    Of course, on HF there can be 'world wide' connectivity, depending
    on many factors.

PacketCluster-DX spotting:  This is a specialized system that allows a couple
    hundred users to be 'connected' to the same system at one time.  It is
    used by those Amateur operators who seek contacts with rare stations
    throughout the world.  When any one user 'finds' a rare station on
    the air, he simply types the information (callsign, frequency and mode)
    into his terminal, and within a minute or so, everyone of the other
    users connected to the 'packet cluster' are informed of the rare
    station!!!   So called "DXers" (people who love to hunt these rare
    stations) LOVE this system.  These users can be spread over a wide
    area (our local packet cluster system has connectees from Maine to
    New York).

DOSGATE: A system that allows you to execute programs remotely.  A DOSGATE
    system may have many programs for you to use over the air.  You
    don't need to download the programs to use them, you are actually
    running programs remotely.  For example, my DOSGATE system has the
    following programs available for use by 'remote' packet users:

       AUTOEXAM: take the latest Amateur Exams from Novice to Extra, used
        as a study guide, or to see if you are ready for the licence
        exam.

       SeeSats: Real time satelite tracking. Informs you of where the
        current OSCAR (and other) satelites are located.


       AUTOCALL:  Online Amateur Radio USA 'callsign' lookup database
        Simply enter the callsign of any amateur radio operator in
        the USA and it will print out the name, address, licence class
        and previous callsign (if any).

      GAMES:  Several 'adventure style' games that can be played online.

      Repeater database:  A database of many of the repeaters in the area.

    DOSGATE allows those who don't have a computer to run programs via
     packet radio.


Gateways: Even though you may not own any HF or UHF equipment (many packet
    radio operators only use a simple 'hand-held' FM tranceiver), you can
    gain access to other bands and operating modes by using a gateway.
    A gatewary allowes connectivity between two normally un-connectable
    communication technologies.


Public Service: Many packet stations are used to help out with sending messages
    during disasters.  Amateur Radio operators help out whenever they can,
    and many Hams have their packet stations ready for portable operation
    to help when needed.  There are many 'training' exercises during each
    year to help practice and test the 'readyness' of the emergency
    stations.

OSCAR Satelites: OSCAR stands for Orbital Satelites Carrying Amateur Radio.
    We have our OWN satlites in orbit that are dedicated for Amateur Radio
    use.  There are some satelites that are dedicated to packet radio
    (sometimes called "PACSATS").  Some of these are special, others are
    for 'store-and-forward' operations to help distribute 'packet traffic'
    around the world.

Station-Station:  I almost forgot.. many people just like 'chatting' with
    their neibors.... The could be people across the street... or in the
    next state... or half way around the world!


  I am sure that I have missed something... maybe others on the NET can fill
in the gaps here.  You asked about potential... as I stated at the begining,
we are just getting started!!!  Many people are just finding out about
packet radio.  I believe that the only limitation is our imagination!!  We
could have a world wide network (we do currently have a 'slow-speed' world
wide network) in the near future... It just takes a little imagination...


> 5) How much will a packet radio set-up cost me?  How COST EFFECTIVE is
>    packet radio?


   Well, if you own the PC already... TNC's can be purchased from about
$120.00 on up.  There are a few for less money, and several that provide
for operating on many digital modes besided packet radio (i.e.: the
Kantronix KAM will provide for: PACKET (HF:300 baud/VHF:1200baud), AMTOR,
RTTY, ASCII, NAVTEX, WEFAX, CW (morse code),...).

  If you already own an Amateur FM tranciever (or an HF SSB tranciever)
then you have all the equipement needed.  If not, a two meter FM rig
can be purchased for:  used: from $100-250.00, new: from $300.00 on up.

Cost effective.... Hmmm, well first be aware that Amateur Radio cannot be
used for any commercial or business purposes... But where else can one
get hours (years) of 'enjoyment' and service out of $450.00 ($350 for a radio
and $100 for a TNC, assuming you already have the computer or terminal).
Note: This stuff can be contageous.... be forwarned :-) !!

> 6) What legal issues do I need to consider regarding packet radio?  Do I
>    need a license?

    Yes, you need a Valid Amateur Radio License.  There is (in the Southern
New Hamshire area) Packet radio activity on the Novice bands.  But if you want
access to the 'mainstream' of packet radio, you will want at least a Technician
Amateur Radio License.

> etc.
>
> Pointers to reading materials such as books and magazines that my campus or
> local libraries might carry would be nice.
>
> Personal comments and insights into the world of packet radio would also be
> appreciated.  I've tried reading the ham-radio newsgroups, but a *lot* of it
> is Greek to me.


