World of Ham Radio 1994 January/AMSOFT_1994.iso/packet/docs/pd199208.doc

Text File | 1993-12-31 | 543.2 KB | 9,363 lines

Sat,  1 Aug 92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #206To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sat,
1 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 206Today's Topics:
Counterproposal to the ARRL Digital Committee Recommendation
                        G3RUH modem
KayPro & packet                        latest KA9Q software?
                 Packet channel analasis???
Packet channel analasis?????                      Questions from
a beginner                        Request for assistanceSend
Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 31 Jul 92 10:38:46 EDTFrom:
psinntp![e-mail]: Counterproposal to the
ARRL Digital Committee RecommendationTo: [e-mail]
think Paul has some excellent points.  I would only quibble with
twothings:1.  Channelization.  I *don't* think we want specific
channelizationembedded in the rules.  Otherwise, if someone
develops a system thatrequires, say, a 1-kHz channel but which
allows four times thethroughput and four times the channel
sharing between stations, we'dhave to go back for a rules change
to make it legal.  No, better tohave the allocation embedded in
the rules and the channelization byagreement, like with VHF
repeaters.  (I'm not sure if Paul intendedthat channelization be
in the rules, but I wanted to make it clearwhy I think it
shouldn't be.)2.  Access.  I understand that the Extra Class
license provision isintended to help limit congestion, but I
have a different suggestion:How about limiting access to those
stations participating in anetwork of at least N stations?  (I'm
not sure what 'N' should be--let's discuss it if you buy the
idea in general.)  I think this iswhat we are really trying to
accomplish, isn't it?  We'd have todefine what "participating in
a network" means.  I take it to meanthat the station forwards
traffic originating at other stations.That means that an HF
station that talks to only one other HFstation is still
participating in a network if the traffic it relaysmight have
originated at one of at least N stations.In addition...3.
"Semiautomatic."  Maybe we should keep this part of the
originalproposal and simply add on a fully automatic subband.
An automatic-response system is a different cat from an
automatic relay system.Each has its uses, and each has somewhat
different potential tointerfere with other stations.-------Jon
Bloom, KE3Z                   |  [e-mail] Radio
Relay League       |225 Main St.
|Newington, CT 06111
|------------------------------Date: 31 Jul 92 17:13:58 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!orchard.la.locus.com!devnet.la.locus.c
om![e-mail]: G3RUH modemTo:
[e-mail] article <claude.712414130@bauv106>
[e-mail] (Claude Frantz (RZ))
writes:>Hello !>>Where can I find the description of this modem
and of the>used modulation method ? Where is the original
article ?>>Thanks>Claude, DJ0OTLook at the proceedings of the
7th ARRL Computer Networking Conferenceand the 10th CNC.
Available from the ARRL.--  * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ         | Views
expressed here are    * * [phone]         | mine and do not
necessarily    * * [e-mail]  DoD #466     | reflect those of my
employer    * * "Dammit Bones, spare me the lecture and give me the
shot!"   *------------------------------Date: 31 Jul 92 16:52:19
GMTFrom: fluke![e-mail]: KayPro &
packetTo: [e-mail], Please excuse me if this is a
FAQ:I have a friend who is interested in packet radio and has
three KayProcomputers cluttering up his garage.  Is there any
packet software thatanyone knows of that will run on a KayPro?
It would put at least oneof those rigs to use and get another
packet'er on the air.Thanks in advance for your time!Richard
Kowalsky(N7RAY)------------------------------Date: 31 Jul 92
15:28:10 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gatech!prism![e-mail]: latest
KA9Q software?To: [e-mail]  This is probably an
FAQ, but I didn't see a copy of it in the unexpiredmessages for
this group on my site....  I need to know what the latest
version of the KA9Q TCP/IP software is, andwhere I can get a
copy of it.  Please respond via e-mail. I'll see that sooner
than a message in thenewsgroup; and there's no point in using up
all the bandwidth just for me.. :)    Thanks,      Monte Freeman
 - KC4GPW-- Monte Freeman  --  Operations Department /
Information TechnologyGeorgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Georgia, 30332uucp:
...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!ccoprfmInter
net: [e-mail]------------------------------Date:
Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:57:58 GMTFrom:
ftpbox!mothost!lmpsbbs!comm.mot.comm![e-mail]
t: Packet channel analasis???To: [e-mail] Hello,
I am looking for any and all MS-DOS based software that will
analyze a normal ax25 packet frequency. I am intereseted in
keeping track of the stations that use the frequency and an
analasis of the stations usage per period of time, be it hours,
days or whatever. Please let me know if there is anything I can
FTP, download or send away for.   Thanx!!! Richard France
[e-mail]
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 31 Jul
92 17:56:53 GMTFrom:
ftpbox!mothost!lmpsbbs!comm.mot.comm![e-mail]
t: Packet channel analasis?????To: [e-mail] Hello,
 I am looking for any and all MS-DOS based software that will
analyze a normal ax25 packet frequency. I am intereseted in
keeping track of the stations that use the frequency and an
analasis of the stations usage per period of time, be it hours,
days or whatever. Please let me know if there is anything I can
FTP, download or send away for.   Thanx!!! Richard France
[e-mail]
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Sat, 1
Aug 92 03:20:10 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu![e-mail]
SD.EDUSubject: Questions from a beginnerTo:
[e-mail]@bluemoon.rn.com (Gerard M. Foley)
writes:: > > 3 - Once I have the equipment, how do I go about
"getting connected?": > >    Do I have to register in my area or
just go online?  (Admittedly: > >    not very likely.): > : > We
don't need no stinking registration.  You just connect like you:
> were dialing up a BBS (Ok, so maybe it's a little more
involved than: > that).: > : Get in touch with a local ham
(radio amateur), and GL (Good Luck),: and 73 (Best Regards)
[e-mail] don't happen to know any ham operators.
I'd like to get my computer upon packet radio, but I really have
no idea about how to do it.  Is theresomeone in my area (look at
the signature) that would be willing to helpme to get started?
(I'm a computer professional, but I don't do radio yet.)I'd like
to start receiving Usenet news via packet radio if that can be
done.By the way, is there a FAQ that I should wait for?  If not,
I'll be askingsome more beginners questions.                Thanks in
advance,                    -=:[ VAL ]:=---|======================== The
previous was my opinion =========///============|| "AMIGA: The
computer for the creative mind."(tm) Commodore  /// Weber State
|| "Macintosh: The computer for the rest of us." (tm)
Apple\\\///  University  ||===================
[e-mail] ==================\///=== Ogden, UT =|
------------------------------Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 18:27:19
GMTFrom: usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov![e-mail]:
Request for assistanceTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>
,[e-mail] writes:>I am sorry for the
cross-post, but this is as close as I can get.>>I know that
there is a newsgroup called rec.radio.amateur.marketplace
(or>something similar), but I can not get to it from my
location.  Could>someone please dump all the postings to a file
and E-mail it to me just>one time?  I want to buy a used HF
radio at a hamfest in 2 weeks, andneed>an idea on what used
prices are like.  Alternately, is there a site where>I could
'anonymous ftp' recent postings?>>Please E-Mail if you can help
(to prevent several people from doing the>same task).>
                        Thanks in advance,>
                Mark (N5XYV)It's called rec.radio.swap. But what
is your email address??  == Minh
==------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#206******************************Date: Sun,  2 Aug 92 04:30:03
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #207To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sun,
2 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 207Today's
Topics:Counterproposal to the ARRL Digital Committee
Recommendation (2 msgs)                data compression with
packet:  legal?                        Satellite Packet Help
              TNC'less Packet on Mac? (2 msgs)
          W2XO docs.??Send Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1992 17:01:45 GMTFrom:
stanford.edu!morrow.stanford.edu!w6yx![e-mail]:
Counterproposal to the ARRL Digital Committee RecommendationTo:
[e-mail]@arrl.org (Jon Bloom) writes:>1.
Channelization.  I *don't* think we want specific
channelization>embedded in the rules.  Otherwise, if someone
develops a system that>requires, say, a 1-kHz channel but which
allows four times the>throughput and four times the channel
sharing between stations, we'd>have to go back for a rules
change to make it legal.  No, better to>have the allocation
embedded in the rules and the channelization by>agreement, like
with VHF repeaters.  (I'm not sure if Paul intended>that
channelization be in the rules, but I wanted to make it
clear>why I think it shouldn't be.)Channelization is sort of
implied by the technology and the channel conditions;it doesn't
absolutely have to be in the law, witness FM repeaters.The 500
Hz size is determined by the nature of the Rayleigh fades on HF,
andthe fact that you want the symbol time to be greater than
most fades.  As suchit's more likely that a future technology
would require a channelization *less* than 500, but still
different.  Incidentally, nothing prohibits youfrom allocating
two 500 Hz channels per link to create a 1 kHz channel.Having
said all that, it's unlikely that you'd want to run at a symbol
rateless than that which the medium will carry, given the
natural noise level(which limits the number of bits per symbol).
 Thus nature has pretty muchhanded us the 500 Hz figure.>2.
Access.  I understand that the Extra Class license provision
is>intended to help limit congestion, but I have a different
suggestion:>How about limiting access to those stations
participating in a>network of at least N stations?  (I'm not
sure what 'N' should be-->let's discuss it if you buy the idea
in general.)  I think this is>what we are really trying to
accomplish, isn't it?  We'd have to>define what "participating
in a network" means.  I take it to mean>that the station
forwards traffic originating at other stations.>That means that
an HF station that talks to only one other HF>station is still
participating in a network if the traffic it relays>might have
originated at one of at least N stations.This is in effect the
"club" approach, and I like it much better than theExtra only
limitation.  'N' will depend on the throughput of the
availabletechnology.  A good limitation would be that 'N'
stations, on the average,should be able to provide enough
traffic to fill at least 1/3 of theavailable capacity.For
example, HF 200 Hz shift FSK at 150 baud should be able to
produce about50 bps of throughput, or about 0.5MB per day.  If
we assume that each BBS(or whatever source) produces 10 1kB
messages per day, with 50% compression,one third capacity
represents about 30 message sources.>3. "Semiautomatic."  Maybe
we should keep this part of the original>proposal and simply add
on a fully automatic subband.  An automatic->response system is
a different cat from an automatic relay system.>Each has its
uses, and each has somewhat different potential to>interfere
with other stations.This part of the proposal would be good for
leaf nodes of a network, whichdon't generate enough traffic to
warrant UAA operation.---=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX/5W1JX  |"Anyway,
nothing can beat Good Old American->[e-mail]
| Know - How." -- Harry Canyon, _Heavy
Metal_------------------------------Date: 1 Aug 92 21:14:52
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: Counterproposal to
the ARRL Digital Committee RecommendationTo:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]> Jon Bloom
writes:>......>>In addition...>>3. "Semiautomatic."  Maybe we
should keep this part of the original>proposal and simply add on
a fully automatic subband.  An automatic->response system is a
different cat from an automatic relay system.>Each has its uses,
and each has somewhat different potential to>interfere with
other stations.>-------I am glad to see that after all the
rhetoric, that we are finallygetting down to some concrete
proposals.There seem to be some real fears of automatic
operation "takingover."  I don't think unrestricted automatic
operation willbe permitted.My personal thinking is that we
should keep the ARRL proposal as isand simply tack on an
sub-band for automatic operation.Roy,
AA4RE------------------------------Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1992
02:35:28 GMTFrom:
usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu.!
[e-mail]: data compression with packet:
legal?To: [e-mail] year or so ago I heard of some
hams who heard from the FCC becausethey were sending
ZIP-compressed files via packet.  The FCC wanted toknow what
they were doing sending "encrypted data."  I don't recallexactly
what happened, but I think the hams explained themselves, andthe
FCC told them that they could continue so long as they
announcedat the beginning of the messages--in plain
English--that thatfollowing was a file compressed by
such-and-such a program.[re: Plain English--sure, a compressed
text file could be in plainerEnglish, but an executable file
just plain looks like jibberish.Sometimes even the source code
looks like jibberish.]The problem seems to be whether or not the
FCC can figure out what you're sending when they want.  So if
you use one of the commoncommercial compression programs, and
say which one at the beginningof the transmission, you shouldn't
have any problems.  If, on the other hand, you design your own
error-correction/compression algorithm, you may have to get
special permission from theFCC to try it out, but my impression
is that they're less likelyto grant permission on the HF bands.
I may be wrong.  In any case, do you know how few bytes per
second you're likely toget? (Hint: you won't have to take off
your shoes to count them.)  It seems to me that the big problems
with HF digital communicationsare (1) bandwidth restrictions and
(2) the unsuitedness of regularmodems to the HF channel.
Compression & error correction are justband-aids on the bigger
problems.Do you know about AAMTOR?  I've never used it, and I
recognize peoplewho do use it think it's a great improvement
over its predecessors,but so far as I can tell, the protocol
sends three bytes at a time.  Re: AX.25 literature: the ARRL
publishes the "AX.25 AmateurPacket-Radio Link-Layer Protocol."
Under $10.  ------------------------------Date: 2 Aug 92
04:34:13 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!vollinj@networ
k.UCSD.EDUSubject: Satellite Packet HelpTo:
[e-mail]  I am interested in getting started on
satellite packet and could use some help chosing the
hardware/software.  I've read "The Satellite Experimenter's
Handbook" but I still have some questions.  I want to get
started with mode JD but will almost certainly want to do other
modes later and also monitor telemetry from non-amateur
satellites.  All I own so far is a PC, Kantronics All-Mode, and
a Yaesu HT. I like the Icom R7000 or R7100 for the downlink
since they seem very versatile (particularly to monitor
non-amateur frequencies).  I will buy some FM 2m radio for the
uplink or add an amp to the HT.    My question is: I understand
the Pacsat modem has an AFC output that goes to the receiver.
Does the R7000/R7100 have the necessary input?  Can the computer
control function of these radios do the same thing?  Also the
TAPR PSK modem says it won't interface to the KAM with its
software HDLC.  Do I need a different TNC?  I've requested
software info from AMSAT but could use advice on which programs
are the best (whatever that means).  An e-mail response would
probably be best since my questions are so specific.  Thanks in
advance and I hope to meet some of you on the
'birds'.*******************************************************Je
ff,   KC6WFUInternet: [e-mail]:
KC6WFU@W6IN.#SOCAL.USA.NA------------------------------Date: 31
Jul 92 00:09:18 GMTFrom:
infopiz!lupine!motcsd!apple![e-mail]:
TNC'less Packet on Mac?To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Aaron
Wohl) writes:>SoftKiss is an init/cdev/driver that drives a ham
radio>modem from a macintosh. It gets your mac on packet
radio>without a tnc.  Softkiss can use poor mans packet
modems>from the IBMPC world.  It can also use the new PacketMac
modems that Dexter Francisand friends have developed. Although
these aren't yet commerciallyavailable, Dexter hopes to have
more kits ready soon.For more information, you can reach Dexter
on Compuserve at70611,1340. If you're on AppleLink, his account
is FRANCIS4.(If you're not on AppleLink directly, I'd request
that you notuse the gateway, as it costs 50 cents per message
both incomingand outgoing.) Or you could use regular mail; his
callsign isKD6CMT if you want to look him up in a callsign
server.73,Patty--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
    ::   Patty Winter N6BIS           Internet: [e-mail]
::             ::   Sunnyvale, California           AMPRNet: 44.4.0.44
         ::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
------------------------------Date: 1 Aug 1992 21:27:24
-0700From: [e-mail]: TNC'less Packet on
Mac?To: [e-mail]... you asked about a TNC'less
interface for packet. Here is a message Igot from Andy about a
program he has done that looks like it might do whatyou need.
Maybe you can drop him a note and he can fill you in (and
maybether rest of us on the net) what is happening with his
latest version...which I think is not 2.x.> Softkiss version
1.1.t> > Softkiss connects a modem directly to a Macintosh.
This saves having aTNC.> Softkiss will work with 300 baud HF,
1200 baud VHF and higher baudrates.> The software is functional
at this time but the user interface is not> pleasent yet.> >
Softkiss is available akutaktak.andrew.cmu.edu [128.2.35.1] in>
/aw0g/softkiss.1.1t.sit.hqx.  You also need Phil Karn's Net/Mac
program if> you don't have it, it is available as
/aw0g/netmac22.sit.hqx> > Changes since the last release:  Well
it acutally works.  I connected to my> local packet bbs for a
couple of hours last night.  There is more of a> manual on how
to hook it up.> > Aaron Wohl ([e-mail])>73 for
now....Terry-KA8SCP, America Online Ham Radio Club Host
Internet: [e-mail] or [e-mail]:
KA8SCP@WA1PHY.#EMA.MA.USA.NOAM or [e-mail]
[44.56.4.82]------------------------------Date: 1 Aug 92
14:11:41 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!lobster!nuchat!jp
unix![e-mail]: W2XO docs.??To:
[e-mail] someone tell me where I can FTP a copy
of the documentation forthe W2XO packet bbs? Thanks in
advance!-- John A. Perry        [e-mail]
- Internet                     jpunix!perry
- UUCP                     KG5RG @ KG5RG.AMPR.ORG           -
Packet Radio------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #207******************************Date: Mon,  3 Aug
92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #208To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Mon,
3 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 208Today's
Topics:Counterproposal to the ARRL Digital Committee
Recommendation (3 msgs)                           Info on
Pactor?                            Packet & OS/2
     Packet channel analysis???                       TNC'less
Packet on Mac?                           using KA9Q NOS  Send
Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 2 Aug 1992 09:30:06 -0700From:
[e-mail]: Counterproposal to the ARRL
Digital Committee RecommendationTo:
[e-mail]: <[e-mail]>In <[e-mail]>
Jon Bloom writes:>......>>In addition...>>3. "Semiautomatic."
Maybe we should keep this part of the original>proposal and
simply add on a fully automatic subband.  An automatic->response
system is a different cat from an automatic relay system.>Each
has its uses, and each has somewhat different potential
to>interfere with other stations.>-------I am glad to see that
after all the rhetoric, that we are finallygetting down to some
concrete proposals.There seem to be some real fears of automatic
operation "takingover."  I don't think unrestricted automatic
operation willbe permitted.My personal thinking is that we
should keep the ARRL proposal as isand simply tack on an
sub-band for automatic operation.Roy,
AA4RE------------------------------Date: 2 Aug 1992 09:27:14
-0700From: [e-mail]: Counterproposal to
the ARRL Digital Committee RecommendationTo:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]> Jon Bloom
writes:>......>>In addition...>>3. "Semiautomatic."  Maybe we
should keep this part of the original>proposal and simply add on
a fully automatic subband.  An automatic->response system is a
different cat from an automatic relay system.>Each has its uses,
and each has somewhat different potential to>interfere with
other stations.>-------I am glad to see that after all the
rhetoric, that we are finallygetting down to some concrete
proposals.There seem to be some real fears of automatic
operation "takingover."  I don't think unrestricted automatic
operation willbe permitted.My personal thinking is that we
should keep the ARRL proposal as isand simply tack on an
sub-band for automatic operation.Roy,
AA4RE------------------------------Date: 2 Aug 92 17:30:04
EDTFrom: psinntp![e-mail]: Counterproposal
to the ARRL Digital Committee RecommendationTo:
[e-mail] rec.radio.amateur.policy, paulf@w6yx
(Paul Flaherty) writes:>[e-mail] (Jon Bloom) writes:>>>1.
 Channelization.  I *don't* think we want specific
channelization>>embedded in the rules.  Otherwise, if someone
develops a system that>>requires, say, a 1-kHz channel but which
allows four times the>>throughput and four times the channel
sharing between stations, we'd>>have to go back for a rules
change to make it legal.  No, better to>>have the allocation
embedded in the rules and the channelization by>>agreement, like
with VHF repeaters.  (I'm not sure if Paul intended>>that
channelization be in the rules, but I wanted to make it
clear>>why I think it shouldn't be.)>>Channelization is sort of
implied by the technology and the channel conditions;>it doesn't
absolutely have to be in the law, witness FM repeaters.>The 500
Hz size is determined by the nature of the Rayleigh fades on HF,
and>the fact that you want the symbol time to be greater than
most fades.  As such>it's more likely that a future technology
would require a channelization >*less* than 500, but still
different.  Incidentally, nothing prohibits you>from allocating
two 500 Hz channels per link to create a 1 kHz channel.>Having
said all that, it's unlikely that you'd want to run at a symbol
rate>less than that which the medium will carry, given the
natural noise level>(which limits the number of bits per
symbol).  Thus nature has pretty much>handed us the 500 Hz
figure.Assuming a single-tone system, sure.  But most of the
proposals I've heardfor improved HF modem technology use
multitone systems.  If you want to getlots of bits through
between point A and point B on a fading channel, oneway to do it
is to use multiple tones at low baud rates.  Such a systemmight
well occupy a channel of greated than 500 Hz.  Of course, you
mightargue that such a station is using multiple channels, but I
think to theFCC a "channel" is that band of frequencies occupied
by a station,regardless of the niceties of the modem scheme.>>2.
 Access.  I understand that the Extra Class license provision
is>>intended to help limit congestion, but I have a different
suggestion:>>How about limiting access to those stations
participating in a>>network of at least N stations?  (I'm not
sure what 'N' should be-->>let's discuss it if you buy the idea
in general.)  I think this is>>what we are really trying to
accomplish, isn't it?  We'd have to>>define what "participating
in a network" means.  I take it to mean>>that the station
forwards traffic originating at other stations.>>That means that
an HF station that talks to only one other HF>>station is still
participating in a network if the traffic it relays>>might have
originated at one of at least N stations.>>This is in effect the
"club" approach, and I like it much better than the>Extra only
limitation.  'N' will depend on the throughput of the
available>technology.  A good limitation would be that 'N'
stations, on the average,>should be able to provide enough
traffic to fill at least 1/3 of the>available capacity.>>For
example, HF 200 Hz shift FSK at 150 baud should be able to
produce about>50 bps of throughput, or about 0.5MB per day.  If
we assume that each BBS>(or whatever source) produces 10 1kB
messages per day, with 50% compression,>one third capacity
represents about 30 message sources.Seems like a reasonable
basis on which to base a number.  Of course,advances in
technology might mean that a N=30 station wouldn't keep
thechannel filled, but that seems like a small concern.>>3.
"Semiautomatic."  Maybe we should keep this part of the
original>>proposal and simply add on a fully automatic subband.
An automatic->>response system is a different cat from an
automatic relay system.>>Each has its uses, and each has
somewhat different potential to>>interfere with other
stations.>>This part of the proposal would be good for leaf
nodes of a network, which>don't generate enough traffic to
warrant UAA operation.And for non-network stations,
too.-------Jon Bloom, KE3Z                   |
[e-mail] Radio Relay League       |225 Main St.
                   |Newington, CT 06111
|------------------------------Date: 2 Aug 92 19:57:54 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!devnull![e-mail]:
Info on Pactor?To: [e-mail]     Does anyone have
more information (formats, data handling, etc) re:     Pactor?
I'm hearing more and more of the "extended" AMTOR signals     on
20 and want to upgrade my TNC to operate this mode.     Thanks--
| Bruce Sawtelle           Ham Radio : W3NJ
       ||      Tandem  Computers   Packet    : W3NJ @
N5LJF.TX.USA.NA           ||      14231 Tandem Blvd   Internet
: bruces @ mpd.tandem.com          ||      Austin, Tx  78728
USENET    : halley!bruces
|------------------------------Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 04:03:12
PDTFrom:
noiro.acs.uci.edu!ucivax!ofa123!f107.n207.z1.Fidonet.org!Chris.Ep
[e-mail]: Packet & OS/2To:
[e-mail] BF>      How do you overcome the IRQ3 and
IRQ4 conflict problem when using BF> com1,2, 3, and 4? BF>
The solution came from a sysop in Canada. BF> For those of you
who want a similar setup you must: BF> 1.  Use a bus mouse -
this poses no conflict.Bus mice use IRQ's just like COM ports,
at least Logitech's do, it is usually selectable from 2,3,4, or
5...but could still pose a problem.  IRQ's can be a REAL pain..