   There are a few books, etc... but I have found that most assume that you
already know about Amateur Radio.   You need to find what we call (ready for
another term?) an "Elmer".... An "elmer" is a friendly, helping Amateur Radio
operator who will 'take you under his/her wing' to help and guide you as much
as you need.  I hope that you can find someone to help you... it takes a
special kind of person to be an 'elmer' (gosh I hate that term).

>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> -Tim
>

Good luck Tim....  Too bad you are not closer... I would be glad to help

  Rich


 Sorry if I got a little 'windy' with the keyboard here... I am getting
ready to start a Novice class, and I always get 'pumped up' just before
the class starts (tonite) :-).

 /**************************************************************************\
 * Rich Bono (NM1D)    If I could only 'C' forever!!    [e-mail] *
 * [phone]          NEC Technologies Inc.                NM1D@WB1DSW *
 \**************************************************************************/

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 17:40:01 GMT
From: [e-mail]  (Patty Winter)
Subject: Intro to packet (long) Re: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ( NM1D) writes:

[a wonderful summary of packet radio]


Rich--

Great posting! Would you be willing to maybe edit the specific
references to Tim's posting and turn it into a general Intro to
Packet Radio article that you could post whenever someone asks?
(Or maybe even automatically once a month [if that suggestion
doesn't get me in trouble with the INFO-HAMS gang!].)

My two cents worth:

>transmitted 'data' will be received 100% intact, as sent).  In fact, if
>the data cannot be delivered 100% intact, the sending is aborted and the
>user is informed that there is no longer a 'connection' between the two
>stations.

Maybe say "is eventually aborted." When I read that, it sounded as
though sending was aborted as soon as there was trouble. The next
paragraph explains about packet retries, but maybe this sentence
could be softened a bit.


> Here is a *simple* list that just highlights some of the available uses of
>Amateur Packet Radio.. I am SURE that I have forgotten something and left it
>off the list:
>
>EMAIL:  At this time we have 'world wide' email distribution.  I personally
>Local networks:  Here in New England we have connectivity over most of the
>PacketCluster-DX spotting:  This is a specialized system that allows a couple
>DOSGATE: A system that allows you to execute programs remotely.  A DOSGATE
>          AUTOCALL:  Online Amateur Radio USA 'callsign' lookup database
>         Repeater database:  A database of many of the repeaters in the area.
>Gateways: Even though you may not own any HF or UHF equipment (many packet
>Public Service: Many packet stations are used to help out with sending messages
>OSCAR Satelites: OSCAR stands for Orbital Satelites Carrying Amateur Radio.
>Station-Station:  I almost forgot.. many people just like 'chatting' with

1. Bulletin boards, which carry postings similar to the stuff on Usenet
and also often have archives of useful files (such as local ham license
testing sites). These are usually the same packet nodes that transport
email.

I've found, however, that the discussions that take place on the
worldwide ham PBBS (packet BBS) system closely parallel the ones on
Usenet--and it's a lot faster to read Usenet! (As Rich mentioned, most
packet operations are nominally at 1200 baud, but believe me, the
actual throughput is a lot lower!)

The other annoying thing about AX.25 PBBSs is that once you start
reading a message, you're stuck until it ends! Not like here on Usenet!
(That isn't true when you're using TCP/IP to read a file, of course,
since you have a separate control channel. But since most BBSs in the
packet world use AX.25, it's something to keep in mind.)

2. File transfers. Better at 56 Kbaud (as some hams are doing), but
feasible at 1200 baud. (Do you have to babysit AX.25 file transfers?
On TCP/IP, you just start it and forget it, so you can do them overnight
or at some other time when you don't care whether it takes a while.)

3. Databases. Rich alluded to this usage in connection with DOSGATE,
but you don't need DOSGATE to offer this service. The two I can think of
in this area are the HAZMAT (hazardous materials) and callsign databases.
Both are available through regular AX.25 connections (the latter also
through the TCP/IP "finger" command).

Thanks, Rich!


Patty
--
*****************************************************************************
Patty Winter N6BIS                        INTERNET: [e-mail]
AMPR.ORG: [44.4.0.44]                     UUCP: {decwrl,nsc,sun}!apple!winter
*****************************************************************************

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 19:05:35 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast![e-mail]  (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR)
Subject: Intro to packet (long) Re: Looking for Intro/FAQ info on packet radio
To: [e-mail]

As quoted from <[e-mail]> by [e-mail] ( NM1D):
+---------------
|     Yes, you need a Valid Amateur Radio License.  There is (in the Southern
| New Hamshire area) Packet radio activity on the Novice bands.  But if you want
| access to the 'mainstream' of packet radio, you will want at least a Technician
| Amateur Radio License.
+---------------

Not necessarily.  In northeast Ohio, not only is there a major BBS on the
standard 2 meter Technician Class frequencies *and* the 220 MHz Novice Class
sub-band, but there are cross-band repeaters available as well.  A Novice on
223.70 can connect to a station on 145.05 MHz by digipeating through TO505,
for example; the return path is via TO370.