:(--  Chris EplerInternet:
[e-mail]:
>internet:[e-mail]-------------------
-----------Date: 1 Aug 92 17:18:55 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!bongo!julian
@network.UCSD.EDUSubject: Packet channel analysis???To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Richard France) writes:> >  Hello,>
I am looking for any and all MS-DOS based software that will
analyze a>  normal ax25 packet frequency.     I tried mailing a
reply, but it bounced. Looking at the path, Ican see why. So
here for everyone is my reply:There is such a programme. Written
by Harold Price, NK6K and SkipHansen, WB6YMH.    You can find it on
Skip's BBS at [phone]    Sorry I can't remember the name.
The BBS does have searchutilities though that should help you
find it. Somehow PACKET MON ringsa bell.Yours-- Julian Macassey,
[e-mail]  N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA742 1/2 North
Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213)
653-4495------------------------------Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1992
14:43:38 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: TNC'less Packet on Mac?To:
[e-mail]@aol.COM writes:|John... you asked
about a TNC'less interface for packet. Here is a message I|got
from Andy about a program he has done that looks like it might
do what|you need.Just one note from personal experience.  I have
a mac plus, and since theSoftKiss driver re-initializes the
serial port, the mouse loses verticalmovement.  The author of
SK, Aaron, told me Friday that it was due to themouse being
hooked to the interrupt of the serial chip(s).Aaron also emailed
me and told me he was fixing it soon.  So, the bottomline is
that if you have a mac plus, you'll have to wait.Also, the most
recent version was 1.2, if I remember correctly.|Terry-KA8SCP,
America Online Ham Radio Club Host -Brent
N5VMG------------------------------Date: 3 Aug 92 03:16:12
GMTFrom:
munnari.oz.au!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato.ac.nz!aukuni.ac.nz!kcbbs!kc@
network.UCSD.EDUSubject: using KA9Q NOS  To:
[e-mail]   Does anyone know of a location that has
hints and tips for  using NET ?  The docs with net are fine for
reference, but I need  information tending towards new operating
disciplines rather than basic  reference.    Regards,  Steve -
ZL1BHD       ------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #208******************************Date: Tue,  4 Aug
92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #209To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Tue,
4 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 209Today's Topics:
    Baycom 1.5 - English Translation?            data
compression with packet: legal? (3 msgs)
  KayPro & packet                    new internet to packet
gateway                     NOS AUTOFORWARD HELP PSE???
            Questions from a beginnerSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 3 Aug 1992 09:52:16 -0700From:
[e-mail]: Baycom 1.5 - English
Translation?To: [e-mail] the baycom 1.5 help
file been translated to English.  I have the 1.4Eversion that
has been.  If so, where is it available.Tnx for any helpRon -
KA5LUGNote:  For replies please use the address below.  If you
try the reply commandit will probably be bounced.  Hope to fix
this [e-mail]------------------------------Date:
Mon, 3 Aug 1992 14:56:39 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Shawn O'Donnell) writes:>A year or so ago I heard of some hams
who heard from the FCC because>they were sending ZIP-compressed
files via packet.  The FCC wanted to>know what they were doing
sending "encrypted data."I've sent many, many ZIP-compressed
files (primarily versions of theNOS source code) over packet
radio and never had any inquiries fromthe FCC. Of course, this
was at 56kb on 220.55 (before we lost thatpart of the band) so
there may have been other obstacles to the easymonitoring of my
transmissions.But I never let that stop me -- if somebody ever
asks, I'll tell themwhat I'm doing, but I don't feel I need any
special advance permissionfrom anyone to do something just
because thousands of other hamsaren't doing exactly the same
thing. The FTP control channel messagesthat immediately precede
a file transfer and name the file (e.g.,NOSSRC.ZIP) ought to be
enough to give anybody with nothing better todo than monitor my
transmissions a pretty good idea of the
fileformat.Phil------------------------------Date: Mon, 3 Aug
1992 13:38:14 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!noc.msc.n
et!uc.msc.edu!apctrc!wsc![e-mail]: data
compression with packet:  legal?To: [e-mail]3 main
items here:   1) a few FCC folk seem to be, uhh, out of touch
2) data compression...I'm going to pass on that one   3) AMTOR
(my favorite mode these days)In article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail](Shawn O'Donnell) writes:>A year or so ago I
heard of some hams who heard from the FCC because>they were
sending ZIP-compressed files via packet.  The FCC wanted to>know
what they were doing sending "encrypted data."strange...  the
FCC folk who contacted them must have been severely outof touch!
 it is not at all uncommon to transfer
ZIP/ZOO/ARJ/whatevercompressed files via ftp (using the KA9Q
software or some variant ofKA9Q's version).  not to mention
transferring the same type files toplain AX.25 packet BBS
systems.btw, while I'm on that thought (and sorry for the
deviation here) --- wherewould I get protocol specs for the file
transfer protocols used to dobinary file transfers with your
normal, everyday, packet BBS?>If, on the other hand, you design
your own error-correction/>compression algorithm,  [....]>In any
case, do you know how few bytes per second you're likely to>get?
(Hint: you won't have to take off your shoes to count them.)
well, if you can average out to around 2:1 to 2.5:1 (that's
based onmodems that support V.42bis compression, and text data),
that's about2 to 2.5 times better than it was before.  why
complain?  :-)but, having found out that the net software
already does this over AX.25and/or TCP/IP over AX.25, why
re-invent the wheel?  I've been a bit outof touch with the net
software, and wasn't aware that it was already usingdata
compression.>Do you know about AAMTOR?  I've never used it, and
I recognize people>who do use it think it's a great improvement
over its predecessors,>but so far as I can tell, the protocol
sends three bytes at a time.  I trust you ment AMTOR?  or
perhaps, AMTOR mode A?  I'll assume this,but if there's a new
mode of AMTOR around the corner, I'd love to hearabout
it!anyways, yes, AMTOR is 3 characters at a time, and assuming a
very cleanconnection (and a clear frequency), it falls way
behind hf packet.  but,when conditions are bad, AMTOR exceeds hf
packet by a long shot.  keepin mind, the larger the block size,
the more you have to re-transmitevery time there's an
error....if you assume a very large number of errors,you want a
very small block size.  (ever notice, with modem transfers,
howZmodem reduces the block size as errors increase, and if the
line clearsup, gradually increases them again to maintain peak
throughput?)AMTOR is also much more persistant than packet....
after a set number ofretries, packet gives up, period.  AMTOR,
on the other hand, will keeptrying pretty much until you tell it
to stop.  NOTE:  I have certainlyseen cases where I saw a <LINK
FAILED> message, but heard the otherstation (he was the
Information Sending Station, as I recall) keep ontrying until
the link was re-established...it then picked up right whereit
left off before the link failed 5--10 minutes before.and, of
course, I can't type AMTOR without saying how much *FUN*
AMTORis, too....  great mode.   --jim\input std_disclaimer
              % 73 DE N5IAL
(/9)-------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------"[...] the plural of `mongoose' ought to be
`polygoose'." [Jargon file 2.9.10]INTERNET:  [e-mail]
 |  [e-mail]  |  [e-mail]:
gagme!n5ial![e-mail] RADIO:  n5ial@n9hsi
(Chicago.IL.US.Earth)--------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------D
ate: Mon, 03 Aug 92 18:26:47 GMTFrom:
csus.edu!netcomsv!mork![e-mail]: data
compression with packet: legal?To:
[e-mail]@media.mit.edu (Shawn O'Donnell)
writes:>If, on the other hand, you design your own
error-correction/>compression algorithm, you may have to get
special permission from the>FCC to try it out, but my impression
is that they're less likely>to grant permission on the HF bands.
 I may be wrong.  If it runs on a common machine, just send a
few copies to the engineerin charge of your district FCC office.
 Send a copy to the ARRL as well.If you are keeping it
propritary, maybe you should reconsider why you areusing on the
ham bands.--
/****************************************************************
*******\| Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]   |
"The problem with || depending on government is that you cannot
depend on it" - Tony Brown
|\***************************************************************
********/------------------------------Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992
18:32:50 GMTFrom: acd4!TEFS1![e-mail]: KayPro &
packetTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Richard Kowalsky) writes:>Hi, Please excuse me if this is a
FAQ:>>I have a friend who is interested in packet radio and has
three KayPro>computers cluttering up his garage.  Is there any
packet software that>anyone knows of that will run on a KayPro?
It would put at least one>of those rigs to use and get another
packet'er on the air.>>Thanks in advance for your time!>>Richard
Kowalsky>(N7RAY)If it will run *any* type of terminal software
that will talk toa RS232C serial port, you can use it on packet.
Gregg.------------------------------Date: 3 Aug 92 16:31:25
GMTFrom: sun-barr!olivea!hal.com!thumper![e-mail]:
new internet to packet gatewayTo: [e-mail] have
enabled a internet to packet gateway on my bbs. I have
furtherextended it to allow internet users to appear to live on
the bbssystem. Thus doing away with cryptic addressing and
allowing those withno packet equipment or no bbs's in their area
to participate.In short it works this way. A packet user wishes
to send a message toyou. When the white pages are checked it
shows you as having yourhomebbs as N0ARY. When the message
arrives at my bbs this address istranslated to an email style
address and sent through the gate.Sending messages through the
other way is just about as simple. If theperson you wish to
reach is n6zfj@n6qmy you simply address your messageto
[e-mail]. Notice that the '@' in the
packetaddress is a '%' on the internet side.  You can originate
bulletinsin the same fashion, [e-mail]
use this service you have to register in advance. My system has
tobe able to translate your "from" address found in your mail
header intoyour callsign. This means that you will have to
always use the samehost to originate messages.If you would like
to take advantage of this service just send a message
to:    [e-mail] the following
information.    CALL:    First name:    City and St:    Zip:This information
is necessary to fill in your white pages entry on thebbs system.
When your registration has been processed I will send youfull
instructions for using the gateway.Depending on the demand I may
have to limit registration until thesystem has been fully
tested.----------------------------------------------------------
-------------------Bob Arasmith   [e-mail] (work)
[e-mail] (home)   n0ary@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na
(packet)------------------------------Date: 3 Aug 92 21:39:21
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!s
kyld![e-mail]: NOS AUTOFORWARD HELP
PSE???To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:  >   > Hi,  >   > I
wonder if you can help.  >   > I have a TCPIP station running
with 2.0f PA0GRI code and  > I would like to autoforward mail
messages generated using   > elm to the normal vanilla ax25
packet network. I`ll explain  > :-  >   > Supposing I wish to
send a message to gm4xxx@gb7edn my local  > mailbox being
gb7san.Address your mail as follows:
user%user-bbs%forwarding-bbs@your-system
[e-mail] have to add this to
your DOMAIN.TXT :        bbs.gb7san      IN      CNAME
gm4yed.ampr.orgNow your system will recognize bbs.gb7san and
deliver it locally instead oftrying to send it smtp to some
unknown host.Next you need to build up \spool\rewrite file. A
minimum entry would be:        *%*%bbs.gb7san  gb7san
*%*@bbs.gb7san  gb7sanThis will intercept mail addressed as
above, and send it locally into thefile
\spool\mail\gb7san.txtNow to do the forwarding file,
\spool\forward.bbs:        GB7SAN        c ax0 gb7san
gb7san        ------------This is a bare minimum. The callsign
at the top will be in the nos.log fileas the ID of who the mail
was sent to. The callsign at the bottom specifiesthat all smtp
mail in \spool\mail\gn7san.txt be forwarded to the
connectedstation.  The "-----" line MUST be included. It
indicates the end of theforwarding instructions. You can have
several forwarding instructions in thefile, and call out several
file names to forward. Also, if a file called forforwarding is
also listed in the \spool\areas file, it will be sent as
abulletin (SB) rather than private (SP).  As a final note, for
you to receiveforwarded mail from your BBS, the To:
callsign/name must be included in yourDOMAIN.TXT. i.e. tcpip  IN
     CNAME   gm4yed.ampr.org. Then your systemwon't kick it back
as bad, host unknown.xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space left
blank intentionally. >J Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA 90749-4425
voice [phone]------------------------------Date: Mon, 3
Aug 1992 18:08:05 GMTFrom: acd4!TEFS1![e-mail]:
Questions from a beginnerTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Val Kartchner) writes:>     I've just heard some of the basics
about packet radio, and I have some>questions.  If there is a
FAQ that answers these questions, then just ignore>this post and
I'll get the FAQ when it comes along.Don't know what a FAQ is.
Could someone please tell me? I will however answeryour
questions as straight forward as I can.>1 - How much does it
cost to get a basic transciever that will connect to my>
computer?$40-$4000. I have seen good rigs for less and more so
take your pick. YOu willprobably have to spend about $100-$300
to get something you really want forVHF and it will probably be
a 2m setup. >2 - Can I get a tranceiver that will pretend that
it's a telephone so that I>    can use my current modem?First of
all, there is more to a packet setup than just the
transciever.Actually, there is nothing special about a
tranceiver to do packet unless you want to do it faster than
2400 baud. However, to do packetyou need three things: A
terminal type device, be that a PC or a real"terminal". A TNC
(terminal node controller) which is actually a modem and
networking device all in one. In some cases you can use simply a
modem type device and put all the networking "smarts" inthe
software on the computer, ie; digicomm. Then comes the radio.>3
- Once I have the equipment, how do I go about "getting
connected?"  Do  I>    have to register in my area or just go
online?  (Admittedly not very>    likely.)Just go online. You,
of course, must have your Amateur Radio License. There isno
registration required. You will probably have to monitor the
channel (onceyou figure out what freq. that is) in your area to
find stations/digipeaters/BBSs that are around. >4 - What types
of communications protocols are used?  What is KA9Q, and is>
it THE protocol?AX.25 mostly. TCP/IP sometimes and a few other
experimental ones. ------------------------------Date: 3 Aug 92
21:56:41 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!orchard.la.locus.com!devnet.la.locus.c
om![e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>pSubject : Re: data compression with
packet: legal?In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Howard ) writes:>[e-mail] (Shawn O'Donnell)
writes:>>>If, on the other hand, you design your own
error-correction/>>compression algorithm, you may have to get
special permission from the>>FCC to try it out, but my
impression is that they're less likely>>to grant permission on
the HF bands.  I may be wrong.  >>If it runs on a common
machine, just send a few copies to the engineer>in charge of
your district FCC office.  Send a copy to the ARRL as well.
Maybe I'm just in a less than optimal mood right now and liable
to benasty, but why should I send the local FCC EOC a few copies
ofmy data compression utility?  And *why* to the ARRL? Huh? Did
Imiss something?  For once and for all, for crying out loud, it
is legal to compress orenCODE data as long as the goal is not to
obscure the data. If this isdifficult to grok, let me simplify:
if you aren't intentionally enCRYPTingthe data so as to obscure
the meaning, then it is NOT illegal.  Sheesh. What should we do,
apply to the ARRL for permission to tryour new data compression
scheme out, before applying to the FCC toinsure the overworked
staff there is even more overworked reading ourpetty request to
do something which is legal already? Or do we just readthe damn
rules in Part 97 ourselves and act like sentient creatures?>If
you are keeping it propritary, maybe you should reconsider why
you are>using on the ham bands.  Good point, but where was the
implication in the first place thatthis was some proprietary
scheme?--  * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ         | Views expressed here are    *
* [phone]         | mine and do not necessarily    * *
[e-mail]  DoD #466     | reflect those of my employer    * *
"Dammit Bones, spare me the lecture and give me the shot!"
*------------------------------Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1992 05:32:18
GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!qualcom.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To :
[e-mail] : Re: data compression with
packet: legal?In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Phil Howard ) writes:|> If it runs on a common
machine, just send a few copies to the engineer|> in charge of
your district FCC office.  Send a copy to the ARRL as well.I see
no reason to do even this much. If somebody asks, give it to
them.But don't bother the FCC
otherwise.Phil------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #209******************************Date: Wed,  5 Aug
92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #210To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Wed,
5 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 210Today's Topics:
Counterproposal to the ARRL Digital Committee Recommendation
        IC-24AT to Handipacket TNC connection, HOW?
      macintosh softkiss vers 1.2.2            Newbie questions
& Packet FAQ Request (2 msgs)
Packet/Sattelite Gate                      Packet channel
analysis???                        Request for assistanceSend
Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sun, 02 Aug 92 10:05:36 EDTFrom:
usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!n8emr!bluemoon![e-mail].E
DUSubject: Counterproposal to the ARRL Digital Committee
RecommendationTo: [e-mail]@ucsd.edu (Brian
Kantor) writes:> Restricting auto-forwarding to Extra class
licensees is silly.  We've> just managed to eliminate CW elitism
on VHF and now we're trying to> reinstate it on HF.> > There is
no significant correlation between license class and operating>
ability.*> > If Paul means this as a conciliatory sop to the
entrenched die-hards, he> should say so.> >     - Brian> > *I was
once told that there IS a significant correlation between
license> class and income.  Fraud (i.e., purchased licenses)
can't be the major> reason; I wonder what is?A problem is how
many unattended HF packet operations. The(widely violated) STA
was an effort to see if about 100could get along, and was not,
in my opinion, very successfulin avoiding a lot of QRM and a
very low thoughput.      I doubt if many Extra Class licenses
were bought.  Maybemore income means more leisure, or as in
Contract Bridge withthe correlation between championship and
options trading, amysterious correlation between code ability
and money-makingability.  Gerry K8EF This is from
[e-mail] doesn't have his (or her) own obnoxious
signature yet------------------------------Date: Tue, 04 Aug 92
20:19:36 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.e
du!lynx!deepthought.unm.edu![e-mail]: IC-24AT
to Handipacket TNC connection, HOW?To: [e-mail]'m
sure someone has already done this, but can someone post ormail
me information on how to connect the ICOM 24AT to thePacComm
Handipacket TNC. I have the receive line figured out,but need to
know how to connect the Transmit and PTT lines.If this
information is available by FTP please let me know where,or
reply here or by mail to: [e-mail]
     -- Mike  (KB5UGQ)73------------------------------Date: 4
Aug 92 15:55:13 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu
.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!aw0g
[e-mail]: macintosh softkiss vers 1.2.2To:
[e-mail] is an init/cdev/driver that drives
a ham radiomodem from a macintosh. It gets your mac on packet
radiowithout a tnc.  Softkiss can use poor mans packet
modemsfrom the IBMPC world.  This is version 1.2.2. This
versionfixes mouse lockup on the Mac Plus and adds a diagramfor
IBM PC baycom modems such as the Tigertronics BayPac.Softkiss is
available from internet host
akutaktak.andrew.cmu.edu[128.2.35.1] as
/aw0g/softkiss.1.2.2.hqx.  It is also on compuservhamnet
sigNET/Mac is also required.  It is available from the same
archives.------------------------------Date: 4 Aug 1992 06:41:55
-0700From: [e-mail]: Newbie questions &
Packet FAQ RequestTo: [e-mail]:DISCLAIMER:
 I have just become interested in packet & radio in the past
fewweeks.I have NO licencse (study under way  :-) ).I too am
looking for FAQs (Frequently Asked Question list) related to HAM
radioor, particularly, Packet.  I was surprised not to find them
on ucsd.edu (did Imissthem?) since they are fairly common on the
Internet.  Are they kept on aanotherserver?Questions:1)  I am
interested in transfer rate greater the 1200 BPS.  I saw a mail
notethat mentioned 56K BPS on the 220.55 band.  56K BPS is about
what I'm lookingfor.Is there a technical reason why 1200 BPS is
common (other than historicreasons).2)  Is anyone working on
porting NFS onto the current TCP/IP stack?  I realizethismay be
a resource hog, but, at higher transfer rates it may not be
excessive.Anythoughts?3)  Packet/Internet gateways?  Are they
common?  Is the Internet news feedavailable through these
gateways?4)  Any reccomendations for radios/TNCs.  I am leaning
toward portable units -theconcept of talking to my home machine
(386/33 running OS/2) from a portable orfrom a Sun workstation
is *very* appealing.As you may have surmised, my background is
the computer side of the house.Pleaserespond directly to me via
E-mail unless you feel your note would have
generalinterest....jim~>: Jim Goldsmith; Xerox ISO; 7900
Westpark Dr.; McLean, VA 22102~S: 8*454-3527;  (703)
734-3527~:
42324.25220652041.0------------------------------Date: Tue, 4
Aug 1992 16:49:17 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.unomaha.edu!cwis!pschleck@network.U
CSD.EDUSubject: Newbie questions & Packet FAQ RequestTo:
[e-mail][e-mail]
writes:>Greetings:>DISCLAIMER:  I have just become interested in
packet & radio in the past few>weeks.>I have NO licencse (study
under way  :-) ).>I too am looking for FAQs (Frequently Asked
Question list) related to HAM radio>or, particularly, Packet.  I
was surprised not to find them on ucsd.edu (did I>miss>them?)
since they are fairly common on the Internet.  Are they kept on
a>another>server?Yup.  They are on ftp.cs.buffalo.edu under
/pub/ham-radio.  BrianKantor, who manages the ucsd.edu archives,
has copies of the FAQ's forsending via listserv request, so he
has them filed somewhere.Maybe he would consider making them
available via FTP at his site aswell (the more sites, the less a
chance of a single-point site failuredepriving the net of
information).73, Paul W. Schleck,
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 4
Aug 1992 05:46:38 -0700From: [e-mail]:
Packet/Sattelite GateTo: [e-mail] local Packet
group has expressed some interest in developinga gateway on one
of our nodes to Amateur Satellites.  I have heardmention of one
in Northeastern Canada, and would like some directionon "where
to look" for suggestions, comments, etc.  Is PACSAT andsome of
the low orbit datasats the way to go?  I believe AO-13is a bit
expensive and complex for our organization to go with.We are
really going from the ground floor on this one, but believethat
it could be an real enticement for membership level and
activity.We had a project building modems for Baycom software
last year, and passedone-hundred on units distributed locally.
The interest is there -I just wonder if we can evolve a plan in
the next 4 or five weeks.Thanks for any help.  73 de Carty
KA2Ycellis@brock1p bitnet------------------------------Date:
Wed, 05 Aug 92 03:04:34 GMTFrom:
das.wang.com!wang![e-mail]: Packet channel
analysis???To: [e-mail]@bongo.UUCP (Julian
Macassey) writes:>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Richard France) writes:>> >>  Hello,>>
  I am looking for any and all MS-DOS based software that will
analyze a>>  normal ax25 packet frequency. >    I tried mailing a
reply, but it bounced. Looking at the path, I>can see why. So
here for everyone is my reply:>There is such a programme.
Written by Harold Price, NK6K and Skip>Hansen, WB6YMH.>    You can
find it on Skip's BBS at [phone]>    Sorry I can't remember
the name. The BBS does have search>utilities though that should
help you find it. Somehow PACKET MON rings>a bell.There is a
program that lets you tinker with packet parameters inorder to
see what TNC settings have on throughput -- without havingto
transmit (it's a simulation program for the PC).  It's
calledESTIMATE.ZIP (or .COM in some incarnations).  Let me know
if youcan't find it on ham BBSs, and I'll send/uupost it as
appropriate.It comes with 'c' source code, too.Dave--
=================================================================
=========Dave Bushong, [e-mail]         + Wang
Laboratories, Inc.             + B-A-BAY, B-E-BEE,
B-I-BICKY-BYEInternet: [e-mail]         +   B-O-BO,
Curly's a DOPE!
(not)============================================================
==============------------------------------Date: 2 Aug 92
08:55:02 CDTFrom:
usc!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!newsserver.pixel.kodak.c
om!laidbak!tellab5!vpnet!vpnet![e-mail]:
Request for assistanceTo: [e-mail], I believe
what you want is "rec.radio.swap". Thatshould be readily
available to you.Ken WA9WCP------------------------------Date: 4
Aug 92 22:20:17 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]--,
<[e-mail]>,
<r2vm_#[e-mail]>)Subject : Re: data compression with
packet: legal?In article <r2vm_#[e-mail]--
[e-mail] (Phil Howard ) writes:...----Making the key
public clears the intent of obscuring the meaning.--Sending a
copy of a program you create to places like the FCC and--the
ARRL would serve that purpose adequately, IMHO....--next.
Actually the OO should contact you first, but in case they
don't--at least by having something on file at the FCC, they
will know in advance--that things are "cool".I can't imagine the
FCC having a filing system that could pull yourunsolicted
'odd-ball' 8-) protocol prior to someone getting around to
justasking you what you're doing.  Just who at the FCC should
such a noticego to? Never mind... If I ever do something
creative, I'll share withwhoever asks -- and if I notice someone
using something new, I'lljust ask them.How simple can it
get?------------------------------Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1992 04:33:23
GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!qualcom.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<r2vm_#[e-mail]>Reply-To :
[e-mail] : Re: data compression with
packet: legal?In article <r2vm_#[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Phil Howard ) writes:|> Making the key
[algorithm?] public clears the intent of obscuring the
meaning.|> Sending a copy of a program you create to places like
the FCC and|> the ARRL would serve that purpose adequately,
IMHO.If your compression algorithm is new and different, then
publish itwidely in the general amateur media (USENET, PBBSes,
ARRL CNCproceedings, etc) so the rest of us can benefit from it.
And if it'san existing algorithm, you don't need to send it to
anybody (includingthe FCC) because, by definition, it's already
available. And, ofcourse, if anybody asks, you simply tell them
what you're doing.Geez. Why do people have to make everything so
hard?Phil------------------------------Date: 4 Aug 1992 16:41:03
GMTFrom: ucsd.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: data
compression with packet:  legal?Legal.  The people I've
contacted, including those at the League, saythey've never heard
of any ruling or policy that precludes encrypteddata.In
particular, the League's never heard of any FCC citation
beingissued, and they do seem to keep track of that sort of
thing.*Urban legend.    - Brian* Look, the ARRL does do some good
things.  Their technical andadministrative people are good.
It's the political leadershipof the League that needs to be
replaced.------------------------------Date: 4 Aug 92 12:33:31
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.c
ontel.com!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To : [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman)Subject : Re: data compression with packet:
legal?In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Phil Karn) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Shawn O'Donnell) writes:>>A year or so ago I heard of some hams
who heard from the FCC because>>they were sending ZIP-compressed
files via packet.  The FCC wanted to>>know what they were doing
sending "encrypted data.">>I've sent many, many ZIP-compressed
files (primarily versions of the>NOS source code) over packet
radio and never had any inquiries from>the FCC. Of course, this
was at 56kb on 220.55 (before we lost that>part of the band) so
there may have been other obstacles to the easy>monitoring of my
transmissions.Heh, heh, the FCC hasn't bought one of the modems
yet, though DOCCanada has. BTW I got a look inside an FCC
monitoring van. Theengineer was really proud of the new
PK-232MBX they had just installed. Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 4 Aug 92 18:46:14
GMTFrom: csus.edu!netcomsv!netcom.com![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: data
compression with packet: legal?[e-mail] (Dana H. Myers)
writes:>  Maybe I'm just in a less than optimal mood right now
and liable to be>nasty, but why should I send the local FCC EOC
a few copies of>my data compression utility?  And *why* to the
ARRL? Huh? Did I>miss something?Maybe you missed something.
This was in reference to one you createfor yourself.  By sending
these copies, it puts the "protocol/format"sufficiently in the
public domain to make it potentially possible forFCC monitoring
to be able to (as if they would care to) "decode" whatyou are
sending.>  For once and for all, for crying out loud, it is
legal to compress or>enCODE data as long as the goal is not to
obscure the data. If this is>difficult to grok, let me simplify:
if you aren't intentionally enCRYPTing>the data so as to obscure
the meaning, then it is NOT ill egal.

If you compress in a way you know others cannot uncompress, it
has theeffect of enCRYPTing... the uncompress program forms the
key.Making the key public clears the intent of obscuring the
meaning.Sending a copy of a program you create to places like
the FCC andthe ARRL would serve that purpose adequately, IMHO.>
Sheesh. What should we do, apply to the ARRL for permission to
try>our new data compression scheme out, before applying to the
FCC to>insure the overworked staff there is even more overworked
reading our>petty request to do something which is legal
already? Or do we just read>the damn rules in Part 97 ourselves
and act like sentient creatures?It's not a form of permission,
it is just simply a process of makingwhat might appear as
enCRYPTion to be take otherwise.Consider if the local OO
intercepts your transferred file and tries allknow utilities on
it, but all fail because it is of your own design.So far nothing
is wrong, but it is suspect.  The FCC might get the matternext.
Actually the OO should contact you first, but in case they
don'tat least by having something on file at the FCC, they will
know in advancethat things are "cool".It's intended to just
avoid problems, that's all.If you prefer not to send them a
copy, then don't.>>If you are keeping it propritary, maybe you
should reconsider why you are>>using on the ham bands.>  Good
point, but where was the implication in the first place
that>this was some proprietary scheme?The implication was ONE
possibility in the case I replied to about usinga new design (or
compression or of anything else).  Its should only bethose who
plan to keep it proprietary who would not want to make a
publicdisclosure of the new design.  IMHO, proprietary designs
have no placeon the ham bands.--
/****************************************************************
*******\| Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]   |
"The problem with || depending on government is that you cannot
depend on it" - Tony Brown
|\***************************************************************
********/------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #210******************************Date: Thu,  6 Aug
92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #211To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Thu,
6 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 211Today's Topics:
    9600 baud radios, recommendations?
 Chip locating                Kenwood TM-621/721 144 MHz @ 9600
Baud                Need Help! ICOM 24-AT  handheld to TNC
                   Net/Mac for sys7?
Terminal Software for Mac?                       TNC'less Packet
on Mac?                    TNC and TCP-IP advice, pleaseSend
Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1992 13:44:50 GMTFrom:
mcsun!news.funet.fi!uwasa.fi![e-mail]: 9600 baud
radios, recommendations?To: [e-mail]'ve been
working 9600 baud (G3RUH) on 70cm with my ICOM 3220 and have
good as  bad experience with it.The receiving is FB, it copies
packets really nice, but sending really sucks.  One thing is
that the receiving staitions have hard time in copying it, also
the txdelay has to be as high as 20-25 before it starts to work
at all. Short  packets seems to get through better than long
packets.So, now, I would like to know if there are any good
surplus/commersial (mainly  surplus) rigs that would work nicely
with 9600 baud (txdelay <= 4, good  linearity etc) and from
where I could get one.73 de Markus [e-mail]        Email:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Thu, 6
Aug 1992 00:52:08 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu![e-mail]
USubject: Chip locatingTo: [e-mail] some help
locating companies that sell the TCM 3105 and the  AMD 7910
modem chip.  The Arrow Electronics Company has an eigh week back
order on them.I really would like them in a couple of
weeks.Richard Bassett
(N2MIX)[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 5 Aug 92 18:35:34 GMTFrom:
usc!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xen
on!skyld![e-mail]: Kenwood TM-621/721 144
MHz @ 9600 BaudTo: [e-mail] need some assistance.I
have a Kenwood TM-721 Dual bander (144/440) and a friend of mine
has theTM-621 (144/220) version. Both have been modified
successfully to operate9600 baud packet on the UHF side of the
radio (440 and 220). However, theVHF (144) side of the radio
doesn't seem to transmit data correctly. BothReceive sides of
both radios work FINE. In looking at the schematics in
theservice manuals, there seems to be a major difference in how
the modulationand loop error voltages are inserted. Has anyone
managed to make the 144 MHzside of the TM-621/721 radios work?
Thanks for your help in this.xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space
left blank intentionally. >J Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA
90749-4425 voice (310)
324-6080------------------------------Date: 6 Aug 92 06:33:13
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!doug.cae.wisc.edu!umn.edu!lynx
!deepthought.unm.edu![e-mail]: Need Help!
ICOM 24-AT  handheld to TNCTo: [e-mail]
Packeteers!I'm having trouble getting my PacComm  Handipacket
TNC  to  workwith  my  new  ICOM 24-AT handheld. Neither ICOM or
PacComm givesvery much info on interfacing the TNC to the radio.
 The  TNC  isnice  in  that  it  provides and internal 2.7k
resitor on the PTTline, but that doesn't seem to be enough. I
added a  1k  resistorin series with this, but still no luck. My
problem is that when Iconnect the radio to the TNC, the radio is
continously  keyed  upand  the  DCD light on the TNC stays on
also. I've connected eachline up independently of the other
without luck  also.  Before  Ihad  the  radio,  I  had  the TNC
hooked to a voice pager where Icould monitor packets without
trouble, but now that I'm trying touse  the  Mic/PTT, nothing
works. I've ohm'd out the cable and itdoesn't appear to be
shorted.I am really anxious to get this to work. I'd like  to
hear  fromanyone  who  has  experience with hooking up a TNC to
the IC-24AThandheld or the PacComm Handipacket TNC. If you can
help,  don'thesitate  to reply.  So far I haven't received
anything, so don'thold back!Reply here or mail to:
[e-mail]73's                  -- Mike
(KB5UGQ)------------------------------Date: 5 Aug 92 14:34:15
GMTFrom:
dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!bach.rutgers.edu![e-mail]
: Net/Mac for sys7?To: [e-mail] have seen various
posts and articles around refering to a project torewrite
NET/Mac from scratch for the Macintosh System 7 software.
Doesanyone out there know about the status of this project.I am
interested in this since some features of system 7 are not
suportedin the current (ported from NOS...) versions.--
+----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------+| Tim Hayes
CAIP Student System Operator || [e-mail]
                        Rutgers University
|+---------------------------------------------------------------
--------------+------------------------------Date: 5 Aug 1992
21:11:57 -0700From: [e-mail]: Terminal
Software for Mac?To: [e-mail] to a recent
posting I have gotten a copy of SoftKISS.  Cananyone suggest a
free or shareware terminal program for the Macwhich works well
with the standard multimode data controllers by AEA,MFJ, and
Kantronics? And an FTP site to obtain it from?Appreciate the
help.  [e-mail]------------------------------Date: 5 Aug
92 00:43:00 GMTFrom:
swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hpscdc!hplextra!hpfcso!hplvec!tcline@network.U
CSD.EDUSubject: TNC'less Packet on Mac?To:
[e-mail]> In rec.radio.amateur.packet,
[e-mail] (Brent) writes:> >     Aaron Wohl
<[e-mail]> writes:>     |  Softkiss can use poor
mans packet modems>     |from the IBMPC world.  > >     Now,
where can one find info about these poor man's packet modems?>
  I remember seeing something in 73 or Radio-Electronics a year
or>     so ago, but I don't know which.  Any pointers would be
nice...> >     thanks,>     -BrentPMP (Poor Man's Packet) is
described in "73 Amateur Radio Today", August1991, page 8
(includes schematics).I haven't tried it yet, but I'm working on
it.----Ted Cline, N0RQV                    VXI Systems
Divisiontcline@hpislx                       Hewlett-Packard, M/S
[e-mail]        815 14th Street
SWVOICE: [phone]               P.O. Box 301FAX:   (303)
679-5971               Loveland, CO  80537
USA------------------------------Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1992 22:41:40
GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
![e-mail]: TNC and TCP-IP advice, pleaseTo:
[e-mail], folks.  I am looking for advice:I am
president of the Columbia University Amateur Radio Club,
CUARC/W2AEE.At the past several meetings, we have been bouncing
around the idea of experimenting with TCP/IP.  We have a well
developed computer system, atColumbia, and most of the members
already have accounts on the Internet.Some people have suggested
that we should create a simple AX25 digipeater node.But I have
been thinking that we would be better to install a gateway
tointernet.  There are many existing digipeater, in Manhattan.
But I don'tthink there is a single gateway.  A gateway has the
potential to create aninstant wormhole to any other gateway,
using the Internet as a medium.  So,if I want to chat with my
friend in San Antonio, I could do so, with perhaps3 hops, rather
than the impossible 20 or so  it might take without a wormhole.I
expect that we should create a simple 1200 bps TCP/IP gateway to
internet, tobegin with, since it seems that the club members
only have 1200 bpscapability, for now; later on, we could try to
get some people on 9600.We would need a PC, ethernet card, TNC
or card, NOS, transceiver, antenna,local ethernet connection and
IP number, and AMPRnet IP number.I plan to bring these thoughts
to Thursday's 6 PM meeting (14th floor, SWMudd building,
visitors welcome, if you happen to be in the
neighborhood).Several members have already purchased TNCs, but I
have beenreluctant, because I wasn't sure which one to get.
Several people in theclub are ready to try out TCP/IP.  With
TCP/IP, higher speeds than 9600 bpsare useful.  The three TNCs I
have looked at are the KPC3, the PK88, and theMFJ1270B.  Does
anyone know whether they can all handle 19,200 bps?Which TNC or
card is best, and why?Does anyone know who the IP coordinator
for Manhattan is?What is the closest packet-internet gateway to
Manhattan?I would appreciate lots of suggestions and advice
concerning this.Thank you,Meir Green, N2JPG * * * * *
=================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Thu, 6
Aug 1992 01:34:20 GMTFrom:
usc!coriolis!red-eft![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<r2vm_#[e-mail]>Subject : Re: data compression with
packet: legal?In article <r2vm_#[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Howard ) writes:>>Consider if the local OO intercepts your
transferred file and tries all>know utilities on it, but all
fail because it is of your own design.>So far nothing is wrong,
but it is suspect.  The FCC might get the matter>next.  Actually
the OO should contact you first, but in case they don't>at least
by having something on file at the FCC, they will know in
advance>that things are "cool".>>It's intended to just avoid
problems, that's all.The road to hell is paved with good
intentions.The regulations are clear on the matter of private
data formats and protocols:stations using these where permitted
are to maintain documentation with theirstation records.There is
no requirement that documentation be published.  To do so
accomplishesnothing with regard to compliance with the
regulations.  The issue of knowledgetransfer is extrinsic to
legal compliance.There is no provision for filing such
documentation with the FCC in the AmateurRadio Service, either
centrally or, as Phil previously suggested, with
FieldEngineering offices.When a regulation is clear, it is
legally unsound for action to comply withthat regulation, to
exceed the action prescribed by the regulator.  The en-forcement
and adjudicative structures in place provide for dealing with
aproblem after the fact, on the sound basis that before the
fact, there is noproblem.Far from avoiding problems, Phil's
suggestion would create them, if in no otherway than by inducing
work that present regulations were designed expressly toavoid,
and which as a matter of public policy, we can ill
afford.-Harris KB6OWB
<red-eft![e-mail]>------------------------------Da
te: 5 Aug 92 21:47:08 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!orchard.la.locus.com!devnet.la.locus.c
om![e-mail]: [e-mail]
<r2vm_#[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: data
compression with packet: legal?In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jack Brindle) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:>>Geez. Why do people have to make everything so hard?>>I
agree. The rules are actually clear here - we can transmit
whatever>(non-encrytion) codes we wish (meaning ebcdic is
legal), as long as>we document them in our log books. Of course,
the rules no longer>require log books...Nor do the rules require
us to document the codes in our log books.Refer to Part
97.309(b); one need do nothing special until theFCC
Engineer-in-Charge requests otherwise for the sake of
insuringcompliance with the rules.--  * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ         |
Views expressed here are    * * [phone]         | mine and do not
necessarily    * * [e-mail]  DoD #466     | reflect those of my
employer    * * "Dammit Bones, spare me the lecture and give me the
shot!"   *------------------------------Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1992
17:26:04 GMTFrom: mdisea![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <r2vm_#[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: data
compression with packet: legal?In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:>If your compression algorithm is new and different, then
publish it>widely in the general amateur media (USENET, PBBSes,
ARRL CNC>proceedings, etc) so the rest of us can benefit from
it. And if it's>an existing algorithm, you don't need to send it
to anybody (including>the FCC) because, by definition, it's
already available. And, of>course, if anybody asks, you simply
tell them what you're doing.>>Geez. Why do people have to make
everything so hard?I agree. The rules are actually clear here -
we can transmit whatever(non-encrytion) codes we wish (meaning
ebcdic is legal), as long aswe document them in our log books.
Of course, the rules no longerrequire log books...Now, who will
be the first to get their 3090's on the air using ebcdic?:-) :-)
:-)--
==========================================================Jack
Brindleham radio: wa4fibinternet:
[e-mail]------------------------------End of
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #211******************************Date:
Fri,  7 Aug 92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #212To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Fri,
7 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 212Today's Topics:
        56k modems vs 9.6k modems            data compression
with packet: legal? (3 msgs)                        Ham radio
gear forsale      Looking for information Microwave
communications/ethernet               MFJ-1278 vs. PK-232MBX ?
(vs. DSP-1232)                 Problem using GRINOS finger
command.                                 TAPR
            TAPR ?                       TNC'less Packet on
Mac?Send Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 6 Aug 92 22:08:21 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!aukuni.ac.nz!mercury!nacjack!rich
[e-mail]: 56k modems vs 9.6k modemsTo:
[e-mail] am thinking of upgradinging my PACCOM
Tiny-2 to 9600, but I know thereare 56k modems out there.Does
anyone know where can I get more information about these modems?
Howexpensive are they? Do they work with a normal transceiver?
Why do peopleuse 9600 if they can use 56k? Do they still use
AX25?Richard-----------------------------------------------------
----------------------And Noah Spake unto his children:
"Scattered showers my arse!"FIDONET: Richard Vowles 3:772/110.0
       USENET: [e-mail] Radio:
ZL1UTF@ZL1AB.#11.AKL.NZL.OC   The Demi-Monde:
199:310/1------------------------------Date: 5 Aug 92 18:42:49
GMTFrom: psinntp![e-mail]: data compression
with packet: legal?To: [e-mail]
rec.radio.amateur.packet, [e-mail] (Phil Howard )
writes:>[e-mail] (Dana H. Myers) writes:>>>  Maybe I'm
just in a less than optimal mood right now and liable to
be>>nasty, but why should I send the local FCC EOC a few copies
of>>my data compression utility?  And *why* to the ARRL? Huh?
Did I>>miss something?>>Maybe you missed something.  This was in
reference to one you create>for yourself.  By sending these
copies, it puts the "protocol/format">sufficiently in the public
domain to make it potentially possible for>FCC monitoring to be
able to (as if they would care to) "decode" what>you are
sending.Actually, I'd rather you sent us the protocol spec in
the form of anarticle I could publish in QEX :-)-------Jon
Bloom, KE3Z                   |  [e-mail] Radio
Relay League       |225 Main St.
|Newington, CT 06111
|------------------------------Date: 5 Aug 92 18:35:25 GMTFrom:
psinntp![e-mail]: data compression with
packet:  legal?To: [e-mail]
rec.radio.amateur.packet, [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
writes:>Legal.  The people I've contacted, including those at
the League, say>they've never heard of any ruling or policy that
precludes encrypted>data.Well, that's putting a bit of a spin on
it.  What was said was thatwe hadn't head of any specific action
with regard to compressedfiles.  There is a rule against
encryption *for the purpose of obscuringthe meaning* of the
data.  To that extent, there has been a rulingprecluding
encrypted data.  There is also a rule that disallows
HFtransmissions that aren't ASCII, ITA2 or CCIR 476/625 coded.
(I don'tmean to be pedantic, just specific.)  Which is not to
say that some FCCfield staff member might not have said, "sure,
go ahead and send thatdata..."  But field staff don't make
policy, so caveat emptor.>In particular, the League's never
heard of any FCC citation being>issued, and they do seem to keep
track of that sort of thing.*>>Urban legend.>    - Brian>>* Look,
the ARRL does do some good things.  Their technical
and>administrative people are good.  It's the political
leadership>of the League that needs to be replaced.Must be a
forged posting :-)-------Jon Bloom, KE3Z                   |
[e-mail] Radio Relay League       |225 Main St.
                   |Newington, CT 06111
|------------------------------Date: 6 Aug 92 21:09:32 GMTFrom:
csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]: data compression
with packet: legal?To: [e-mail]@arrl.org (Jon
Bloom) writes:>Actually, I'd rather you sent us the protocol
spec in the form of an>article I could publish in QEX
:-)>------->Jon Bloom, KE3Z                   |
[e-mail]>American Radio Relay League       |>225 Main St.
                     |>Newington, CT 06111               |That
would make even more sense.  That way there is no doubt that it
isnot a secret code.--
/****************************************************************
*******\| Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]   |
"The problem with || depending on government is that you cannot
depend on it" - Tony Brown
|\***************************************************************
********/------------------------------Date: 6 Aug 92 15:13:15
GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!uchinews!machine!chinet!drx@netwo
rk.UCSD.EDUSubject: Ham radio gear forsaleTo:
[e-mail] Radio equipment FOR SALE:Icom W-2A    Dual
band wonder from Icom. 60 memories. Full independant dual    band
operation (seperate volume and squelch).    This baby is brand new.
Bought it last month (have receipt!).BC-72     This is the desktop
charger for the above W2. Rapidly charges    (On the order of 1 hr
or so.) Operates from 12 volts or from    supplied adapter. Bought
at same time as above.Other goodies to go with the
above.CP-13        Cigarette lighter cable with built filter. Also
charges the above    radio.OPC-288    DC power cable. Allows one to
connect the W2 to an external    power supply.Softcase carrying
case. This isn't the ICOM softcase but a thrid partyitem. If
you've ever been in ham radio store you have probably seen
it.The radio works great, what the heck it's new!!I have all the
boxes and everything for the W2 and BC-72.    I'm looking for
$550.00 for all of the above. (What a bargin!) Also I have a AEA
PK-232MBX (A couple of months old, no box) Basically newworks
great. Looking for $275.00 (will also throw in a AEA ISOPOLE 440
andISOPOLE 144)(I will also throw in some beer(or preferred
beverage) if you buy it all!)The reason for disposing of good
and new equipment in such a short time?Well, it was all an
impulse buy.  I was recently invited (and I accepted)to
participate in the startup of a sound reinforcement company for
localarea bands and such, and found that I have neither the
time, inclination, normoney to continue in something which I
spend no time at (ham radio.)  So here is you chance. Act now!
Here are the stats:Scott Whittle, N9JKNto call me during the
day: [phone] , just ask for Scottto call me after 5:30pm
: [phone] , just ask for Scott to call at any other time:
[phone] , just ask for ScottThe email method :
[e-mail]-- Scott Whittle (drx)
[e-mail] Zero Sight & Sound, inc.          Two
Wheaton Center #1111         * Ding-a-Ding-Dang my
Dang-a-long-ling-long Wheaton, IL 60187 708.533.7471   *
Ministry, JBMH, as edited by IceIce Beno
------------------------------Date: Fri, 07 Aug 92 02:16:46
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!umn.edu!lynx!pioneer.unm.edu!opus@
network.UCSD.EDUSubject: Looking for information Microwave
communications/ethernetTo: [e-mail] have access to
a pair of microwave transmitters and receivers.  I want to
starta project on connecting two computers with ethernet cards
in them via themicrowave tx/rx.The information that I need are
references to literature and spec's on what is necessary to do
to accomplish the connection.The microwave tx/rx's are:Micropass
II FM Microwave Telecom LinkFCC ID B2N9CL 10050Part #
10050-100-18 and 10050-216-02Racon Inc.I need some sort of
information on these tx/rx's.I have already done research on the
FCC regulations on communications via thismethod and I believe
that I should have no problem getting the necessary license todo
so.The tx/rx's operate in the 22-23GHz range, would it be
possible to have ethernetpackets and related data be transported
across such a link?Please send me e-mail and thank you for your
time.-- Colby KraybillSpace and Planetary Image
FacilityUniversity of New
[e-mail]------------------------------Date:
Thu, 06 Aug 1992 19:44:05 GMTFrom:
newsgate.watson.ibm.com!yktnews!admin!aixproj![e-mail]
ject: MFJ-1278 vs. PK-232MBX ? (vs. DSP-1232)To:
[e-mail],    Would somebody post a comparison
between these    two multimode controllers, please?  [The choice    is
to be made about which one to buy for HF and    VHF]    1) Modes
(hopefully including relative wide-spread       of those
mentioned)    2) Features, performance (if applicable :-)    3)
Reliability and easiness to use    4) Customer Service    5)
Upgrade-ability    Also, where does DSP-1232  (and 2232)  fit into
this    scheme? Yeah, it has great potentials, but to unlock    those
do I have to program that nice DSP myself? And    what advantages
does DSP have TODAY? More modes? Any    other?    Thanks!  Oh, BTW you
can e-mail your reply to me
as    well.    Regards,    Uri.        [e-mail]------------<Disclaimer
>    ------------------------------Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1992 20:52:24
GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!noc.msc.n
et!uc.msc.edu!apctrc![e-mail]: Problem
using GRINOS finger command.To: [e-mail] using
the finger @host command (2.0jGRINOS), the server
respondsproperly by returning a list of files contained in the
finger directory.However, when issuing finger all@host, NOS
returns unknown user. Whatcan I do to solve this?  Thanks in
advance for any
assistance!MikeWA5TXX------------------------------Date: 6 Aug
92 20:40:56 GMTFrom:
news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu![e-mail]:
TAPRTo: [e-mail] has replied to my query on
which TNCs are capable of running high bitrates.Does anyone have
the email address of someone at TAPR, who might know?Does anyone
have the phone number for TAPR?I assume that they can answer my
question, since TAPR is involved with highspeed packet modem
experimentation.Thank you.Meir, N2JPG * * * * *
=================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 5 Aug
92 21:30:56 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!tulane!rouge![e-mail]
ject: TAPR ?To: [e-mail], Frederic!  TAPR
1.1.7b is available from many places,including PC.USL.EDU.  In
fact, if you are going to use KISSprotocol, I recommend you use
version 1.1.7b in lieu of ANYother version, up to and including
1.1.8.  On PC.USL.EDU (130.70.40.3) look for
pub/ham/tapr117b.zip.Bon courage!et 73 de-- -- James
Dugal,    N5KNX        Internet: [e-mail] Director        Ham
packet: n5knx @k5arh (land), UO-22 (sat.)Computing Center        US
Mail: PO Box 42770  Lafayette, LA  70504University of
Southwestern LA.    Tel.