++Brandon
--
Me: Brandon S. Allbery                      VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440
Internet: [e-mail]                Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN
America OnLine: KB8JRR                      AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88]
uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery    Delphi: ALLBERY

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 14:40:25 GMT
From: hpcc05!col![e-mail]  (Bdale Garbee)
Subject: is TNC-2(or similar) source in public domain?
To: [e-mail]

>Is the TNC-2 source code (Z80) in the public domain??  I've got
>a platform that's got all the same pieces as a TNC-2 (Z80, CTC, SIO,
>ram, prom, etc) but all the stuff's at different addresses (it's
>also got a 9600 baud v.29 modem in it...)  I'd like to make
>the TNC-2 run on this platform perhaps by just working the code
>over a little...

If you mean the "TAPR code", the answer is no.  It's actually a bit complicated,
call the TAPR office and ask if you want to.  I don't remember the details
offhand.

I don't know whether DED provides source for his TNC-2 EPROM or not, I doubt
it though.

The KISS EPROM written by K3MC has source included in the KA9Q TCP/IP
distributions.  Look for the file tnc_tnc2.arc on the floppies.

The TNC-2 doesn't have a CTC...

Bdale

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 01:47:19 GMT
From: usc!wuarchive!dranet.dra.com![e-mail]
Subject: MFJ 1278/KISS problem
To: [e-mail]

I have an MFJ1278, firmware 4/3/90, which doesn't really get along with ka9q
tcp/ip.  In particular, the 1278 ignores the param ax0 255 command and stays in
KISS mode even when the power is reset.  MFJ little help so far.  Anyone got
suggestions.  Even a description of the MFJ1278 implementation of KISS would be
enough!

mike wa0sxv
[e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 14:46:33 GMT
From: sdd.hp.com!samsung!rex!rouge!pc![e-mail]  (Dugal James P.)
Subject: MFJ 1278/KISS problem
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>I have an MFJ1278, firmware 4/3/90, which doesn't really get along with ka9q
>tcp/ip.  In particular, the 1278 ignores the param ax0 255 command and stays in
>KISS mode even when the power is reset.  MFJ little help so far.  Anyone got

The quick-start book that came with mine says to issue TWO commands:
    param tnc 255
    param tnc 254

Not only is this non-standard, it's a STUPID decision (imho).

73,
--
-- James Dugal, N5KNX           Internet: [e-mail]
Associate Director              Ham packet: n5knx@k5arh
Computing Center                US Mail: PO Box 42770  Lafayette, LA  70504
University of Southwestern LA.  Tel. [phone]       U.S.A.

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 11:08:34 GMT
From: cti1![e-mail]  (Mark Pledger)
Subject: Where can I get KA9Q for IBM PC Compatible ??
To: [e-mail]

I just started subscribing to this news group and was wondering where I can
get a KA9Q software package??


--
Sincerely,


Mark Pledger

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTI                              |              [phone] [voice]
2121 Crystal Drive               |              [phone] [fax]
Suite 103                        |
Arlington, DC  22202             |              [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: 26 Sep 90 20:24:56 GMT
From: swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!srcsip!msi-s0.msi.umn.edu!noc.MR.NET!uc!shamash![e-mail]  (Jeff Comstock)
Subject: Where can I get KA9Q for IBM PC Compatible ??
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark Pledger) writes:
>I just started subscribing to this news group and was wondering where I can
>get a KA9Q software package??

Actually, it's on quite a few machines:

thumper.bellcore.com   Look in pub/ka9q
tomcat.gsfc.nasa.gov   Tomcat IS running NOS
hpcsos.col.hp.com      Good archive of net and nos
ucsd.edu               I saw a 890421.1 directory there.  Havent
               looked at what is in it though.

Good luck, and have fun,
Jeff
PS: if you don't have internet ftp access, send me email and I will
dig up info on the WB3FFV bbs for you.  You can get it there via
anon uucp or download from the bbs.

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 90 04:30:04 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #155
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Fri, 28 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 155

Today's Topics:
            KA9Q Wanted for Amiga

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 26 Sep 90 20:48:11 GMT
From: decvax.dec.com!zinn!ubbs-nh!wa1omm![e-mail]  (Paul MacDonald)
Subject: KA9Q Wanted for Amiga
To: [e-mail]

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Louis A. Mamakos) writes:
>>By the way, LhArc compresses the files to 450K, substantially better than
>>ZOO's 615K.
>
>Does anyone know of an archiver which is as portable as ZOO which has better
>compression?  I use ZOO on MS-DOS, on the Amiga, and a pile o' UNIX platforms
>of many architectures, (none of which are 8*86 based, thank god).  The source
>to ZOO is freely available, and of reasonable good quality.  Thats why I use
>it.  If there's a better alternative, I'd like to hear about it.
>
>louie
>WA3YMH

Louie,

  Use LHARC. It is also available for UNIX and VMS, as well as for the
venerable PC.