318-231-6417    U.S.A.------------------------------Date: 6 Aug 92
13:53:44 GMTFrom: [e-mail]: TNC'less Packet on
Mac?To: [e-mail]------------------------------Date:
Thu, 6 Aug 1992 12:46:19 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!noc.msc.n
et!uc.msc.edu!apctrc!wsc![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <r2vm_#[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>rcReply-To :
[e-mail] : Re: data compression with packet:
legal?In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail](Jack Brindle) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail]:>>If your compression algorithm
is new and different, then publish itwow....I really did spark
off a debate with that question, didn't I?  :-)actually, my
knowledge of data compression algorithms (from the perspectiveof
writing one) is nil --- I was actually planning on trying to use
thesame basic algorithm found in the CCITT V.42bis standard.but,
of course, as I've already mentioned, since the KA9Q software
isalready basically doing this, no point.>Now, who will be the
first to get their 3090's on the air using ebcdic?>:-) :-)
:-)nahhh....then what would you use for a paperweight?   :-)
:-)   --jim\input std_disclaimer                     % 73 DE
N5IAL
(/9)-------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------"[...] the plural of `mongoose' ought to be
`polygoose'." [Jargon file 2.9.10]INTERNET:  [e-mail]
 |  [e-mail]  |  [e-mail]:
gagme!n5ial![e-mail] RADIO:  n5ial@n9hsi
(Chicago.IL.US.Earth)--------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------D
ate: 6 Aug 92 19:16:10 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!rsiatl![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<r2vm_#[e-mail]>Subject : Re: data compression with
packet: legal?In article <r2vm_#[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Howard ) writes:>>Consider if the local OO intercepts your
transferred file and tries all>know utilities on it, but all
fail because it is of your own design.>So far nothing is wrong,
but it is suspect.  The FCC might get the matter>next.  Actually
the OO should contact you first, but in case they don't>at least
by having something on file at the FCC, they will know in
advance>that things are "cool".>>It's intended to just avoid
problems, that's all.The way to avoid problems is to treat an OO
the same here as you would any other instance.  Tell him to
pound sand and go away.  His wannabecop urge will pass after
awhile.John-- John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested
in high performance mobility?  Performance Engineering Magazine
(TM) |Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high
tech and computers? [e-mail]                        |Write
me about PE MagazineNeed Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write
Me for info on Dixie.com.------------------------------End of
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #212******************************Date:
Sat,  8 Aug 92 04:30:04 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #213To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sat,
8 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 213Today's Topics:
data compression with packet:  legal? (3 msgs)
Kenwood TM-621/721 144 MHz @ 9600 Baud
MFJ 1278 (2 msgs)                   MFJ 1278 And MULTICOM. (2
msgs)                     Packet-Radio Digest V92 #211
           Protest over ARRL actions                    TNC and
TCP-IP advice, please
UndigestifySend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 7 Aug 1992 13:31:15 GMTFrom:
ucsd.edu![e-mail]: data compression with
packet:  legal?To: [e-mail]
rec.radio.amateur.packet, [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
writes:>Legal.  The people I've contacted, including those at
the League, say>they've never heard of any ruling or policy that
precludes encrypted>data.Did I really say that?  Arrgh!  Of
course I meant "COMPRESSED", not "encrypted".Must be getting
old.  Next thing you know, I'll be joining QCWA anddrooling on
my tie.Thanks for pointing that out, Jon.  Anyone tell you
you're an all-rightsorta guy, if only you worked somewhere else?
 :-)    - Brian------------------------------Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1992
04:47:24 GMTFrom:
snorkelwacker.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu.!sro@
uunet.uu.netSubject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail]>  The people I've contacted, including
those at the League, say>  they've never heard of any ruling or
policy that precludes encrypted>  data.I think you meant
*compressed* data.  *Encrypted* data is a no-no.Now that cheap
compressing software incorporates pretty good encryption
algorithms, we'll have to be careful.  The thing which the FCC
is concerned about, it seems to me, is whetheror not the ham is
trying to obscure the meaning of the transmission.(See 97.113
(d).)  Whether or not your local listening station is Zip or
Stuffit savvy is another question.  An Amateur Affiliate
coordinator spoke at a club meeting in Boston about a year ago.
He told us about an incident in which local hamsexchanging ZIP
files were contacted by the FCC and asked to explainwhy they
were transmitting in cypher.  I may remember the story wrong--it
may have been a zealous but uninformed Amateur Auxiliary who got
upset, I don't know.  In any case, there remain no standards for
"plain language" in theworld of compression.  What if the FCC
van doesn't have a Mac, and Itransmit a Stuffit file?  What
about less popular compression formats?Compactor?  FastBack?
Norton?  Not all compression software announcesitself in the
header.  What would you have to send to make the FCC (and
foreign PTT if you're DXing)
happy?--Shawn------------------------------Date: Thu, 06 Aug 92
11:31:32 EDTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu
!n8emr!bluemoon![e-mail]: data compression
with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail]@chicago.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
writes:> In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Shaw> >A year or so ago I heard of some hams
who heard from the FCC because> >they were sending
ZIP-compressed files via packet.  The FCC wanted to> >know what
they were doing sending "encrypted data."> > I've sent many,
many ZIP-compressed files (primarily versions of the> NOS source
code) over packet radio and never had any inquiries from> the
FCC. Of course, this was at 56kb on 220.55 (before we lost that>
part of the band) so there may have been other obstacles to the
easy> monitoring of my transmissions.> > But I never let that
stop me -- if somebody ever asks, I'll tell them> what I'm
doing, but I don't feel I need any special advance permission>
from anyone to do something just because thousands of other
hams> aren't doing exactly the same thing. The FTP control
channel messages> that immediately precede a file transfer and
name the file (e.g.,> NOSSRC.ZIP) ought to be enough to give
anybody with nothing better to> do than monitor my transmissions
a pretty good idea of the file> format.> > PhilMy reading of the
FCC Regulations is that anything goesunless the intent is to
conceal the data. This is from     [e-mail]
doesn't have his (or her) own obnoxious signature
yet------------------------------Date: 6 Aug 92 19:51:39
GMTFrom: psinntp!lupine!hansen1![e-mail]:
Kenwood TM-621/721 144 MHz @ 9600 BaudTo:
[e-mail] for posting to the net, but I can not
seem to reach Jeff Angus thru email :-(Hello Jeff,Could you tell
me what you did?  I have a TM-721A and I would love to put it up
on 9600 baud, even if it is ONLY UHF for now.After I have the
UHF going I will be, like you, wanted and working to get VHF
working at 9600 baud.If you get info on how to make it work at
9600 baud for the VHF band, let me know... I am very
interested.Thanks in advance.P.S. What values are you using for
TXDelay?DE
KJ6NNPhilEMAIL:        [e-mail]:        kj6nn@n0ary----------------
--------------Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1992 13:37:23 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!mail-enters-news@netwo
rk.UCSD.EDUSubject: MFJ 1278To: [e-mail] recent
inquiry asked for a comparison of the MFJ 1278 and AEA machine.I
bought the MFJ, as it seemed to have similar features to the AEA
232, andwas a few bucks cheaper.  So why not save the 30 bucks
or so?  I havethe only MFJ TNC in the area, but I wish I would
have joined the majority.I can basically work the machine okay,
but have had lots of problems.  Ibelieve most of the problems
are in the MFJ software.  The software documentationis
inadequate IMHO.  I can use LanLink, but then I do not get the
multimodestuff, of course.  I recently bought a new computer,
and cannot use theMFJCOM software, the machine locks up with the
first keypress.  I have acopy of MULTICOM, but I find it is copy
protected.  I wanted to use it onboth my portable and my
desktop.  I have succeeded in wasting the availablecopies trying
to break the copy protection.  In short, the machine worksokay
when I can communicate with it, but have had lots of software
problems.------------------------------Date: Fri, 07 Aug 1992
17:18:24 GMTFrom:
newsgate.watson.ibm.com!yktnews!admin!aixproj![e-mail]
ject: MFJ 1278To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Don Stauffer) writes:|> A recent
inquiry asked for a comparison of the MFJ 1278 and AEA
machine.|> I bought the MFJ, as it seemed to have similar
features to the AEA 232, and|> was a few bucks cheaper.  So why
not save the 30 bucks or so?  Yeah, that's what I thought after
comparing the ad's...|> I can basically work the machine okay,
but have had lots of problems.  I|> believe most of the problems
are in the MFJ software. I see...|> I recently bought a new
computer, and cannot use the|> MFJCOM software, the machine
locks up with the first keypress.  I have a|> copy of MULTICOM,
but I find it is copy protected.  I wanted to use it on|> both
my portable and my desktop.  I have succeeded in wasting the
available|> copies trying to break the copy protection.  In
short, the machine works|> okay when I can communicate with it,
but have had lots of software problems.Thanks a lot for sharing
your experience. That their firmware is buggy - is bad. That
their MULTICOM iscopy-protected - I will NEVER buy their stuff,
period. Thanksfor letting me know beforehand.So it looks like
the only way is
AEA...Regards,Uri.------------<Disclaimer>-----------------------
-------Date: Fri, 7 Aug 92 18:38:29 GMTFrom:
usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!at
t!walter!porthos!vixen![e-mail]: MFJ 1278 And
MULTICOM.To: [e-mail] have an MFJ 1278 operating
under MULTICOM. I noticed the thread regarding problems with the
software and the hardware.I have a 386/33 with 4meg running
windows 3.1. I have the 1278 set up on COM 3 running at 9600
baud 7 bit, even parityand one stop bit.I have had absolutely no
problem running the hardware or software *ONCE* I realized that
I can't run MULTICOM as a Window but mustrun it in a DOS window
I run SSTV, HF and VHF packet, RTTY, CW  and AMTOR. A couple
ofus are experimenting with RTTY over VHF FM (2 METERS). I also
blew the software protection and called MFJ. They were both
courteous and very helpful. I sent them the original discand
they put me back on the air in about 10 work days. There was a
nominal charge (reload, shipping via UPS and handling).You
really can not blame MFJ for the software since theysub-contract
the work and act only as agents.All standard disclaimers should
be applied at this point.David C. Marden, Bell Communications
Research, 100 Schultz Dr. P.O.Box 7050 Red Bank, NJ 07701
908-758-5643 vixen![e-mail] known as King Edward
the second, Amateur Golfer
(KE2AG)------------------------------Date: 7 Aug 92 21:59:22
GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.h
oneywell.com!umn.edu!noc.msc.net!uc.msc.edu!shamash!ems!ems.cdc.c
om![e-mail]: MFJ 1278 And MULTICOM.To:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(24104-marden) writes:|> |> |> I have an MFJ 1278 operating
under MULTICOM. I noticed the thread |> [STUFF DELETED]|>|> I
also blew the software protection and called MFJ. They were |>
both courteous and very helpful. I sent them the original disc|>
and they put me back on the air in about 10 work days. There |>
was a nominal charge (reload, shipping via UPS and handling).|>
Holy Cow!  You paid perfectly good money for a program,
something wentwrong with something you don't use anyway (copy
protection), you were off the air for 10 days, and you had to
pay more money to get thingsfixed!  I could sell you a junk car,
you still wouldn't be able to driveit, but send me more money,
and I'll give you a car that works.  This therotten attitude of
a bad software company.  I agree with other folkswho get excited
when someone tells 'em that something is copy protectedand they
won't buy it.  If the copy protection causes you any trouble,
theyought to overnight the fixed version to you AT NO CHARGE!!!
You are honestthe copy protection only gets in your way.|> You
really can not blame MFJ for the software since they|>
sub-contract the work and act only as agents.|> They could hire
me to do the right thing the right way!|> |> All standard
disclaimers should be applied at this point.|> David C. Marden,
Bell Communications Research, 100 Schultz Dr. P.O.|> Box 7050
Red Bank, NJ 07701 908-758-5643 vixen![e-mail]|> Also
known as King Edward the second, Amateur Golfer (KE2AG)Tommy
BWD0EIB.------------------------------Date: 7 Aug 1992 10:05:21
-0700From: [e-mail]: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #211To: [e-mail]'ve been some problems
trying to send my SIGNOFF.Please delete my name from the
list.Gerardo Belinsky------------------------------Date: 7 Aug
92 20:20:53 GMTFrom:
sun-barr!west.West.Sun.COM!huge![e-mail]:
Protest over ARRL actionsTo: [e-mail] think we
should all write to our ARRL rep and let them know how po'd we
are aboutthe whole thing, however, I don't think that making all
the users of the BBS's sufferfor a poor decission that some
schmuck (or schmucks) made is the right way to goabout it.Flood
the sobs with mail and what ever else you can think about but
don't jump ontheir sewer-level bandwagon and do basically just
what they are proposing to do, which is screw the user
community.I think the days of throwing tantrums and doing the
old "we'll showem who kicks themost" bs are over, flood the
suckers with mail and tell them that if they don'tlook after our
needs, which is what they are supposed to do, we will just fire
them!Hugo, N6YWH------------------------------Date: Fri, 7 Aug
1992 12:56:07 GMTFrom:
psinntp!ncrlnk!ciss!lawday![e-mail]: TNC and
TCP-IP advice, pleaseTo:
[e-mail]@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
writes:>OK, folks.  I am looking for advice:[ other stuff
deleted]>Several members have already purchased TNCs, but I have
been>reluctant, because I wasn't sure which one to get.  Several
people in the>club are ready to try out TCP/IP.  With TCP/IP,
higher speeds than 9600 bps>are useful.  The three TNCs I have
looked at are the KPC3, the PK88, and the>MFJ1270B.  Does anyone
know whether they can all handle 19,200 bps?>Which TNC or card
is best, and why?>Does anyone know who the IP coordinator for
Manhattan is?>What is the closest packet-internet gateway to
Manhattan?I have experience with three ways of generating
faster-than-9600 baudHDLC frames:1)  Ottawa PI interface card.
Definitely best performance, and lowestprice ($120 US).
Disadvantage:  so far, only works with NOS, thoughwith a
Clarkson packet driver now available, that could change.
We'reusing them in ways the designer didn't quite intend, and do
see somepackets fall on the floor.  I think it's a software, not
hardware,problem, though.  You're on your own to package and
interface a modem.The Gracilis PacketTwin board is similar to
the PI card, with theadvantage of permitting onboard modems.  I
don't have any firsthandexperience with it, though.2)  PacComm
Tiny-2 "10MHz node version".  This is simply the standardTiny-2
but with a 10MHz clock and parts rated accordingly.  Out of
thebox, the serial port will do 38.4 and the radio side 19.2.
These canboth be increased by dinking with the divider.  I've
put two intoservice at 19.2 and they work great.  Price for the
10MHz version isabout $150.  PacComm sells 9600 and (I think)
19.2 modems for about$100.  Since it's a TNC-2 clone you can use
any of the high speed modemsavailable.3)  Kantronics DataEngine.
 Nice hardware, but pricy if all you want isa TNC -- about $275
before modems.  BIG PROBLEM in my book -- the KISSimplementation
works very poorly at high speeds, with <lots> of lostpackets.
The good news:  Johan, WG7J, has just finished the alphaversion
of "Nos-in-a-Box" for the Data Engine, so with that code itcould
be the ideal platform for a small to medium sized switch (with
twohigh speed ports and a couple of NetRom TNCs or a slip link
hung off theserial port).Hope this helps.  I won't take up
bandwidth with it here, but if you'reinterested let me know and
we can talk offline about the architecturewe're using for a
19.2KB metro area network here in Dayton, usingKantronics D4-10
radios as RF modems and avoiding the cost of adding anadditional
modem to the system.John-- John R. Ackermann, Jr.        Law
Department, NCR Corporation, Dayton, Ohio(513) 445-2966
[e-mail] Radio: ag9v@n8acv
tcp/ip: [e-mail]
[44.70.12.34]------------------------------Date: 7 Aug 1992
09:29:23 -0700From: [e-mail]:
UndigestifyTo: [e-mail]'m looking for a simple
program to undigestify packet-radio.I use Berkeley mail
(/usr/ucb/mail) on a Sun system. Pleselet me know where to ftp
one from by e-mail.73 Costas Krallis SV1XV (ex.
G7AHN)-----------------------------------------------------------
-------|   Dr. K. Krallis  SV1XV|   Epsilon Software S.A.||
E-Mail|  ------|  Internet:  [e-mail]|
Packet radio: SV1XV @ SV1IW.ATH.GRC.EU|  AMPRnet:
[e-mail]         [44.154.1.11]|  BITNET:
sv1xv@grathun1|  Snail Mail:  P.O.BOX 3066, GR-10210 Athens,
GREECE-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #213******************************Date: Sun,  9 Aug 92
04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #214To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sun,
9 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 214Today's Topics:
  data compression with packet:  legal?                      KAM
Data Engine and TCP/IP                   MFJ 1278 And MULTICOM.
(2 msgs)                   Packet Filters for TS-450S HELP
                         TAPR ?                      TS-450
Filters for PacketSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 8 Aug 1992 14:05:15 -0700From:
[e-mail]: data compression with packet:
 legal?To: [e-mail]     I'm still so surprised that
this is still being discussed the wayit is. At least some people
are no admitting that you can run aboutanything you want as long
as your intent is not to obscure your transmission.
                  ^^no=now     We've had people here in Detroit
gripe and complain about TCP/IPbecause they can't decode what we
are saying (turn your PID or MPROTO on!).People have gotten on
voice repeaters bad mouthing it saying that we send commercial
software back and forth. Of course the only people thatsay that
are the ones who have NEVER even seen a TCP/IP system work.
Just because we use LZW compression for SMTP, NNTP and some
converslinking, we do so to make packet more efficient.  When
someone complainsand says that I am doing it illegally, I will
challenge them to talkto the FCC and explain how they send plain
text and hog up the frequencyand I compress the messages and
spend less time actually on the air andmake better use of the
frequency.  Then what about things like NETROMtransmissions,
Texnet frames, etc...  Those aren't plain text. Does thatmean
that they are illegal because someone monitoring can't decode
itin plain text? NO!    If it had to be plain text then we would
have nodeslists a mile long on the transmission.  I'd have to
increase the watchdogtimers on the TNC's to transmit all that
plain text.  I believe thatTexnet uses something like 5 bytes of
information for it's nodes (any Texnet gurus out there)?  How
many people even have this information? Itwas published in  one
of the ARRL CNC papers a few years back.     If you complain
that someone is illegal because you can't easilydecode a
transmission, do one of the following:     1. Ask the person.
If you ask me I will probably invite you over        and show
you how it all works     2. Determine if they are using the
spectrum more efficiently than        you are with your
non-compressed transmissions.     3. Piece the transmissions
back together and decode it yoursel.     4. Get a life!Ron
N8FOW------------------------------Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1992
15:37:19 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!nic.umass.edu!hamp.hampshire.edu!awoodhull@networ
k.UCSD.EDUSubject: KAM Data Engine and TCP/IPTo:
[e-mail] Data Engine and TCP/IP help?A Dutch ham
working in Nicaragua, Theo Vlaar, PA3CBH/YN1TV, wrote mewith a
question about packet which is a bit beyond my experience, but
Iimagine the expertise is out there on the net.  Any pointers
toarchived files or other sources of info would be appreciated.
Pleasee-mail to me at [e-mail] and 73,
Al Woodhull, N1AW-------------- question from YN1TV
-----------------> From:    IN%"[e-mail]"  7-AUG-1992
09:24:27.84> To:    [e-mail]> > ...We have now
two KAM DATA ENGINES with a 70 cm and 2 meter> transceiver. This
means that we can use the set as a gateway> between the 2 meter
1200 Baud link and the 70 cm 19.200 Baud link.> In PACKET mode
it is no problem, but doing it in TCP/IP ( so in> KISS mode) is
still a problem. We do not know how exactly we> have to address
the two MODEMs via NET. Phil Karns software> should be modified
somehow to address the right MODEM in the> DATA ENGINE. Do you
have any friends who apply the DATA ENGINE as> gateway in TCP/IP
using the Phil Karns software?> ...>
------------------------------Date: 8 Aug 1992 11:47:09
-0700From: [e-mail]: MFJ 1278 And
MULTICOM.To: [e-mail]>You really can not blame MFJ
for the software since they>sub-contract the work and act only
as agents.MFJ is the contractor and would be responsible for
setting the specificationsfor the contracted software.  This
would include the user interface, operatingsystems supported,
hardware the software can use and so on.And it's sold by them
under their name.------------------------------Date: 8 Aug 92
19:22:52 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usene
t.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast![e-mail]: MFJ 1278
And MULTICOM.To: [e-mail] quoted from
<[e-mail]> by [e-mail]
(24104-marden):+---------------| I have a 386/33 with 4meg
running windows 3.1. I have the | 1278 set up on COM 3 running
at 9600 baud 7 bit, even parity| and one stop bit.| | I have had
absolutely no problem running the hardware or software | *ONCE*
I realized that I can't run MULTICOM as a Window but must| run
it in a DOS window +---------------Any idea why?  I haven't
tried it under DESQview yet, because my systemconfiguration
causes the copy protection to have indigestion (translation:it
dislikes my SuperStor drivers; I assume it reacts similarly to
Stacker,or that a later version addresses this --- my 1278 and
Multicom are bothsomewhat old and MFJ has yet to ship me my
updates).  But see below.+---------------| I also blew the
software protection and called MFJ. They were | both courteous
and very helpful. I sent them the original disc| and they put me
back on the air in about 10 work days. There | was a nominal
charge (reload, shipping via UPS and
handling).+---------------It is claimed that MFJ will send
registered Multicom owners a non-copy-protected version with
just a phone call; they encode your callsign into thecopy they
send you so they can track pirated copies if necessary.# # #It's
worth noting that MFJ's support varies from good (above) to
nonexistent.Much like their quality, in fact.  And their "free
upgrade" certificatesappear to be wastepaper; I haven't heard of
anyone actually *receiving* anupdate after sending in the
certificate.++Brandon-- Brandon S. Allbery, KF8NH [44.70.4.88]:
[e-mail], [e-mail] Programmer, Telotech,
Inc. (if I may call myself
that...)------------------------------Date: 8 Aug 92 20:43:34
GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!
ut-emx!shrike![e-mail]: Packet Filters for
TS-450S HELPTo: [e-mail] reply via E-Mail or
PacketDick,
KD5VU============================================================
=========      Richard (Dick) Kriss
E-Mail:[e-mail]      904 Dartmoor Cove
Packet Radio: SP KD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA    Austin, Texas
78746    Phone: [phone] (day) or 327-9566 (evenings)  My
employer has nothing to do with this message! ...  _._

=================================================================
====    ------------------------------Date: 9 Aug 92 01:53:22
GMTFrom: tulane!agwbbs![e-mail]:
TAPR ?To: [e-mail] James, I was wondering the
reason you said  1.1.8 is not as good as the 1.1.7B???-- Via DLG
Pro v0.992Internet:[e-mail]
Usenet:rex!agwbbs!angelo_glorioso_III  Packet:N5UXT @
N5UXT.#NOLA.LA.USA.NA  Tcp/ip:N5UXT.AMPT.ORG
[44.108.2.13]------------------------------Date: 9 Aug 92
01:19:20 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!shrike![e-mail]
: TS-450 Filters for PacketTo: [e-mail] think the
text from my posting got trashed. Will try to rememberwhat I
said.Sure would like to hear from Kenwood / PK-232 users about
how theoptional filters work on Packet. I am thinking about
purchasingthe optional SSB filter for the TS-450S/AT for use on
HF packetwith the PK-232MBX. Will the optional filter HELP or
HURT Pkt Rx?Dick,
KD5VU============================================================
=========      Richard (Dick) Kriss
E-Mail:[e-mail]      904 Dartmoor Cove
Packet Radio: SP KD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA    Austin, Texas
78746    Phone: [phone] (day) or 327-9566 (evenings)  My
employer has nothing to do with this message! ...  _._

=================================================================
====    ------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #214******************************Date: Mon, 10 Aug 92
04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #215To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Mon,
10 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 215Today's Topics:
                Failed mail                     HF Packet
Survey... (2 msgs)                 Looking for Recommendations
on a TNC                Need Help! ICOM 24-AT  handheld to TNC
                   Protest over ARRL actionsSend Replies or
notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 9 Aug 1992 22:33:51 -0700From:
[e-mail]: Failed mailTo:
[e-mail] following message was not delivered,
because the name it isis addressed to is not registered here. *
Originally by Uucp, 2:220/801 * Originally to Packrad, 2:490/20
* Originally dated Mon, 10 Aug 92 00:38:26
+0300------------------------------Date: 9 Aug 1992 17:40:39
-0700From: [e-mail]: HF Packet
Survey...To: [e-mail] HF packet survey data was
solicited in QST and the RTTY Journal.But some questions remain:
 1) Which packet magazines were covered?  2) Was there an ARRL
bulletin soliciting data for the survey?If the answers are NONE
and NO, I am disappointed at someoneattempting to say that the
survey represented any sort ofcross-section of the amateur
community,Roy, AA4RE------------------------------Date: 9 Aug
1992 17:43:37 -0700From: [e-mail]: HF
Packet Survey...To: [e-mail] HF packet survey
data was solicited in QST and the RTTY Journal.But some
questions remain:  1) Which packet magazines were covered?  2)
Was there an ARRL bulletin soliciting data for the survey?If the
answers are NONE and NO, I am disappointed at someoneattempting
to say that the survey represented any sort ofcross-section of
the amateur community,Roy,
AA4RE------------------------------Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992
09:44:46 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroy
er!news.iastate.edu![e-mail]: Looking for
Recommendations on a TNCTo: [e-mail]   I am looking
to get into packet radio, and would appreciate it if I couldget
some recommendations on a good multimode packet TNC.  I have
heard somegood things about the PK-232MBX, which seems to be the
most-used multimode TNCaround, but the MFJ-1278 seems to have a
lot more features.   I will be doing packet on an Amiga 3000,
which has the ability to run bothMacintosh and IBM software, so
software compatibility with this Amiga shouldnot be a problem.
I am a beginner when it comes to packet radio, so I
wouldapreciate it if someone could fill me in on exactly what I
would need in addition to the TNC itself and whatever comes with
it (besides the radio).For instance, the MFJ-1278 seems to
require some sort of adapter cable foreach computer, and both
the MFJ-1278 and PK-232MBX require specialized softwarefor
Amiga, Mac, or IBM to make use of the really fancy stuff such as
SSTV andFAX.     Any help with this would be appreciated.  For
me, the purchase of a TNC isa rather big expense, so I would
like to make sure the TNC that I get willbe the best value for
my money, and will also be compatible with other TNCsin use
locally.---| Marc Barrett -MB-  |  email:
[e-mail]----------------------------------------------
----------------------------------Date: 9 Aug 92 17:41:56
GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
ct: Need Help! ICOM 24-AT  handheld to TNCTo:
[e-mail] article <#fxm9![e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Mike LaPierre) writes:>I'm having
trouble getting my PacComm  Handipacket  TNC  to  work>with  my
new  ICOM 24-AT handheld. Neither ICOM or PacComm gives>very
much info on interfacing the TNC to the radio.  The  TNC
is>nice  in  that  it  provides and internal 2.7k resitor on the
PTT>line, but that doesn't seem to be enough. I added a  1k
resistor>in series with this, but still no luck. My problem is
that when I>connect the radio to the TNC, the radio is
continously  keyed  up>and  the  DCD light on the TNC stays on
also. I've connected each>line up independently of the other
without luck  also.  Before  I>had  the  radio,  I  had  the TNC
hooked to a voice pager where I>could monitor packets without
trouble, but now that I'm trying to>use  the  Mic/PTT, nothing
works. I've ohm'd out the cable and it>doesn't appear to be
shorted.>>I am really anxious to get this to work. I'd like  to
hear  from>anyone  who  has  experience with hooking up a TNC to
the IC-24AT>handheld or the PacComm Handipacket TNC. If you can
help,  don't>hesitate  to reply.  So far I haven't received
anything, so don't>hold back!I haven't used the IC24, but the
circuit I use for all Icom HTsshould work. It follows:TNC
PTT>---------)))))))------------> MIC tip
=======    TNC AF OUT>------)))))))---x
 |--------> MIC or EAR ringTNC GND<-------------------xTNC AF
IN<--------------------------< EAR TIPThe transformer is a
minature 1:1 AF transformer from an old BCB radioor from a Radio
Shack grab bag. You can wire it inline in the cableand cover it
with shrink wrap.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date:
Mon, 10 Aug 1992 01:44:20 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!convex!convex![e-mail]
ject: Protest over ARRL actionsTo: [e-mail] think
it's important to tell them what we want and why.  Flooding them
with mail is not exactly what I had in mind.  But, there are
reasons why it would be beneficial to the packet community to
have HF stations be able to operate unattended... like increased
availability to pass traffic.We need to get as many as possible
to write responsible letters telling themwhy what they've
decided to do is not in the best interest of those of us who do
a lot of packet work.   I've sent a very rational letter of why
I don't like the decision with my own reasons.   I'd encourage
everyone to do the same.   Presley N5VGCThis is a bit
overboard!!In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:>I think we should all write to
our ARRL rep and let them know how po'd we are about>the whole
thing, however, I don't think that making all the users of the
BBS's suffer>for a poor decission that some schmuck (or
schmucks) made is the right way to go>about it.>Flood the sobs
with mail and what ever else you can think about but don't jump
on>their sewer-level bandwagon and do basically just what they
are proposing to do, >which is screw the user community.>>I
think the days of throwing tantrums and doing the old "we'll
showem who kicks the>most" bs are over, flood the suckers with
mail and tell them that if they don't>look after our needs,
which is what they are supposed to do, we will just fire
them!>>Hugo, N6YWH>>>------------------------------Date: Sun, 9
Aug 1992 04:30:02 PDTFrom: [e-mail] (Packet-Radio
Mailing List and Newsgroup)To: Multiple recipients of list
I-PACRAD <[e-mail]>Packet-Radio Digest
Sun,  9 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 214Today's Topics:
        data compression with packet:  legal?
  KAM Data Engine and TCP/IP                   MFJ 1278 And
MULTICOM. (2 msgs)                   Packet Filters for TS-450S
HELP                                TAPR ?
TS-450 Filters for PacketSend Replies or notes for publication
to: <[e-mail]>Se nd s

ubscription requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems
you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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
textherein consists of personal comments and does not represent
the officialpolicies or positions of any party.  Your mileage
may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 8 Aug 1992 14:05:15 -0700From:
[e-mail]: data compression with packet:
 legal?To: [e-mail]     I'm still so surprised that
this is still being discussed the wayit is. At least some people
are no admitting that you can run aboutanything you want as long
as your intent is not to obscure your transmission.
                  ^^no=now     We've had people here in Detroit
gripe and complain about TCP/IPbecause they can't decode what we
are saying (turn your PID or MPROTO on!).People have gotten on
voice repeaters bad mouthing it saying that wesend commercial
software back and forth. Of course the only people thatsay that
are the ones who have NEVER even seen a TCP/IP system work.
Just because we use LZW compression for SMTP, NNTP and some
converslinking, we do so to make packet more efficient.  When
someone complainsand says that I am doing it illegally, I will
challenge them to talkto the FCC and explain how they send plain
text and hog up the frequencyand I compress the messages and
spend less time actually on the air andmake better use of the
frequency.  Then what about things like NETROMtransmissions,
Texnet frames, etc...  Those aren't plain text. Does thatmean
that they are illegal because someone monitoring can't decode
itin plain text? NO!    If it had to be plain text then we would
have nodeslists a mile long on the transmission.  I'd have to
increase the watchdogtimers on the TNC's to transmit all that
plain text.  I believe thatTexnet uses something like 5 bytes of
information for it's nodes (anyTexnet gurus out there)?  How
many people even have this information? Itwas published in  one
of the ARRL CNC papers a few years back.     If you complain
that someone is illegal because you can't easilydecode a
transmission, do one of the following:     1. Ask the person.
If you ask me I will probably invite you over        and show
you how it all works     2. Determine if they are using the
spectrum more efficiently than        you are with your
non-compressed transmissions.     3. Piece the transmissions
back together and decode it yoursel.     4. Get a life!Ron
N8FOW------------------------------Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1992
15:37:19 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!nic.umass.edu!hamp.hampshire.edu!awoodhull@networ
k.UCSD.EDUSubject: KAM Data Engine and TCP/IPTo:
[e-mail] Data Engine and TCP/IP help?A Dutch ham
working in Nicaragua, Theo Vlaar, PA3CBH/YN1TV, wrote mewith a
question about packet which is a bit beyond my experience, but
Iimagine the expertise is out there on the net.  Any pointers
toarchived files or other sources of info would be appreciated.
Pleasee-mail to me at [e-mail] and
73,Al Woodhull, N1AW-------------- question from YN1TV
-----------------> From: IN%"[e-mail]"  7-AUG-1992
09:24:27.84> To:   [e-mail]>> ...We have now
two KAM DATA ENGINES with a 70 cm and 2 meter> transceiver. This
means that we can use the set as a gateway> between the 2 meter
1200 Baud link and the 70 cm 19.200 Baud link.> In PACKET mode
it is no problem, but doing it in TCP/IP ( so in> KISS mode) is
still a problem. We do not know how exactly we> have to address
the two MODEMs via NET. Phil Karns software> should be modified
somehow to address the right MODEM in the> DATA ENGINE. Do you
have any friends who apply the DATA ENGINE as> gateway in TCP/IP
using the Phil Karns software?>
...>------------------------------Date: 8 Aug 1992 11:47:09
-0700From: [e-mail]: MFJ 1278 And
MULTICOM.To: [e-mail]>You really can not blame MFJ
for the software since they>sub-contract the work and act only
as agents.MFJ is the contractor and would be responsible for
setting the specificationsfor the contracted software.  This
would include the user interface, operatingsystems supported,
hardware the software can use and so on.And it's sold by them
under their name.------------------------------Date: 8 Aug 92
19:22:52
GMTFrom:swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.e
du!usenet.ins.cwru.edu !ncoast![e-mail]:
MFJ 1278 And MULTICOM.To: [e-mail] quoted from
<[e-mail]> by [e-mail]
(24104-marden):+---------------| I have a 386/33 with 4meg
running windows 3.1. I have the| 1278 set up on COM 3 running at
9600 baud 7 bit, even parity| and one stop bit.|| I have had
absolutely no problem running the hardware or software| *ONCE* I
realized that I can't run MULTICOM as a Window but must| run it
in a DOS window+---------------Any idea why?  I haven't tried it
under DESQview yet, because my systemconfiguration causes the
copy protection to have indigestion (translation:it dislikes my
SuperStor drivers; I assume it reacts similarly to Stacker,or
that a later version addresses this --- my 1278 and Multicom are
bothsomewhat old and MFJ has yet to ship me my updates).  But
see below.+---------------| I also blew the software protection
and called MFJ. They were| both courteous and very helpful. I
sent them the original disc| and they put me back on the air in
about 10 work days. There| was a nominal charge (reload,
shipping via UPS and handling).+---------------It is claimed
that MFJ will send registered Multicom owners a
non-copy-protected version with just a phone call; they encode
your callsign into thecopy they send you so they can track
pirated copies if necessary.# # #It's worth noting that MFJ's
support varies from good (above) to nonexistent.Much like their
quality, in fact.  And their "free upgrade" certificatesappear
to be wastepaper; I haven't heard of anyone actually *receiving*
anupdate after sending in the certificate.++Brandon--Brandon S.
Allbery, KF8NH [44.70.4.88]: [e-mail],
[e-mail] Programmer, Telotech, Inc. (if I may call
myself that...)------------------------------Date: 8 Aug 92
20:43:34
GMTFrom:usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.ute
xas.edu!ut-emx!shrike! [e-mail]: Packet
Filters for TS-450S HELPTo: [e-mail] reply
via E-Mail or PacketDick,
KD5VU============================================================
=========   Richard (Dick) Kriss
E-Mail:[e-mail]      904 Dartmoor Cove
Packet Radio: SP KD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA    Austin, Texas
78746    Phone: [phone] (day) or 327-9566 (evenings)  My
employer has nothing to do with this message! ...
_._==============================================================
=======------------------------------Date: 9 Aug 92 01:53:22
GMTFrom: tulane!agwbbs![e-mail]:
TAPR ?To: [e-mail] James, I was wondering the
reason you said  1.1.8 is not as good as the 1.1.7B???-- Via DLG
Pro v0.992Internet:[e-mail]
Usenet:rex!agwbbs!angelo_glorioso_III  Packet:N5UXT @
N5UXT.#NOLA.LA.USA.NA  Tcp/ip:N5UXT.AMPT.ORG
[44.108.2.13]------------------------------Date: 9 Aug 92
01:19:20 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!shrike![e-mail]
: TS-450 Filters for PacketTo: [e-mail] think the
text from my posting got trashed. Will try to rememberwhat I
said.Sure would like to hear from Kenwood / PK-232 users about
how theoptional filters work on Packet. I am thinking about
purchasingthe optional SSB filter for the TS-450S/AT for use on
HF packetwith the PK-232MBX. Will the optional filter HELP or
HURT Pkt Rx?Dick,
KD5VU============================================================
=========   Richard (Dick) Kriss
E-Mail:[e-mail]      904 Dartmoor Cove
Packet Radio: SP KD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA    Austin, Texas
78746    Phone: [phone] (day) or 327-9566 (evenings)  My
employer has nothing to do with this message! ...
_._==============================================================
=======------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92
#214******************************------------------------------E
nd of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#215******************************Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 04:30:03
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #216To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Tue,
11 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 216Today's Topics:
   data compression with packet:  legal?
DR-1200T characteristics (2 msgs)             Fastest data rate?
(arlan 450 @ 200kbit/sec)       How to power a PC motherboard
from car battery? (2 msgs)                 Looking for
Recommendations on a TNC                               MFJ 1278
                    Terminal Software for Mac?Send Replies or
notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 10 Aug 92 04:27:19 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!tulane!rouge!jab0684@net
work.UCSD.EDUSubject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail] seem to recall reading in my study guide
for the novice test, a question about the bandwidth for
communicating with an"unspecifieddigital code."  What exactly
did they mean by
this?[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Mon, 10
Aug 1992 15:15:05 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu!cs.tamu.edu!kurt@network
.UCSD.EDUSubject: DR-1200T characteristicsTo:
[e-mail] just bought a DR-1200T at the Austin
Summerfest.  When I put it in service, I found that I had to
increase my TxDelay from 100ms to 200ms (IC-22U vsDR-1200T).
Does anyone have any data on what "reasonable" TxDelays are
forthe DR-1200T???  With the 9600bps mod, it seems quixotic to
do so if I have tospend 200ms keyup for a 15ms packet...Why
can't someone just make a reasonable crystal-controlled radio
for packetthat puts out a decent amount of power for a
reasonable price?  99.44% of the"features" of the DR-1200T are
useless for us square-wave types.  The 22Uis almost perfect.
True, it's not crystal-controlled, but it has a damn
nicesynthesizer.  I'd settle gladly if Icom were to start
cranking that baby outagain, set up for packet.  It's getting
harder to get commercial riceboxesfor conversion, as well as
more expensive.Thanks, I needed that.  8-}-- Kurt Freiberger,
wb5bbw      [e-mail]   409/847-8607  fax:[phone]Dept.
of Computer Science, Texas A&M University      DoD #264: BMW
R80/7 pilot"We preserve our freedom using three boxes: ballot,
jury, and cartridge."      *** Not an official document of Texas
A&M University ***------------------------------Date: 11 Aug 92
04:05:05 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!kksys.com
!orbit!pnet51![e-mail]: DR-1200T
characteristicsTo: [e-mail]>Why can't someone just
make a reasonable crystal-controlled radio for packet>that puts
out a decent amount of power for a reasonable price?  99.44% of
the>"features" of the DR-1200T are useless for us square-wave
types.  The 22U>is almost perfect.  True, it's not
crystal-controlled, but it has a damn nice>synthesizer.  I'd
settle gladly if Icom were to start cranking that baby
out>again, set up for packet.  It's getting harder to get
commercial riceboxes>for conversion, as well as more
expensive.Ramsey has that little synthesized, diode-programmed
radio kit, in the spiritof the 22U.  Might have its own
problems, but it's worth asking about, anyway!: John
Seboldt...Minneapolis, MN...As a ham, K0JD...as a human,
:: right-brained yet right-handed...as a musician, techie yet
creative ::   UUCP: {crash, tcnet, petrus,
quest}!orbit!pnet51!jseboldt         ::   ARPA:
crash!orbit!pnet51![e-mail]                        ::
INET: [e-mail]
 :------------------------------Date: 10 Aug 92 16:07:29
GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!clarkson!phoenix.erc.clarks
on.edu![e-mail]: Fastest data rate? (arlan
450 @ 200kbit/sec)To: [e-mail] is the fastest
data rate you've seen over "packet"? I have a pairof Telesystems
SLW 900Mhz Spread Spectrum 8 bit PC cards with a packetdriver
(for NOS) that has a claimed bit rate of 200kbit/sec. It's
onlygood for about a mile line of sight, but it is fast.. I was
wonderingwhat others have seen for data rates.. I will
summmarize..---            [e-mail] Logan
AMA        -----|-----   ARRL
[e-mail] ERC        IRCHA   *>=====[_]L)
EAA          AirBornPotsdam, NY 13699   PRA           -'-`-
PADI         USSAwork: 315-268-2292  fax: [phone]
home: 315-265-2679------------------------------Date: Tue, 11
Aug 1992 02:10:45 GMTFrom: coplex![e-mail]:
How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?To:
[e-mail] would like to set up a portable packet
station for use in my car.I would like to avoid the cost of
purchasing an expensive DC-AC(cigarette lighter) power
converter, and instead downgrade/condition the power for use
directly into the motherboard--no standard PC powersupply
needed.Surely with the countless field day projects and such
created though theyears someone has done this already.  To save
me several days of wheelre-inventing I would GREATLY appreciate
it if someone could point me in theright direction.  Thanks in
advance!Dannie J. [e-mail]4HGI
------------------------------Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 05:03:59
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.c
olumbia.edu![e-mail]: How to power a PC
motherboard from car battery?To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dannie
Gregoire) writes:>I would like to set up a portable packet
station for use in my car.>I would like to avoid the cost of
purchasing an expensive DC-AC>(cigarette lighter) power
converter, and instead downgrade/condition the >power for use
directly into the motherboard--no standard PC power>supply
needed.>>Surely with the countless field day projects and such
created though the>years someone has done this already.  To save
me several days of wheel>re-inventing I would GREATLY appreciate
it if someone could point me in the>right direction.  Thanks in
advance!>>Dannie J. Gregoire>[e-mail]>KD4HGI Or you
could just buy a cheap laptop!Remember that full-size
motherboards require more than just a single 12V DCsupply.  They
require +-5V DC, at high amperage.  I think you would still
needa DC to DC converter, for that.  Good luck! * * * * *
=================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Tue,
11 Aug 1992 05:18:17 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.c
olumbia.edu![e-mail]: Looking for
Recommendations on a TNCTo: [e-mail], I just
ordered an MFJ 1270B, after calling several manufacturers.It
seems that you are looking for an "all-mode", so you would want
the 1278.I am interested in moving up to higher data rates, in
the future.  Turns outthat the MFJ has true DCD, to sense
packets but reject noise, and it hashardware HDLC, for fast and
reliable throughput at higher speeds.  It is alsoa true TNC-2
clone, and is fully socketed, allowing complete compatibility
withplug-in ROMS and other mods and upgrades from TAPR, etc.I
looked at the Kantronics KPC3, PK88, and PacComm Tiny-2, and
they all lackedone of the above features, although they may have
had other features:KPC3: CMOS, low power, and allows mailbox of
up to 512K using standard static       RAM.  Lacks hardware
HDLC.Tiny-2: fast model allows up to 38,400 bps data rate.It
seems that the MFJ is the only one with true DCD.  The MFJ is
the cheapest and is known to be reliable.  MFJ also claims
thatit will operate at a data rate of 19,200, after a simple
jumper is installed.Supposedly, the jumper will be inside future
TNCs, and they are sending mea sheet for the mod. * * * * *
=================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 10 Aug
92 18:37:00 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gatech!utkcs2!utkux1.utk.edu!utkvx4.utk.edu!rpadawer@netw
ork.UCSD.EDUSubject: MFJ 1278To: [e-mail] would to
speak for the loyal opposition here...  I have theMFJ-1278
multimode tnc and am very, very happy with it.  I haveowned the
AEA-232MBX as well, and I liked it too, but I found thatit was
more complex to set up; I did like the MacRatt software thatcame
with it, though, for Macintosh use.  However... it seems to
methat many beginners buy the MFJ unit and curse it when they
run intoproblems figuring the many contingencies that must be
navigated whenfirst getting into packet (speed between computer
and tnc, speedbetween tnc and radio, proper cabling, stop bits,
parity, full vshalf duplex, proper Packet mode protocol and use,
etc., etc.)...Getting into Packet is a bit more complex than
calling CQ with amicrophone on 10 meters, I don't care what
anybody says.  And abeginner is almost guaranteed to have
problems, no matter what.I had horrible, horrible problems with
my AEA-232MBX when I firstbought it and was terribly
disappointed... until I later found outthat the unit is fine and
that my problems had more to do with myown ignorance than with
the unit.  That said, I would like toreiterate that I think the
MFJ-1278 is a fine unit, easy to tune,hardy vis-a-vis pickiness
in sensitivity settings, and a goodDX PacketCluster workhorse
here at WA4FJF.  And... my guess is thatthere are more than a
few of us out here who swear by the 1278.Randy Padawer,
[e-mail]:   WA4FJF @
N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA------------------------------Date: Mon,
10 Aug 1992 13:48:16 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!vlsi4![e-mail]
SD.EDUSubject: Terminal Software for Mac?To:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Tom Gewecke) writes:>Thanks to a recent
posting I have gotten a copy of SoftKISS.  Can>anyone suggest a
free or shareware terminal program for the Mac>which works well
with the standard multimode data controllers by AEA,>MFJ, and
Kantronics? And an FTP site to obtain it from?>Appreciate the
help.  [e-mail]  Have you been trying to find the
perfect packet radio communications programfor your Macintosh
computer?  Well, you may have just found it.  Virtuoso is
acommunications program written specifically for packet radio.