Best regards,

Paul
--

                /\  /\
                   //\\//\\
        +--------------------------------------------+
        | From the shack of WA1OMM -- Paul MacDonald |
        | Using the power of the multitasking Amiga! |
        |                                            |
        | Compuserve: 70411,626   PLink:  UPPERCRUST |
        | Amateur Packet Radio:   [e-mail] |
        | Usenet:         ubbs-nh.mv.com!wa1omm!paul |
        +--------------------------------------------+

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #156
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sat, 29 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 156

Today's Topics:
         Any comments on L.L. Grace DSP-12? (2 msgs)

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 28 Sep 90 17:10:12 GMT
From: idacrd![e-mail]  (Robert McGwier)
Subject: Any comments on L.L. Grace DSP-12?
To: [e-mail]



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

Date: 28 Sep 90 20:08:02 GMT
From: unmvax!ariel.unm.edu!hydra.unm.edu![e-mail]  (David Oliver Eisman)
Subject: Any comments on L.L. Grace DSP-12?
To: [e-mail]

I spoke with Mr. Brooks yesterday regarding the purchase of a DSP-12.
I was a bit surprised that it wasn't ready after seeing the ad and all
in QST.  (I seem to recall the new ICOM satellite rig being in the same
boat)

Anyhow, the picture in the ad is of the prototype.  He said that a
booth will be set up at the AMSAT Conf. with the DSP-12 and other
goodies.  I guess I'll just wait and see, but darn I'd like one now!

Ollie
SEDS-UNM Satellite Tracking Station (SSTS)

--
Ollie Eisman (N6LTJ)    [e-mail]     [phone]
3505 Lafayette Rd. NE #3, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87131, USA

"That makes me mad."  --  Droopy

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

Date: (null)
From: (null)
I forgot to comment on the hardware itself.  The NEC v40 was my first
choice for the AEA box, they rejected it since they had many man years
in the Z80 and the 64180 would require minimal movement on their part.
I believe this was a short sighted mistake.  The bottom line is that
we do have that code running and it works quite well.  Brooks has a
long history in writing multitasking operating systems for communications
packages.  He has written a multitasking kernal for the DSP-12.  You will
easily be able to add your own tasks to the running code if you so desire.
This is a really nice feature for the inventive but I am not sure it is
what Jon Q. Ham wants.  On the DSP side, I can tell you Brooks DSP-12
is quite nice.  It ought to be:

The AEA DSP-2232 has AD7870 A/D's, AD767 D/A's, Maxim 261 filter chips,
Intel 85C30 for protocol, Signetic 571 AGC.


Need I tell you what is in the DSP-12?  . . . . .


Bob
.

--
____________________________________________________________________________
    My opinions are my own no matter    |       Robert W. McGwier, N4HY
    who I work for! ;-)                 |       CCR, AMSAT, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 90 04:30:03 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V90 #157
To: packet-radio


Packet-Radio Digest         Sun, 30 Sep 90       Volume 90 : Issue 157

Today's Topics:
                kam wefax mode
             Want Nacogdoches, TX Contact

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

Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Sep 90 01:17:26 MET
From: "Vincenzo G. Capuano" <[e-mail]>
Subject: kam wefax mode
To: Packet Radio <[e-mail]>

Hi,
I would like to write a program to display fax, and wefax on a Mac II
using a Kantronics KAM or an AEA PK-232. Where can I find the documentation
on how to understand the informations that these TNCs send to the serial port
of my Mac ? I mean: how can I detect the color of a pixel by reading the
serial port ? What signal of the rs232? Etc. Etc.......

I know there are some programs for the MS-DOS world: I have seen them
listed in wsmr-simtel20.army.mil archives: wefax.arc and autofax.arc, are
they in source form ? If so I could try to understand the protocol by reading
the source code....

Thanks in advance for any help.
Vincenzo.

=-=-=-=
Capuano
Vincenzo G. Capuano                     E-mail: [e-mail]
Via Dante Alighieri, 9                          [e-mail]
57036 Porto Azzurro (LI)
Italy

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

Date: 29 Sep 90 20:41:41 GMT
From: venus!yalevm!maine![e-mail]  (Paul H. Risk)
Subject: Want Nacogdoches, TX Contact
To: [e-mail]

I'm moving to Nacogdoches to accept faculty position at Stephen F. Austin
State University, School of Forestry.  I'd be interested in finding out
about packet activity there.  Is there a BBS I could work thru while
I'm still here in Maine..  Also interested in general info on ham
radio in the area- repeaters, etc...  CUD ragchew on HF.

Paul H. Risk N1DJD
Univ of Maine College of Forestry
Orono, Maine

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

End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************