This means thatit has features that you as a packet radio
operator need and also packs a lotof bells and whistles to keep
your packet radio communications smooth andeffortless.  The
current version is 1.3.  Virtuoso is a shareware program with a
price tag of only $20.  It isavailable on America Online, GEnie,
CompuServe, and various ftp sites
like:ucsd.edu:    /hamradio/packet/mischpcsos.col.hp.com:    /packet/ke
0phpacific.mps.ohio-state.edu:    /publicsics.se:    /pubSome features
implemented in Virtuoso v1.3 include:  -Word Mode - Useful for
RTTY and AMTOR.  -A powerful scripting language to automate
routine tasks.  -Automatic execution of a script when starting
and quitting.  -Save incoming text to a disk file.  -Send a text
file from a disk.  -Append a selection of text to the end of an
existing file.  -Print a selection of text.  -Column counter
display  -Word find - useful for finding the last time you heard
someone.  -Spelling checker(Dictionaries Necessary). Checks the
words as you type them.  -Split screen (rx and tx) which can be
adjusted easily.  -Windows can be scrolled up to see previous
text (Up to 32000 characters).  -Full font, size, style, and
justification support.  -Supports 300 - 19200 baud.  -Keyboard
buffer window so you can type in long messages of text
before they are sent over the air.  This window supports full
 cut, copy, paste, clear, and undo like any good text editor
does.  To send the message, just hit Command-Return.  -Use the
control key (or the command key if you don't have a     control
key) to send control characters to the TNC.  -Option to strip
off line-feeds, or all control characters on     the input
before it's displayed on the screen and saved to     disk.
Control-G's can be passed through to beep your computer     if
you want.  -Virtuoso can automatically put your TNC in KISS mode
upon     shutdown, and take it back out at startup.  This is
useful for     TCP/IP'ers.  This file has been checked for
viruses with Disinfectant 2.5.1before uploading.  If you cannot
find Virtuoso anywhere, send me some e-mail and I'll getyou a
copy.  I also appreciate any and all comments, suggestions,
andcriticism.  That's the only way I'm going to know what to fix
and improvefor the next
versions.+-------------------------------------------------------
--------+| Jim Van Peursem - Ph.D. Student - Ham Radio -> KE0PH
        || System Administrator - Digital Systems Design Lab
        || Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Engineering || Iowa State University - Ames, IA 50011
            || internet - [e-mail]

|+---------------------------------------------------------------
+------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#216******************************Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 04:30:02
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #217To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Wed,
12 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 217Today's Topics:
                10GHz bands                          Found Noise
Source           How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?
                  Packet with an FT-2400? (2 msgs)
                  TNC                      TS-450 Filters for
PacketSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 13:11:06 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!mtu.edu![e-mail]: 10GHz
bandsTo: [e-mail] am planning to put a 10GHz data
link up between my machine and a friendssattelite server.
Unfortunately, I don't know exactly what frequencies theband
covers.  If anyone could tell me, I would be most
grateful.Thanks in Advance73 de Ken
n8pbe------------------------------Date: 11 Aug 92 05:44:58
GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!skyld!jangus
@network.UCSD.EDUSubject: Found Noise SourceTo:
[e-mail] has been causing problems with my
tcp/ip station for almost a year.December of last year I
replaced the XT clone with a true blue IBM PC/AT.Yeah, an older
version, 8 MHz, stacked 2x 256K memory, had to run amemory card
for the extra required to survive the overhead in NOS.Here's
where the noise was coming from: The AFSK port on the DRSI
PacketAdaptor. Type-1 early 1988 version. It took several turns
on a Radio Shackferrite core to drop the ambient noise level
from S9+10 to S3.xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space left blank
intentionally. >J Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA 90749-4425 voice
[phone]------------------------------Date: 11 Aug 92
17:34:40 GMTFrom: gatech!emory!rsiatl![e-mail]:
How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?To:
[e-mail]@coplex.com (Dannie Gregoire)
writes:>I would like to set up a portable packet station for use
in my car.>I would like to avoid the cost of purchasing an
expensive DC-AC>(cigarette lighter) power converter, and instead
downgrade/condition the >power for use directly into the
motherboard--no standard PC power>supply needed.>Surely with the
countless field day projects and such created though the>years
someone has done this already.  To save me several days of
wheel>re-inventing I would GREATLY appreciate it if someone
could point me in the>right direction.  Thanks in advance!Yes, I
run a computer in my car all the time.  From an inverter.
Minecost $79 (Tripplite) from the local radio shack and makes
250 watts of 120vac from 12 volts in.  If that is "expensive",
then buy the components andbuild your own.  A 12 volt, 20 amp
transformer will work fine in reverseand a blocking oscillator
arrangment will take but a few transistors anda couple of power
resistors.  Of course, by the time you get it all bundled up and
isntalled in a cabinet, you'll have more than $79 in it.As to
supplying voltage directly, consider the lowly, humble $30 PC
powersupply.  It supplies nice, clean regulated power to
hundreds or thousandsof dollars worth of motherboard, memory and
peripherals.  It screens outnasties that come in from outside
and most of the time will sacrifice itselfto large nasties
without damaging downstream components.  Why would you want to
try to goober up something almost inevitably will do allthe
above functions less well and probably at higher cost?If you
don't have the room for a relatively large conventional
inverter, get one of the new whippy little PWM inverters not
much larger than acigarette pack.  They cost, oh, $100
discounted.  Still rock bottom cheapcompared to the cost of your
homemade 5 volt regulator that decides not toanymore.John-- John
De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance
mobility?  Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |Marietta, Ga
                      |Interested in high tech and computers?
[e-mail]                        |Write me about PE
MagazineNeed Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info
on Dixie.com.------------------------------Date: 11 Aug 92
05:33:16 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.
cmu.edu!drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu!pitt.edu!gvls1!tredysvr!undr!seanp
@network.UCSD.EDUSubject: Packet with an FT-2400?To:
[e-mail]        Has anyone attempted packet with a
Yaesu FT-2400?  I am        interested in bringing this radio
into my house and running        packet, but in the manual it
states:        "Packet radio operation with the FT-2400H
requires a later model        tnc with a PLL-type DCD circuit,
since there is no readily        accessible squelch status
output from the radio to tell the tnc        when the channel is
clear."        The mic output on the unit looks like this:
 Pin 1   Call        Pin 2   RX-Audio        Pin 3   PTT
Pin 4   Mic        Pin 5   GND        Pin 6   +5v        Pin 7
Up        Pin 8   Down        Am I totally screwed?  Will packet
with this radio be next to        impossible?  What TNC's would
work well with this radio?        Can anyone offer
assistance/suggestions/mods/etc?        Sean---Sean Petty

undr![e-mail]: 39'58'12"N
75'84'26"W
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Tue, 11 Aug
1992 18:26:40 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.c
olumbia.edu![e-mail]: Packet with an
FT-2400?To: [e-mail] the MFJ1270B has
true hardware DCD. * * * * *  =================  Internet
address is   [e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I.
Green =  for short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *
=================  UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * *
* * =================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 12 Aug
1992 01:43:52 -0700From: [e-mail]:
TNCTo: [e-mail]: Name here is Roland Call is
7J1AKI stateside is WF4P.I run a KAM tnc and have had the MFJ
and know folks thathave the 232, as a matter of fact we are
running the 232in my MARS station. I really like my KAM!!I know
the MFJ has some good features and the 232 looks goodbut the KAM
has the same features plus it is the only dual porttnc of the
three.The 232 is hard to operate from my standpoint.I like my
KAM. I think I said that....Look at what you want to do, how
much money do you have to spend,what do you think you may want
to do. Then make your decision.sgd Roland
7J1AKI------------------------------Date: 12 Aug 92 04:45:36
GMTFrom:
csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!freyr![e-mail]:
TS-450 Filters for PacketTo: [e-mail] got the
narrow SSB filter (2.4 kHz, I think) and the 500 Hz 455(CW)
filterfor my 450 and have been very happy with them...
                                        Phil--  Phillip L. Akers
[e-mail]
freyr![e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 12 Aug 92 02:09:26 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gatech!emory!wa4mei!ke4zv![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To :
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman)Subject : Re: data compression
with packet:  legal?In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Shawn O'Donnell) writes:>>The thing which the FCC is concerned
about, it seems to me, is whether>or not the ham is trying to
obscure the meaning of the transmission.>(See 97.113 (d).)
Whether or not your local listening station is >Zip or Stuffit
savvy is another question.  A question that needs to be
addressed is *why* the FCC has the plainlanguage rule.
Originally this was to prevent German *spies* fromcommunicating
back to Berlin. Now since amateur operations were*suspended*
during both world wars, this restriction is rather moot.The
other reason was to stop commercial incursion into
amateurchannels. Now IMHO that is mostly a moot point as well
with the adventof modern communications networks. Few businesses
would trust importantinformation to amateur networks. If any
*did* setup such a network tointeroperate with amateurs, it
would benefit the amateur more thanthe commercial user. Note
that encryption *is* legal in commercialservice. Again IMHO,
this rule should be revisited to see if it'snecessary today, if
it ever was.Foreign PTT regulations are different which may
preclude use ofsuch techniques in international transmissions to
those jurisdictions.>In any case, there remain no standards for
"plain language" in the>world of compression.  What if the FCC
van doesn't have a Mac, and I>transmit a Stuffit file?  What
about less popular compression formats?>Compactor?  FastBack?
Norton?  Not all compression software announces>itself in the
header.  What would you have to send to make the >FCC (and
foreign PTT if you're DXing) happy?The current rules only
require that a station keep a copy of any non-standard code used
in the station records. If the FCC wishes to decompressany
message they may have intercepted, they can ask for a copy of
thecode specification to allow them to do so. They do not
require that realtime capability to decompress a file be
available to them before youcan use compression. Foreign
administrations' requirements are different.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #217******************************Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92
04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #218To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Thu,
13 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 218Today's Topics:
       Data Carrier Detect and Packet            data
compression with packet:  legal? (2 msgs)           How to power
a PC motherboard from car battery?                     KA9q with
slip and ethernet                          Pac-Comm KISS mode
                    Packet/Sattelite GateSend Replies or notes
for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 12 Aug 92 15:44:08 GMTFrom:
elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!skyld![e-mail]
paSubject: Data Carrier Detect and PacketTo:
[e-mail] Carrier Detect or DCD in most TNC's is
simply a matter of noise detection.Kantronics KAM version 3.0
and later use a software DCD but you have to selectit. (It isn't
on as a default) The MFJ-1270b does not have "true" DCD, but
a$15 kit from TAPR (exar 2211 DCD) will correct that to allow
running the TNCwith 'open squelch'. The DRSI cards will work
with either thier internal DCDmod from DRSI for about $35. (A
nice plug in adaptor that goes in the TCM-3105socket). TAPR also
sells a DCD state machine kit for $20 that work with a
widevariety of TNC's and has a xtal osc. that is an option if
the X16 clock is notavailable. (For example when the DCD kit is
used with an AM7910 modem chip likethat on the Digicom
Modems)Since most VHF packet is done on FM, and most FM stations
are either there orthey aren't, simple 'is there noise present'
DCD works. Unfortunately it alsothinks the channel is busy when
it hears music, voices, intermods etc.The trick to HF packet is
to set the receive audio level so that the backgroundnoise just
barely get the (stupid) DCD circuitry to flicker and then back
off abit. Most modems (VHF included), unlike adolescent music,
work best at lowaudio levels.[Side bar]Tucson Amateur Packet
Radio, P.O. Box 12925 Tucson, AZ 857321-602-749-9479 (voice)
1-602-749-5636 (FAX)TAPR supplies a wide variety of Packet
related kits, firware and software.xenon!skyld!jangus   < This
space left blank intentionally. >J Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA
90749-4425 voice (310)
324-6080------------------------------Date: 12 Aug 92 07:26:38
ESTFrom: psinntp![e-mail]: data compression
with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 13 Aug
92 03:18:28 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
ubject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Boudreaux Jean A) writes:>I seem to recall
reading in my study guide for the novice test, >a question about
the bandwidth for communicating with an"unspecified>digital
code."  What exactly did they mean by this?>>[e-mail]
FCC uses several methods for relating digital modes to
bandwidth.Traditionally they have relied on standard encodings
with standardspeeds given in WPM and standard FSK shifts. With
the rise of otherdigital encodings, they started talking about
"baud rates" in therules. For example HF packet is limited to
300 baud. Now that's nottoo satisfactory given that modulation
methods other than FSK haveappeared. Now bits per second and
baud may not mean the same thingas modulation methods have been
developed to encode more than onebit per baud, QPSK is an
example. So the FCC got down to where therubber meets the road
and said that occupied bandwidth is the onlyimportant criteria
from a rules standpoint and started specifyingmaximum bandwidth
and letting you fill that with any encoding youlike.
Unfortunately, they didn't delete the older rules at the
sametime so now we have a confusing mismash of conflicting rules
onwhat and what isn't legal.There's also confusion between bit
encodings at the machine level,Baudot, ASCII, EBDIC, etc, and
bit encodings at the modem level,FSK, PSK, QPSK, MSK, etc.
Because the FCC didn't seem to have areally good grasp of the
fundamentals involved, their early rulesare anachronisms. This
is an area of the rules that needs revisiting.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 04:05:21
GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
ubject: How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?To:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dannie
Gregoire) writes:>I would like to set up a portable packet
station for use in my car.>I would like to avoid the cost of
purchasing an expensive DC-AC>(cigarette lighter) power
converter, and instead downgrade/condition the >power for use
directly into the motherboard--no standard PC power>supply
needed.>>Surely with the countless field day projects and such
created though the>years someone has done this already.  To save
me several days of wheel>re-inventing I would GREATLY appreciate
it if someone could point me in the>right direction.  Thanks in
advance!+12 volts isn't that hard since the PC only uses it for
drives and RS232.Getting the +5 volts at the currents demanded,
however, is more difficultto achieve efficiently, requiring a
switcher. Negative 12 volts definitely requires a DC-DC
converter. Regulating +12 volts from a 12.5 volt supply can be
tricky as well. There's very little margin to work with, again a
switcheris called for.Probably the best course is to modify a
standard PC power supply. It'salready a switcher. There are a
few PC supplies with integral UPScapability that can run
directly from +12 volts. Others would requiresome component
juggling to run off 12 volts instead of 110. No PCsupply that I
know of cares if it's input voltage is AC or DC, andmost are
really tolerant of wide input voltage swings.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992
07:40:20 GMTFrom:
mcsun!sun4nl!rivm!neptunus.rivm.nl![e-mail]:
KA9q with slip and ethernetTo: [e-mail],I'm
using KA9q as a slip host. Now i have a connection to the
ethernet.  Now i was wondering if its possible to route the slip
packets to the ethernet. Is this possiblewith ka9q?Thanks
Michel--                             Michel van Best        EMAIL:
[e-mail]      Phone: [phone]          FAX: +31 30
742971      National Institute of Public Health and
Environmental Protection              P.O. Box 1, 3270 BA,
Bilthoven, The Netherlands------------------------------Date: 12
Aug 92 22:17:22 GMTFrom:
olivea!isc-br!tau-ceti!comtch!iea![e-mail]:
Pac-Comm KISS modeTo: [e-mail] AB> Newsgroups:
rec.radio.amateur.packet AB> (From G8FSL: home QTH London, UK)
AB> A few of us in London running TCP/IP, using Pac-Comm TNCs in
KISS mode, AB> This problem happens with TNC2 clones running
Pac-Comm software, and also AB> with the TNC-220 (mind you, the
TNC-220 has so many  AB> Is there a known problem in this area,
and can anyone suggest a fix AB> (especially for the TNC-220s,
which are gathering dust as a result)?There might be a software
problem.  The Pac-Comm I received this morningindicated a lot of
EPROM changes on a sheet.  I will bring it to work in themorning
and see if I can see what might be the changes.  They were June
of 92software updates.  It also indicated something about
FULLDUP in Kiss Mode but Ijust scanned it before taking the unit
home this morning.73, Jay [e-mail]
1:346/3.0WS7I @ WS7I.WA.USA.NA * Origin: Radio Therapy BBS
(1:346/3)------------------------------Date: 12 Aug 92 07:36:30
ESTFrom: psinntp![e-mail]: Packet/Sattelite
GateTo: [e-mail] rec.radio.amateur.packet,
[e-mail] (Carlton Ellis)
writes:>Our local Packet group has expressed some interest in
developing>a gateway on one of our nodes to Amateur Satellites.
I have heardIt's happening on quite a regular basis.  And not so
far from you, either.Check out the QST Public Service column, by
ARRL Division Director(and sat-fan-atic) Bill Burden a few
months back.  It's a niftyarticle about how local amateurs are
routinely being gatewayed intothe satellites.|       |   |
  Deputy Manager, Field Services, ARRL.|       |___|         The
ARRL Amateur Radio Emergency Service, the ARRL| uck   |   |urder
   National Traffic System, The Amateur Auxiliary to------  |
|         the FCC's Field Operations Bureau, the ARRL     KY1T
          Field Organization and the ARRL Monitoring
System.----------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail]   Prodigy - MGTS39A,  BIX -
ARRL,   MCI Mail - RPALM, MCI Mail - "ARRL HQ", America On Line
- "ARRL HQ"        Compuserve - 70007,3373 (ARRL HQ)  -- Genie
ARRL.HQ ------------------------------Date: (null)From:
(null)"Above 50 MHz where data and RTTY emissions are permitted,
unspecified digital codes may be used in communication between
stationslicensed by the FCC.  Baudot, AMTOR and ASCII are
specified inthe rules, so unspecified includes everything
else..."|       |   |         Deputy Manager, Field Services,
ARRL.|       |___|         The ARRL Amateur Radio Emergency
Service, the ARRL| uck   |   |urder    National Traffic System,
The Amateur Auxiliary to------  |   |         the FCC's Field
Operations Bureau, the ARRL     KY1T             Field
Organization and the ARRL Monitoring
System.----------------------------------------------------------
[e-mail]   Prodigy - MGTS39A,  BIX -
ARRL,   MCI Mail - RPALM, MCI Mail - "ARRL HQ", America On Line
- "ARRL HQ"        Compuserve - 70007,3373 (ARRL HQ)  -- Genie
ARRL.HQ ------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #218******************************Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92
04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #219To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Fri,
14 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 219Today's Topics:
          DR-1200T characteristics                   ESTIMATE
packet radio throughput             Fastest data rate? (arlan
450 @ 200kbit/sec)               Hiearchial Address Info Wanted
(2 msgs)       How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?
(2 msgs)                 Packet Networks today and tommorrow
              PERSEID ACTIVITY REPORTS NEEDED!Send Replies or
notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 07:26:51 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: DR-1200T characteristicsTo: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Seboldt) writes:>Ramsey has that little synthesized,
diode-programmed radio kit, in the spirit>of the 22U.  Might
have its own problems, but it's worth asking about, anyway!I
assembled their 70cm version last month. Despite a long weekend
witha spectrum analyzer, I could not tame the transmitter to
mysatisfaction. Lots of low-frequency parasitics, and plenty of
phasenoise too.One of these years I'll stop thinking that the
next cheap radio kit tohit the market will be better than the
last one...I wasted money on acouple of Hamtronics FM-5s,
too...Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 17:49:14
GMTFrom: usc!rpi!bu.edu!wang![e-mail]:
ESTIMATE packet radio throughputTo: [e-mail]
of a reference to ESTIMATE.EXE a couple of weeks ago, I
havereceived a lot of requests for the program.  I suppose the
right thing todo is to post it, but I'm not sure this is the
right place to do so.Could someone tell me if this is the right
place, and if not, where is?Dave--
=================================================================
=========Dave Bushong, [e-mail]         + Wang
Laboratories, Inc.             + "Ma-ha"..... "Ah-haa"Internet:
[e-mail]
+================================================================
==========------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992
07:28:14 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: Fastest data rate? (arlan 450 @ 200kbit/sec)To:
[e-mail] NCR Wavelan cards run at 2Mb/s in the
902-928 MHz band. Don't knowwhat they actually attain in average
throughput though.Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug
92 15:58:23 GMTFrom: worldbank.org![e-mail]:
Hiearchial Address Info WantedTo: [e-mail]
anyone know where I can find information on the correct form
ofhierarchial addressing; even better, does anyone know of a
publicationwhich describes the available address
elements?Thanks. Darrell (NR3Y)
------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 21:25:51 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!park.uvc
c.edu!cc.uvcc.edu![e-mail]: Hiearchial
Address Info WantedTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] writes:> Does anyone know where I
can find information on the correct form of> hierarchial
addressing; even better, does anyone know of a publication>
which describes the available address elements?> > Thanks.
Darrell (NR3Y)>  every network has a *different* correct form of
addressing, and several ofthem are hierarchical.1) Internet
domain names are heirarchical, and are of the form:
local.part%more#[e-mail]
\____________  ___________/|\_________  ____________/
      \/            |          \/              local part
at       fully qualified domain namethe local part can be almost
unbelievably complex.the fully qualified domain name part
consists of two sub parts.  the end part(here "domain.name") is
allocated by the Network Information Center uopnmeeting certain
requirements.  the early part ("sub.subdomain") is handed out by
the domain administrator.  There is a ham radio
domain,"ampr.org" administered by Brian Kantor ([e-mail]).
 He could issuethe name kf7xm.ampr.org to me if he wished.  I,
being the administrator of theuvcc.edu domain could issue myself
kf7xm.uvcc.edu.This is more fully described in the RFC's
available from [e-mail] RFC 920, 974, 1032, 1033,
1034, & 1035.2) -- -- Vern Cole -- Systems Manager -- Utah
Valley Community College --------------------------------Date:
13 Aug 92 19:19:42 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!sdd.hp.com!hpscdc!hplextra!hpl-opus!hpnmdla!alanb@ne
twork.UCSD.EDUSubject: How to power a PC motherboard from car
battery?To: [e-mail] rec.radio.amateur.packet,
[e-mail] (Dannie Gregoire) writes:>I would like to set
up a portable packet station for use in my car.>I would like to
avoid the cost of purchasing an expensive DC-AC>(cigarette
lighter) power converter, and instead downgrade/condition the
>power for use directly into the motherboard--no standard PC
power>supply needed.The PC uses +5V, -5V, +12V and -12V as I
recall.  +5 is no problem if you don't mind wasting a lot of
power in the 5Vregulator.  You'll need a large heat sink.  You
could also builda simple buck converter (switcher) to regulate
more efficiently.+12 is used for the disc drives and serial
interface.  Use a low-dropout type regulator from the car
battery (about +13V).-12 V is normally only used for the serial
interface.  A low-currentDC-DC converter IC should suffice.I
think -5V is not normally used.  You can probably leave it
out.AL N1AL------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992
07:23:18 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?To:
[e-mail] strongly agree with the recommendations
to just buy an inverter.Commercial 12VDC-120VAC inverters have
gotten very small, light andefficient in the past decade, and
they're not all *that*
expensiveeither.Phil------------------------------Date: Fri, 14
Aug 1992 07:18:48 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>What hardware methods are currently
available?>Our best national and international WAN technology is
300 baud HF BBS>forwarding. It's thruput is about 15
bytes/second. It's suitable for>Email.You left out the Internet
backbone links, sometimes referred to as"wormholes". There are
quite a few regional TCP/IP networks that arelinked to each
other through the regular Internet, using
IP-inside-IPencapsulation techniques that have been in KA9Q NOS
well over a year.With the growth of the Internet it is not hard
at all to find at leastone site in a given metropolitan area
that has both access to theInternet and a ham contact interested
in putting up a gateway.These links provide continuous real-time
wide area connectivity thatat the moment simply isn't attainable
in any other way. The onlyamateur-provided links that could even
come close to providing asimilar grade of service require a
geostationary amateur satellitesuch as AMSAT Phase IV, which has
been shelved indefinitely due tolack of funds.I see no reason to
deprecate a long-haul linking technology justbecause it's not
radio. Hams ought to take a "systems integration"approach to
networking and be as flexible as possible in usingwhatever is
available to get the job done. Personally, I've alwaysthought
that the packet radio problems most worth solving are
thoseinvolved in building high metropolitan area networks, where
radiomakes the most sense in the first place. Long-haul HF is
basically ananachronism, and except for its potential last-ditch
emergency uses itis really a dead-end
technology.Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92
20:16:45 GMTFrom:
swrinde!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!torn!newshost.uwo.ca!uwovax.uwo.
ca![e-mail]: PERSEID ACTIVITY REPORTS
NEEDED!To: [e-mail] received a few initital
reports on the1992 Perseids from Aug 11/12 I have one further
request for observers. There is a possiblity that something
unusual took place in the hours before the predicted new maxima
at 22-23 UT, Aug 11. If anyone made some radio observations or
visual observations in the interval 15-21 UT, Aug 11 I would be
extremely appreciative of receiving a report to clarify the
situation during those
hours.***********************************************************
*************Peter Brown     [e-mail]
American Section - International Meteor
Organization------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #219******************************Date: Sat, 15 Aug
92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #220To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sat,
15 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 220Today's Topics:
              (none) (2 msgs)               Data Carrier Detect
and Packet (2 msgs)                      DSP Modems?  How are
they?              ESTIMATE packet radio throughput (2 msgs)
           getting packet IP numbers and netmasks  Long haul HF
in 3rd world (Re: Packet Networks today and tomorrow)
            mfj 1278 and multicom                 Packet
Networks today and tommorrowSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 14 Aug 1992 07:04:10 -0700From:
[e-mail]: (none)To:
[e-mail]: from internet by attmail; Fri Aug
14 13:54 GMT 1992>From UCSD.EDU!packet-radio-relay Fri Aug 14
04:30:03 PDT 1992 remote from internetReceived: by att.att.com;
Fri Aug 14 09:46:35 EDT 1992Received: by ucsd.edu; id
AA12323    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Fri, 14 Aug 92 04:30:07 -0700
for claris!voder!nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sinclair%spi.dnetReceived: by
ucsd.edu; id AA12313    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Fri, 14 Aug 92
04:30:04 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb
-oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay
packet-radio-listMessage-Id: <[e-mail]>Date:
Fri, 14 Aug 92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: internet!ucsd.edu!packet-radio
(Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup)Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
internet!UCSD.Edu!Packet-Radio Precedence: BulkSubject:
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #219To: internet!UCSD.EDU!packet-radio
Packet-Radio Digest         Fri, 14 Aug 92       Volume 92 :
Issue 219Today's Topics:                       DR-1200T
characteristics                   ESTIMATE packet radio
throughput             Fastest data rate? (arlan 450 @
200kbit/sec)               Hiearchial Address Info Wanted (2
msgs)       How to power a PC motherboard from car battery? (2
msgs)                 Packet Networks today and tommorrow
           PERSEID ACTIVITY REPORTS NEEDED!Send Replies or notes
for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 07:26:51 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: DR-1200T characteristicsTo: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Seboldt) writes:>Ramsey has that little synthesized,
diode-programmed radio kit, in the spirit>of the 22U.  Might
have its own problems, but it's worth asking about, anyway!I
assembled their 70cm version last month. Despite a long weekend
witha spectrum analyzer, I could not tame the transmitter to
mysatisfaction. Lots of low-frequency parasitics, and plenty of
phasenoise too.One of these years I'll stop thinking that the
next cheap radio kit tohit the market will be better than the
last one...I wasted money on acouple of Hamtronics FM-5s,
too...Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 17:49:14
GMTFrom: usc!rpi!bu.edu!wang![e-mail]:
ESTIMATE packet radio throughputTo: [e-mail]
of a reference to ESTIMATE.EXE a couple of weeks ago, I
havereceived a lot of requests for the program.  I suppose the
right thing todo is to post it, but I'm not sure this is the
right place to do so.Could someone tell me if this is the right
place, and if not, where is?Dave--
=================================================================
=========Dave Bushong, [e-mail]         + Wang
Laboratories, Inc.             + "Ma-ha"..... "Ah-haa"Internet:
[e-mail]
+================================================================
==========------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992
07:28:14 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: Fastest data rate? (arlan 450 @ 200kbit/sec)To:
[e-mail] NCR Wavelan cards run at 2Mb/s in the
902-928 MHz band. Don't knowwhat they actually attain in average
throughput though.Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug
92 15:58:23 GMTFrom: worldbank.org![e-mail]:
Hiearchial Address Info WantedTo: [e-mail]
anyone know where I can find information on the correct form
ofhierarchial addressing; even better, does anyone know of a
publicationwhich describes the available address
elements?Thanks. Darrell (NR3Y)
------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 21:25:51 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!park.uvc
c.edu!cc.uvcc.edu![e-mail]: Hiearchial
Address Info WantedTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] writes:> Does anyone know where I
can find information on the correct form of> hierarchial
addressing; even better, does anyone know of a publication>
which describes the available address elements?> > Thanks.
Darrell (NR3Y)>  every network has a *different* correct form of
addressing, and several ofthem are hierarchical.1) Internet
domain names are heirarchical, and are of the form:
local.part%more#[e-mail]
\____________  ___________/|\_________  ____________/
      \/            |          \/              local part
at       fully qualified domain namethe local part can be almost
unbelievably complex.the fully qualified domain name part
consists of two sub parts.  the end part(here "domain.name") is
allocated by the Network Information Center uopnmeeting certain
requirements.  the early part ("sub.subdomain") is handed out by
the domain administrator.  There is a ham radio
domain,"ampr.org" administered by Brian Kantor ([e-mail]).
 He could issuethe name kf7xm.ampr.org to me if he wished.  I,
being the administrator of theuvcc.edu domain could issue myself
kf7xm.uvcc.edu.This is more fully described in the RFC's
available from [e-mail] RFC 920, 974, 1032, 1033,
1034, & 1035.2) -- -- Vern Cole -- Systems Manager -- Utah
Valley Community College --------------------------------Date:
13 Aug 92 19:19:42 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!sdd.hp.com!hpscdc!hplextra!hpl-opus!hpnmdla!alanb@ne
twork.UCSD.EDUSubject: How to power a PC motherboard from car
battery?To: [e-mail] rec.radio.amateur.packet,
[e-mail] (Dannie Gregoire) writes:>I would like to set
up a portable packet station for use in my car.>I would like to
avoid the cost of purchasing an expensive DC-AC>(cigarette
lighter) power converter, and instead downgrade/condition the
>power for use directly into the motherboard--no standard PC
power>supply needed.The PC uses +5V, -5V, +12V and -12V as I
recall.  +5 is no problem if you don't mind wasting a lot of
power in the 5Vregulator.  You'll need a large heat sink.  You
could also builda simple buck converter (switcher) to regulate
more efficiently.+12 is used for the disc drives and serial
interface.  Use a low-dropout type regulator from the car
battery (about +13V).-12 V is normally only used for the serial
interface.  A low-currentDC-DC converter IC should suffice.I
think -5V is not normally used.  You can probably leave it
out.AL N1AL------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992
07:23:18 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?To:
[e-mail] strongly agree with the recommendations
to just buy an inverter.Commercial 12VDC-120VAC inverters have
gotten very small, light andefficient in the past decade, and
they're not all *that*
expensiveeither.Phil------------------------------Date: Fri, 14
Aug 1992 07:18:48 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>What hardware methods are currently
available?>Our best national and international WAN technology is
300 baud HF BBS>forwarding. It's thruput is about 15
bytes/second. It's suitable for>Email.You left out the Internet
backbone links, sometimes referred to as"wormholes". There are
quite a few regional TCP/IP networks that arelinked to each
other through the regular Internet, using
IP-inside-IPencapsulation techniques that have been in KA9Q NOS
well over a year.With the growth of the Internet it is not hard
at all to find at leastone site in a given metropolitan area
that has both access to theInternet and a ham contact interested
in putting up a gateway.These links provide continuous real-time
wide area connectivity thatat the moment simply isn't attainable
in any other way. The onlyamateur-provided links that could even
come close to providing asimilar grade of service require a
geostationary amateur satellitesuch as AMSAT Phase IV, which has
been shelved indefinitely due tolack of funds.I see no reason to
deprecate a long-haul linking technology justbecause it's not
radio. Hams ought to take a "systems integration"approach to
networking and be as flexible as possible in usingwhatever is
available to get the job done. Personally, I've alwaysthought
that the packet radio problems most worth solving are
thoseinvolved in building high metropolitan area networks, where
radiomakes the most sense in the first place. Long-haul HF is
basically ananachronism, and except for its potential last-ditch
emergency uses itis really a dead-end
technology.Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92
20:16:45 GMTFrom:
swrinde!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!torn!newshost.uwo.ca!uwovax.uwo.
ca![e-mail]: PERSEID ACTIVITY REPORTS
NEEDED!To: [e-mail] received a few initital
reports on the1992 Perseids from Aug 11/12 I have one further
request for observers. There is a possiblity that something
unusual took place in the hours before the predicted new maxima
at 22-23 UT, Aug 11. If anyone made some radio observations or
visual observations in the interval 15-21 UT, Aug 11 I would be
extremely appreciative of receiving a report to clarify the
situation during those
hours.***********************************************************
*************Peter Brown     [e-mail]
American Section - International Meteor
Organization------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92
#219******************************------------------------------D
ate: 14 Aug 1992 07:11:53 -0700From:
[e-mail]: (none)To:
[e-mail]: from internet by attmail; Fri Aug
14 13:54 GMT 1992>From UCSD.EDU!packet-radio-relay Fri Aug 14
04:30:03 PDT 1992 remote from internetReceived: by att.att.com;
Fri Aug 14 09:46:35 EDT 1992Received: by ucsd.edu; id
AA12323    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Fri, 14 Aug 92 04:30:07 -0700
for claris!voder!nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sinclair%spi.dnetReceived: by
ucsd.edu; id AA12313    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Fri, 14 Aug 92
04:30:04 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb
-oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay
packet-radio-listMessage-Id: <[e-mail]>Date:
Fri, 14 Aug 92 04:30:0 3 P

DTFrom: internet!ucsd.edu!packet-radio (Packet-Radio Mailing
List and Newsgroup)Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
internet!UCSD.Edu!Packet-Radio Precedence: BulkSubject:
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #219To: internet!UCSD.EDU!packet-radio
Packet-Radio Digest         Fri, 14 Aug 92       Volume 92 :
Issue 219Today's Topics:                       DR-1200T
characteristics                   ESTIMATE packet radio
throughput             Fastest data rate? (arlan 450 @
200kbit/sec)               Hiearchial Address Info Wanted (2
msgs)       How to power a PC motherboard from car battery? (2
msgs)                 Packet Networks today and tommorrow
           PERSEID ACTIVITY REPORTS NEEDED!Send Replies or notes
for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 07:26:51 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: DR-1200T characteristicsTo: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Seboldt) writes:>Ramsey has that little synthesized,
diode-programmed radio kit, in the spirit>of the 22U.  Might
have its own problems, but it's worth asking about, anyway!I
assembled their 70cm version last month. Despite a long weekend
witha spectrum analyzer, I could not tame the transmitter to
mysatisfaction. Lots of low-frequency parasitics, and plenty of
phasenoise too.One of these years I'll stop thinking that the
next cheap radio kit tohit the market will be better than the
last one...I wasted money on acouple of Hamtronics FM-5s,
too...Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 17:49:14
GMTFrom: usc!rpi!bu.edu!wang![e-mail]:
ESTIMATE packet radio throughputTo: [e-mail]
of a reference to ESTIMATE.EXE a couple of weeks ago, I
havereceived a lot of requests for the program.  I suppose the
right thing todo is to post it, but I'm not sure this is the
right place to do so.Could someone tell me if this is the right
place, and if not, where is?Dave--
=================================================================
=========Dave Bushong, [e-mail]         + Wang
Laboratories, Inc.             + "Ma-ha"..... "Ah-haa"Internet:
[e-mail]
+================================================================
==========------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992
07:28:14 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: Fastest data rate? (arlan 450 @ 200kbit/sec)To:
[e-mail] NCR Wavelan cards run at 2Mb/s in the
902-928 MHz band. Don't knowwhat they actually attain in average
throughput though.Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug
92 15:58:23 GMTFrom: worldbank.org![e-mail]:
Hiearchial Address Info WantedTo: [e-mail]
anyone know where I can find information on the correct form
ofhierarchial addressing; even better, does anyone know of a
publicationwhich describes the available address
elements?Thanks. Darrell (NR3Y)
------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92 21:25:51 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!park.uvc
c.edu!cc.uvcc.edu![e-mail]: Hiearchial
Address Info WantedTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] writes:> Does anyone know where I
can find information on the correct form of> hierarchial
addressing; even better, does anyone know of a publication>
which describes the available address elements?> > Thanks.
Darrell (NR3Y)>  every network has a *different* correct form of
addressing, and several ofthem are hierarchical.1) Internet
domain names are heirarchical, and are of the form:
local.part%more#[e-mail]
\____________  ___________/|\_________  ____________/
      \/            |          \/              local part
at       fully qualified domain namethe local part can be almost
unbelievably complex.the fully qualified domain name part
consists of two sub parts.  the end part(here "domain.name") is
allocated by the Network Information Center uopnmeeting certain
requirements.  the early part ("sub.subdomain") is handed out by
the domain administrator.  There is a ham radio
domain,"ampr.org" administered by Brian Kantor ([e-mail]).
 He could issuethe name kf7xm.ampr.org to me if he wished.  I,
being the administrator of theuvcc.edu domain could issue myself
kf7xm.uvcc.edu.This is more fully described in the RFC's
available from [e-mail] RFC 920, 974, 1032, 1033,
1034, & 1035.2) -- -- Vern Cole -- Systems Manager -- Utah
Valley Community College --------------------------------Date:
13 Aug 92 19:19:42 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!sdd.hp.com!hpscdc!hplextra!hpl-opus!hpnmdla!alanb@ne
twork.UCSD.EDUSubject: How to power a PC motherboard from car
battery?To: [e-mail] rec.radio.amateur.packet,
[e-mail] (Dannie Gregoire) writes:>I would like to set
up a portable packet station for use in my car.>I would like to
avoid the cost of purchasing an expensive DC-AC>(cigarette
lighter) power converter, and instead downgrade/condition the
>power for use directly into the motherboard--no standard PC
power>supply needed.The PC uses +5V, -5V, +12V and -12V as I
recall.  +5 is no problem if you don't mind wasting a lot of
power in the 5Vregulator.  You'll need a large heat sink.  You
could also builda simple buck converter (switcher) to regulate
more efficiently.+12 is used for the disc drives and serial
interface.  Use a low-dropout type regulator from the car
battery (about +13V).-12 V is normally only used for the serial
interface.  A low-currentDC-DC converter IC should suffice.I
think -5V is not normally used.  You can probably leave it
out.AL N1AL------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992
07:23:18 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: How to power a PC motherboard from car battery?To:
[e-mail] strongly agree with the recommendations
to just buy an inverter.Commercial 12VDC-120VAC inverters have
gotten very small, light andefficient in the past decade, and
they're not all *that*
expensiveeither.Phil------------------------------Date: Fri, 14
Aug 1992 07:18:48 GMTFrom:
qualcom.qualcomm.com!chicago.qualcomm.com![e-mail]
bject: Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>What hardware methods are currently
available?>Our best national and international WAN technology is
300 baud HF BBS>forwarding. It's thruput is about 15
bytes/second. It's suitable for>Email.You left out the Internet
backbone links, sometimes referred to as"wormholes". There are
quite a few regional TCP/IP networks that arelinked to each
other through the regular Internet, using
IP-inside-IPencapsulation techniques that have been in KA9Q NOS
well over a year.With the growth of the Internet it is not hard
at all to find at leastone site in a given metropolitan area
that has both access to theInternet and a ham contact interested
in putting up a gateway.These links provide continuous real-time
wide area connectivity thatat the moment simply isn't attainable
in any other way. The onlyamateur-provided links that could even
come close to providing asimilar grade of service require a
geostationary amateur satellitesuch as AMSAT Phase IV, which has
been shelved indefinitely due tolack of funds.I see no reason to
deprecate a long-haul linking technology justbecause it's not
radio. Hams ought to take a "systems integration"approach to
networking and be as flexible as possible in usingwhatever is
available to get the job done. Personally, I've alwaysthought
that the packet radio problems most worth solving are
thoseinvolved in building high metropolitan area networks, where
radiomakes the most sense in the first place. Long-haul HF is
basically ananachronism, and except for its potential last-ditch
emergency uses itis really a dead-end
technology.Phil------------------------------Date: 13 Aug 92
20:16:45 GMTFrom:
swrinde!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!torn!newshost.uwo.ca!uwovax.uwo.
ca![e-mail]: PERSEID ACTIVITY REPORTS
NEEDED!To: [e-mail] received a few initital
reports on the1992 Perseids from Aug 11/12 I have one further
request for observers. There is a possiblity that something
unusual took place in the hours before the predicted new maxima
at 22-23 UT, Aug 11. If anyone made some radio observations or
visual observations in the interval 15-21 UT, Aug 11 I would be
extremely appreciative of receiving a report to clarify the
situation during those
hours.***********************************************************
*************Peter Brown     [e-mail]
American Section - International Meteor
Organization------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92
#219******************************------------------------------D
ate: Fri, 14 Aug 92 21:20:18 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!destroyer!ubc-cs!alberta!adec23![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Data Carrier Detect and PacketTo:
[e-mail]@skyld.UUCP (Jeff Angus) sez:>The
MFJ-1270b does not have "true" DCD ...You mean a fully
functional DCD. They detect DCD with a state machine
(digital),but when it drops out due to noise or signal strength,
the packet is lost byanother (impatient) TNC starting to
transmit. The DCD mod from TAPR hangsthe DCD on to allow for
this poor noise response.>Since most VHF packet is done on FM,
and most FM stations are either there or>they aren't, simple 'is
there noise present' DCD works.But this is flawed as this
requires your Squelch control to be on threshold,or at least
track the background noise. In practice, many set the controltoo
high and cause hidden transmitter problems. Idealy, the squelch
thresholdon typical rigs should be set so that it breaks open
with no signal aboutonce every ten seconds ... `just' on
threshold.>Unfortunately it also thinks the channel is busy when
it hears music, voices,>intermods etc.And this is BAD? Ok, so
you want to transmit a packet when you have nohope of hearing
the ack packet? This causes a problem ONLY for impatientpeople
that know not what they do.>The trick to HF packet is to set the
receive audio level so that the background>noise just barely get
the (stupid) DCD circuitry to flicker and then back off
a>bit.True, but a state machine (digital) DCD still works better
here than noisebased units.Ciao, 73 de VE6MGS/Mark
-sk-------------------------------Date: 14 Aug 1992 22:15:41
GMTFrom: ucsd.edu![e-mail]: Data Carrier
Detect and PacketTo: [e-mail]@adec23.uucp (Mark
Salyzyn) writes:>[e-mail] (Jeff Angus) sez:>>The
MFJ-1270b does not have "true" DCD ...>You mean fully functional
DCD. They detect DCD with a state machine (digital),No, the
MFJ1270 uses the XR2211 demodulator.  It's an analog PLL
device.There is a state machine in the TNC, but it's used to
recover clock andperform the NRZI->NRZ conversion.  It doesn't
do carrier detect.  Youcould make it do so, but it's easier to
add in a second one on apiggyback board like the TAPR
deal.>>Unfortunately it also thinks the channel is busy when it
hears music, voices,>>intermods etc.The real reason for wanting
a DCD that isn't noise-based is so that youcan leave your
squelch open, because it takes a lot of radios a goodportion of
a packet time to get their squelch open.  More than half ofthe
TXD that people wind up using is to compensate for the
receiver'ssquelch opening time, not how long the TX actually
takes to key up.>True, but a state machine (digital) DCD still
works better here than noise>based units.A good state machine
will lock on only when the bits look like realdata, so it
doesn't matter what the crud on the channel looks like.That
would always be superior to the noise-based DCD.However, might
you want a separate noise-detect unit to performcollision
avoidance.    - Brian------------------------------Date: Fri, 14
Aug 1992 19:31:33 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!wupost!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd
.edu![e-mail]: DSP Modems?  How are
they?To: [e-mail] U. of Maryland Club is going
to be looking into obtaining DSP Modems for high speed and
satellite packet work.  My questionis1)  How many DSP modems are
available?  2)  What is your experience with any of the above or
    what have you heard about tradeoffs between the different
modemsPlease email me and I'll summarize.-Thomas
N3HAU------------------------------Date: 14 Aug 92 17:51:07
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!mips!samsung!transfer!necis![e-mail]
ect: ESTIMATE packet radio throughputTo: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Bushong)
wrote:> Because of a reference to ESTIMATE.EXE a couple of weeks
ago, I have> received a lot of requests for the program.  I
suppose the right thing to> do is to post it, but I'm not sure
this is the right place to do so.> > Could someone tell me if
this is the right place, and if not, where is?>  Hi Dave...  I
could tell you where to post it........   but the last time I
asked the same sort of question I didn't get any goodanswers.  I
wanted to post copies of a few of my ham radio software:
DOSGATE, AUTOCALL, AUTOLOG, AUTOFAX, AUTOCW, and a windows
program that converts metric/english(american) measures. If you
find a good place to post this stuff... let me know. Rich--
/****************************************************************
**********\ * Rich Bono (NM1D)              IMRICH
[e-mail] *  * [phone]
                [e-mail] *
\****************************************************************
**********/------------------------------Date: 14 Aug 92
21:05:32 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!inst-sun1![e-mail]
ct: ESTIMATE packet radio throughputTo: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] ( NM1D) writes:>In
article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Bushong)
wrote:>> Because of a reference to ESTIMATE.EXE a couple of
weeks ago, I have>> received a lot of requests for the program.
I suppose the right thing to>> do is to post it, but I'm not
sure this is the right place to do so.>> >> Could someone tell
me if this is the right place, and if not, where is?>> > Hi
Dave...>>  I could tell you where to post it........>>   but the
last time I asked the same sort of question I didn't get any
good>answers.  I wanted to post copies of a few of my ham radio
software:>  DOSGATE, AUTOCALL, AUTOLOG, AUTOFAX, AUTOCW, and a
windows program that> converts metric/english(american)
measures.>> If you find a good place to post this stuff... let
me know.>> Rich>-- >
/****************************************************************
**********\> * Rich Bono (NM1D)              IMRICH
[e-mail] * > * [phone]
                 [e-mail] * >
\****************************************************************
**********/------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992
00:42:49 GMTFrom: clarkson![e-mail]: getting
packet IP numbers and netmasksTo: [e-mail]2CC
(clarkson university, Potsdam, NY) just started running ka9q's
NOSon 2m with netrom routing to the rest of the NEDA net. I used
a netmask off of clarkson's net to assign some starter
IPnumbers, but I would like to get a real amateur netmask.  I'd
also liketo find a netrom route (or innernet) to the rest of the
amateur tcp/ipnet. where should I go for this
information?                Rob--            [e-mail] Logan
   AMA        -----|-----   ARRL
[e-mail] ERC        IRCHA   *>=====[_]L)
EAA          AirBornPotsdam, NY 13699   PRA           -'-`-
PADI         USSA------------------------------Date: 14 Aug 92
13:00:54 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!sdd.hp.com!caen!nic.umass.edu!hamp.hampshire.edu!awo
[e-mail]: Long haul HF in 3rd world (Re:
Packet Networks today and tomorrow)To: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Phil Karn) writes:> ... Long-haul HF
is basically an> anachronism, and except for its potential
last-ditch emergency uses it> is really a dead-end technology.>
This may be true in the US and other developed countries, but
thesituation is not necessarily the same everywhere. In many
third worldcountries the infrastructure is not there to support
reliable datacommunications by landline, even locally. I
particularly know the situation in Nicaragua. When I was
workingthere in late 1990 it was almost impossible to use a
landline modem  at1200 baud on my suburban Managua telephone
line. Between the twocampuses of the Engineering University it
was almost impossible to makevoice telephone calls because of
the lack of trunks between twoexchanges in the same city.
Landline connections between cities,especially between the
Atlantic and Pacific coasts or between thecapital and mining
centers in the mountains were very difficult tomake.
International e-mail was available, but exchanges with the
UStook place only twice a day.In this situation the
Communications department of the EngineeringUniversity is very
interested in using ham-developed techniques andequipment, not
just to establish UHF links between locations inManagua, but
also to take advantage of reliable daytime ranges of a
fewhundred miles in the 7 Mhz part of the spectrum for
inter-citycommunication and to use higher frequencies for
international datalinks to colleagues in other countries.I
suspect similar situations exist in other third world countries.
Budget restrictions make ham-type techniques and equipment
veryattractive for such applications. In Nicaragua there is also
strongsupport for ham radio itself; they realize that getting
young peopleinterested in radio can only help to provide the
technical skills thatfurther development of the economy
requires.Al Woodhull,  N1AW  School of Natural Science,
Hampshire College, Amherst, MA 01002413-549-4600 ext 581
(office), 413-549-4740 (home)[e-mail],
[e-mail]------------------------------Date:
13 Aug 92  19:24:00 CSTFrom:
access.usask.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!bison!sys6626!inqmind!mailbox!UU
[e-mail]: mfj 1278 and multicomTo:
[e-mail] comments about MFJ, their MFJ1278,
Multicom and service have been left in this echo.I have only
owned 1 TNC and it is the MFJ1278T with the 3.3 ROM.  I love it.
 I also sent my free EPROM upgrade to them at the end of 1 year
and heard nothing.  I figured it was a lost cause but 6 moths
later 1 called them, sat on hold for 5 minutes while thye looked
for my order; and hot-damn; they found it.  They said it was "on
hold" as they were just releasing version 3.5 and mine would be
shipped in a week.  Well double hot-damn; they did ship it and
as they said and I got it a week later via US Mail and Canada
Post.I find Multicom inadaguate for packet work and prefer the
Aussie paKet 5.1 terminal program.  If you are into Afx and
Multi-gray scale or SSTV then Multicom may be your answer.  I
first got it 18 months ago and was instantly annoyed by the copy
protection.  Its not that good to be concerned about pirating.
However I found I could make extra backups for myself using the
Copy2PC board with the setting for "copy with weak bits".  These
copies saved me in the early days of packet experimentation.
Once I deleted a Multicom subdirectory without restoring the
software count back to the floppy ( you are allowed 2 copies -
that thought gives me anxiety attackes just like the days of the
original Lotus 1-2-3).So with a little prodding MFJ did deliver
and with a little insurance by getting an extra copy of the
Multicom master disk you should be okay.  VE4YZ  Alan Thoren,
QTH:   Winnipeg Manitoba Canada  Data: 204-669-5591  Packet:
VE4YZ@VE4KV.#WPG.MB.CAN.NA * Origin: M.W.C.S BBS - Now 1.8 GIG
[phone]/8/9
(1:348/206.0)------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug
1992 16:09:23 GMTFrom:
usc!wupost!darwin.sura.net!convex!news.utdallas.edu!corpgate!bnrg
ate!bwdls61!bnr.ca![e-mail]: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Phil Karn) writes:|> I see no reason to deprecate a long-haul
linking technology just|> because it's not radio. Hams ought to
take a "systems integration"|> approach to networking and be as
flexible as possible in using|> whatever is available to get the
job done. Personally, I've always|> thought that the packet
radio problems most worth solving are those|> involved in
building high metropolitan area networks, where radio|> makes
the most sense in the first place. Long-haul HF is basically
an|> anachronism, and except for its potential last-ditch
emergency uses it|> is really a dead-end technology.While I
agree that solving the local connectivity problem deserves a
*lot*  of attention, and that INTERNET wormholes are becoming a
way of life,  I think that solving the longhaul problem *on
amateur radio* is also  worth persuing.  There exist a
motherload of linked voice repeater networks  today, some of
them covering vast distances (IPARN, for a Canadian  example).
It is my believe that much of the site/power/antenna/political
engineering in these networks can be leveraged for use in *real*
high-speed  digital networks that carry both voice and data.
That, I think, is a  vision worth persuing.-- Marcus Leech, 4Y11
            Bell-Northern Research  |opinions
[e-mail]                  P.O. Box 3511, Stn. C
|are my own, and [e-mail]             Ottawa, ON,
CAN K1Y 4H7 |necessarily BNRs------------------------------End
of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#220******************************Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 04:30:03
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #221To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sun,
16 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 221Today's Topics:
 Callbook Server for Full-Service BBS calls                data
compression with packet:  legal?                  New packeteer
frustration (3 msgs)                 Packet Networks today and
tommorrow                      TAPR 9600 baud modem helpSend
Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send
subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 15 Aug 92 06:56:01 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!shrike![e-mail]
: Callbook Server for Full-Service BBS callsTo:
[e-mail] wish list is to find an on-line Callbook
server thathas a listing of packet BBS calls by City/State. If
noserver, does anyone have a listing?Sure would be nice to be
able to lookup Austin, Texasand find N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA who
runs a full-service BBS.On more than one ocasion I have wanted
to send a msg toa ham in a city and had no idea of the BBS
callsign.Are you listening ARRL for the next Repeater
Directory?Dick, KD5VUKD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NAOn: 8/15/92
1:55:28 AM CST------------------------------Date: 15 Aug 92
13:43:13 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
ubject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Luck Hurder KY1T) writes:>>>From the ARRL's FCC
Rulebook:>>"Above 50 MHz where data and RTTY emissions are
permitted, >unspecified digital codes may be used in
communication between stations>licensed by the FCC.  Baudot,
AMTOR and ASCII are specified in>the rules, so unspecified
includes everything else..."Let's make sure we aren't talking
apples and oranges here. Baudot andASCII are bit encodings for
*characters*, AMTOR uses the same encodingas Baudot. Meanwhile,
*compression* is done at the *text* level, notthe character
level. For example, I could zip a file and then uuencodethe zip
file. Then the file I would transmit would still be ASCII atthe
character level, but totally different from the original at
thetext level.There are *three* different levels of encoding
that must be considered.The text level, the character level, and
the symbol level. Text levelencoding includes plain text,
compressed text, and encrypted text. Onlythe latter is
restricted. Encryption may be used on certain controllinks in
amateur service, but nowhere else. At the character level,we
have Baudot, ASCII, and unspecified encodings such as EBDIC.
Theunspecified encodings are limited to the data segments above
50 MHz.Finally we have the symbol encoding. This can be NRZ,
NRZI, straightFSK, AFSK, PSK, QPSK, etc. This is what really
determines occupiedbandwidth when taken together with symbol
rate.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug
1992 16:58:55 GMTFrom:
cs.yale.edu![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail] many years of sitting
by the packet sidelines, I've set up a KAMand started decoding
the burps.  As someone who uses the Internetdaily, this has been
an eye-opening experience for me.As someone recently noted ham
packet, as currently practiced, is anadventure in
low-performance communications (but cost-effective).  Yeah,with
incredible patience and luck, I've managed to connect from
Phila-delphia to Maine.  I've seen umpteen users competing for a
single1200 baud port to a PC.  And I note that 10s of kHz of
precious HFspectrum are taken up by very unfriendly robots
chatting at **300 baud**.(They won't give you the time of day,
and the throughput is abysmal.)Now I see there's a big brouhaha
about the ARRL not defending theseterribly inefficient mail
operations to the maximum of its ability.The contrast with the
Internet is incredible.  I can easily transfera megabyte per
minute across the country, and I am somewhat annoyedI can't do
better.  I can send dozens of e-mail messages around theworld
and often get replies in minutes.  But you all know that.My
question here is where does one go for information about
digitalham networking plans - especially the (very logical) use
of Internetlinks for long haul?  It's not in QST, I think.
:-)Until I get better adjusted to VHF packet, you'll probably
find meon 20 m AMTOR.  There's a friendly medium!  Not much good
for downloadingsoftware, however.Cheers and 73s, Martin,
AA6E------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 20:45:31
GMTFrom: csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]: New
packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail] also recently
purchased a BayPac unit to connect my computer and myhandheld to
try packet. My impression is that packet is just toooo slowfor
me. I can connect to Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec.
Thismakes packet seem rather useless to me at the moment,
although I wouldhappily be educated about useful applications of
packet.-- Dave Feustel N9MYI <[e-mail]>---Given Civil
Seizure, from the DEA's point of view, winning the War onDrugs
would be killing the Goose that lays golden eggs.It's also hard
to tell which group is up to more no-good: cops
orcrooks.------------------------------Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992
04:20:10 GMTFrom: world![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail]@netcom.com (David
Feustel) writes:>I also recently purchased a BayPac unit to
connect my computer and my>handheld to try packet. My impression
is that packet is just toooo slow>for me. I can connect to
Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec. This>makes packet seem
rather useless to me at the moment, although I would>happily be
educated about useful applications of packet.>-- >Dave Feustel
N9MYI <[e-mail]>>--->Given Civil Seizure, from the
DEA's point of view, winning the War on>Drugs would be killing
the Goose that lays golden eggs.>It's also hard to tell which
group is up to more no-good: cops or>crooks.Make that three
votes for a big Question Mark concerning packet.I, too, just
received a BAYMOD-9 from PaccCom.  At 60 bucks it seemed likea
cheap way to see what all the broo ha ha was all about.  Well,
afterspending two nights here in the Boston area seeing the
sameinformation, messages and mail going back and forth at 1200
baud, I'mnot sure what the big deal is, either.  Sign me...
another kid spoiled by the Internet!73...  KA2TMT       Rich
G.-- Richard D. GoldsteinSchiller & KusmerPatent Attorneys At
Law(617) 227-5454 Telephone------------------------------Date:
Sat, 15 Aug 92 16:59:17 GMTFrom:
das.wang.com!wang![e-mail]: Packet Networks
today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail]@chicago.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
writes:>[...]>I see no reason to deprecate a long-haul linking
technology just>because it's not radio. Hams ought to take a
"systems integration">approach to networking and be as flexible
as possible in using>whatever is available to get the job done.
[...]I agree.  Look at what happened to the railroads during
this century.They should have known that they were in the
*transportation* business,not just the train business.  The
airlines dominate the transportationbusiness now.  Railroads are
good for hauling freight (I know, oversimpli-fication).Hams are
in the communications (non-)business.  Read section 97.1.We have
these precious frequency allocations because (among otherthings)
we push the state of the art, and not just by radio.  Youwill
never advance in any area unless you see the big picture.73,
Dave  KZ1O-- Dave Bushong, [e-mail] Laboratories,
Inc.Internet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug
92 03:50:50 GMTFrom:
usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!skyld!jangus@net
work.UCSD.EDUSubject: TAPR 9600 baud modem helpTo:
[e-mail], it took a few days of banging my head
against the wall, but I did getthe TAPR 9600 baud modem working
with the MFJ-1270b TNC. (Note while I waswaiting for the ringing
in my head to stop, I accidentally read the manual.)I am now
trying to get same said modem to work with the PacComm Tiny-2
TNC.I did the same 'cut jumpers' on the 20 pin header that I did
on the 1270 butthe PacComm Tiny-2 seems to insist on being a
different bird.Anyone out there already do this? Also, if you've
'married' this modem withother TNC's such as the PK-87/88 or the
DRSI cards please email some notesfor those mods as well. I try
to maintain a library of hardware connections.Thanks,
73xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space left blank intentionally. >J
Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA 90749-4425 voice (310)
324-6080------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #221******************************Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92
04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #222To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Mon,
17 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 222Today's Topics:
        Baycom/Baymod-9 Help/Advice?                   Latest
version of PK-88 firmware                 Packet Networks today
and tommorrow                 Please help with getting on
packet.            Seeking opinion on HTs, multimode
controllersSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 22:49:16 GMTFrom:
world![e-mail]: Baycom/Baymod-9 Help/Advice?To:
[e-mail], I am now into packet.  This weekend I
received the Baymod-9modem-in-a-db-connector from PacCom and
version 1.50a of the Baycomterminal program.Problem is:  I don't
have the foggiest idea of what any of this means!<g>(its not up
to my usual heathkit standard of explaination!)Anyhow, I was
successful in making the physical connections necessary
toconnect my Alinco DJ-F1T and in sending and receiving some
packets froma local Node(?).  I was also successful in
connecting to myself throughthe node, so I think all is working
fine.  However, I am not sure how to adjust any of the
parameters so that I maximize my communications whileminimizing
the generation of packets which cause collisions.Is there a
Baycom guru who can provide me with some advice on how to
usethis system to its fullest advantage, in simple Ham engilsh?
Also, anyadvice on how to check whether I have the controls of
my radio set properlywould be appreciated.  Finally, I see all
of the (what I believe to be)AX.25 "stuff" going across the
bottom of the screen, and I think that ifI understood what I was
seeing I could tell how efficient my transmissionsare being, but
right now its all GERMAN to me <g>Many thanks to all in advance!
 (FTP sites for info also appreciated!)73 and tnx!  de
KA2TMT        Rich Goldstein-- Richard D. GoldsteinSchiller &
KusmerPatent Attorneys At Law(617) 227-5454
Telephone------------------------------Date: 16 Aug 1992
09:42:36 -0700From: [e-mail]: Latest
version of PK-88 firmwareTo: [e-mail] have a AEA
PK-88 TNC and the ROM is upgaraded to the June 1, 1990 version.
As there arequite a few bugs in this ROM, could you please let
me knowif there is a more recent ROM upgrade for
PK-88?ThanksCostas Krallis  SV1XV (ex G7AHN)E-Mail:
[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 16 Aug 92 13:08:38 GMTFrom:
usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary@network.U
CSD.EDUSubject: Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Karn) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>>What hardware methods are currently
available?>>>Our best national and international WAN technology
is 300 baud HF BBS>>forwarding. It's thruput is about 15
bytes/second. It's suitable for>>Email.>>You left out the
Internet backbone links, sometimes referred to as>"wormholes".
There are quite a few regional TCP/IP networks that are>linked
to each other through the regular Internet, using
IP-inside-IP>encapsulation techniques that have been in KA9Q NOS
well over a year.>With the growth of the Internet it is not hard
at all to find at least>one site in a given metropolitan area
that has both access to the>Internet and a ham contact
interested in putting up a gateway.I left these out because they
aren't amateur radio. They work, andas long as the commercial
and institutional networks tolerate them,they are useful, but
they aren't amateur radio. We could just abandonpacket *radio*
and all run Fidonet landline BBSs, but that wouldn'tbe amateur
*radio* either. The thruput would be better though.For
communications *systems* use, the wirelines are superior toradio
in ordinary day to day long haul service. But we're supposed to
be *radio* amateurs, and the data is secondary to the medium in
our case. I know that's a limited way of looking at things, but
amateur packet radio is a limited form of communications.
Afterall, if communications efficiency were our only goal, we'd
makelong distance phone calls instead of cluttering 20 meters
withkilowatt DXers.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date:
Sun, 16 Aug 1992 17:08:06 GMTFrom:
usc!rpi!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Please help with getting on packet.To:
[e-mail] finally got my new 1270B TNC running,
talking to my computer at 9600 bps,and receiving packets.  I
calibrated the transmit audio level, and I verifiedhearing
packets, using a separate receiver.  But I have not been able
toconnect to any other stations!  I tried increasing TXDelay,
but to no avail.I am on 145.030.  Could I just be in a poor
location, and no other stationcan hear me?  Someone please give
me advice.  Is there a good station near114th Street on the West
side of Manhattan (NY) that I can try to connect to?I also have
440 MHz capabilities.  Thank you for all advice.73,Meir * * * *
*  =================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 16 Aug
92 23:53:03 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gatech!uflorida!winnie!zach.fit.edu![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Seeking opinion on HTs, multimode controllersTo:
[e-mail] all;I am trying to decide on a packet
setup, but know very little aboutHTs in general.  The DJ580T
looks like a fairly good deal right now,so I was hoping to get
some more info on it, or recommendations forother products with
similar functions.  I would like to eventuallyhook it up to the
MFJ-1278 multimode controller (any opinions onthis device are
also appreciated).If anybody has recommendations on an
inexpensive 2m/70cm HT suitablefor packet, please email to me.
If there are reviews available, pointersto them would be great.
I am not particularly picky about wether or notit can handle
56kbps or some high speed;  2400 baud is plenty for me
fornow.Please email, as news gets expired frequently here at my
site.Tim Coldenhoff,  KD4QJF/AAinet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Sun, 16
Aug 1992 22:48:13 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!yale.edu!cs.yale.edu!ewing-martin@netwo
rk.UCSD.EDUTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>2Subject : Re: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:...>For communications *systems* use, the
wirelines are superior to>radio in ordinary day to day long haul
service. But we're supposed >to be *radio* amateurs, and the
data is secondary to the medium in >our case. I know that's a
limited way of looking at things, but >amateur packet radio is a
limited form of communications. After>all, if communications
efficiency were our only goal, we'd make>long distance phone
calls instead of cluttering 20 meters with>kilowatt DXers.>>Gary
KE4ZVMy slant on this is that radio is uniquely good at
local/portable/mobiledata communications.  Something I dearly
wish I could do now (for work)is to get 38.4 or 56 kb/s from
home to work.  Ham radio could be doingthis.  (Alas, not for
work!) Ham radio can never hope to compete with NSFNet
(Internet) in MB/sec around the country or world.  But (until
ISDN or until normal phone modems get much better) radio (in GHz
bands, probably) is the right solution.The economics seems
right.  Hams are willing to spend $100s to getconnected on
packet.  Soon, this should get you up to 9600 bps forlocal
communications to a hub node/bbs.  The hub node/bbs systemsseem
to be able to command $1000s from clubs or fat cats.  Thatshould
be enough to cadge an Internet connection from the local U,too.I
can't see the value in ever trying for transcontinental ham
linksat any speed, when Internet is free and reliable.  (If ham
satellitescan be done "free", I should think Internet
connections could be.)There's a lot of value in long radio links
connecting very remote or non-industrialized areas, but that's
not my focus here.Just some random ideas from an inquiring mind.
 (Maybe the honchosare working on this already?)Martin,
AA6E------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#222******************************Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 04:30:03
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #223To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Tue,
18 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 223Today's Topics:
              (none) (4 msgs)                        A&A Packet
modem kits?                data compression with packet:  legal?
                Digicom C-64: Anyone still using it?
 Hostmaster vs Ka-Gold...comments? (2 msgs)
     KISS and TCP/IP                  New packeteer frustration
(4 msgs)                         Standard C528A Mods
What AOR radio similar to Icom R1? (2 msgs)
   Wormhole Info WantedSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 17 Aug 1992 21:18:19 -0700From:
[e-mail]: (none)To:
[e-mail]: from internet by attmail; Tue Aug
18 03:59 GMT 1992>From UCSD.EDU!packet-radio-relay Mon Aug 17
04:30:02 PDT 1992 remote from internetReceived: by att.att.com;
Mon Aug 17 21:49:22 EDT 1992Received: by ucsd.edu; id
AA28347    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Mon, 17 Aug 92 04:30:05 -0700
for claris!voder!nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sinclair%spi.dnetReceived: by
ucsd.edu; id AA28342    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Mon, 17 Aug 92
04:30:03 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb
-oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay
packet-radio-listMessage-Id: <[e-mail]>Date:
Mon, 17 Aug 92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: internet!ucsd.edu!packet-radio
(Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup)Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
internet!UCSD.Edu!Packet-Radio Precedence: BulkSubject:
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #222To: internet!UCSD.EDU!packet-radio
Packet-Radio Digest         Mon, 17 Aug 92       Volume 92 :
Issue 222Today's Topics:                     Baycom/Baymod-9
Help/Advice?                   Latest version of PK-88 firmware
               Packet Networks today and tommorrow
  Please help with getting on packet.            Seeking opinion
on HTs, multimode controllersSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 22:49:16 GMTFrom:
world![e-mail]: Baycom/Baymod-9 Help/Advice?To:
[e-mail], I am now into packet.  This weekend I
received the Baymod-9modem-in-a-db-connector from PacCom and
version 1.50a of the Baycomterminal program.Problem is:  I don't
have the foggiest idea of what any of this means!<g>(its not up
to my usual heathkit standard of explaination!)Anyhow, I was
successful in making the physical connections necessary
toconnect my Alinco DJ-F1T and in sending and receiving some
packets froma local Node(?).  I was also successful in
connecting to myself throughthe node, so I think all is working
fine.  However, I am not sure how to adjust any of the
parameters so that I maximize my communications whileminimizing
the generation of packets which cause collisions.Is there a
Baycom guru who can provide me with some advice on how to
usethis system to its fullest advantage, in simple Ham engilsh?
Also, anyadvice on how to check whether I have the controls of
my radio set properlywould be appreciated.  Finally, I see all
of the (what I believe to be)AX.25 "stuff" going across the
bottom of the screen, and I think that ifI understood what I was
seeing I could tell how efficient my transmissionsare being, but
right now its all GERMAN to me <g>Many thanks to all in advance!
 (FTP sites for info also appreciated!)73 and tnx!  de
KA2TMT        Rich Goldstein-- Richard D. GoldsteinSchiller &
KusmerPatent Attorneys At Law(617) 227-5454
Telephone------------------------------Date: 16 Aug 1992
09:42:36 -0700From: [e-mail]: Latest
version of PK-88 firmwareTo: [e-mail] have a AEA
PK-88 TNC and the ROM is upgaraded to the June 1, 1990 version.
As there arequite a few bugs in this ROM, could you please let
me knowif there is a more recent ROM upgrade for
PK-88?ThanksCostas Krallis  SV1XV (ex G7AHN)E-Mail:
[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 16 Aug 92 13:08:38 GMTFrom:
usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary@network.U
CSD.EDUSubject: Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Karn) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>>What hardware methods are currently
available?>>>Our best national and international WAN technology
is 300 baud HF BBS>>forwarding. It's thruput is about 15
bytes/second. It's suitable for>>Email.>>You left out the
Internet backbone links, sometimes referred to as>"wormholes".
There are quite a few regional TCP/IP networks that are>linked
to each other through the regular Internet, using
IP-inside-IP>encapsulation techniques that have been in KA9Q NOS
well over a year.>With the growth of the Internet it is not hard
at all to find at least>one site in a given metropolitan area
that has both access to the>Internet and a ham contact
interested in putting up a gateway.I left these out because they
aren't amateur radio. They work, andas long as the commercial
and institutional networks tolerate them,they are useful, but
they aren't amateur radio. We could just abandonpacket *radio*
and all run Fidonet landline BBSs, but that wouldn'tbe amateur
*radio* either. The thruput would be better though.For
communications *systems* use, the wirelines are superior toradio
in ordinary day to day long haul service. But we're supposed to
be *radio* amateurs, and the data is secondary to the medium in
our case. I know that's a limited way of looking at things, but
amateur packet radio is a limited form of communications.
Afterall, if communications efficiency were our only goal, we'd
makelong distance phone calls instead of cluttering 20 meters
withkilowatt DXers.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date:
Sun, 16 Aug 1992 17:08:06 GMTFrom:
usc!rpi!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Please help with getting on packet.To:
[e-mail] finally got my new 1270B TNC running,
talking to my computer at 9600 bps,and receiving packets.  I
calibrated the transmit audio level, and I verifiedhearing
packets, using a separate receiver.  But I have not been able
toconnect to any other stations!  I tried increasing TXDelay,
but to no avail.I am on 145.030.  Could I just be in a poor
location, and no other stationcan hear me?  Someone please give
me advice.  Is there a good station near114th Street on the West
side of Manhattan (NY) that I can try to connect to?I also have
440 MHz capabilities.  Thank you for all advice.73,Meir * * * *
*  =================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 16 Aug
92 23:53:03 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gatech!uflorida!winnie!zach.fit.edu![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Seeking opinion on HTs, multimode controllersTo:
[e-mail] all;I am trying to decide on a packet
setup, but know very little aboutHTs in general.  The DJ580T
looks like a fairly good deal right now,so I was hoping to get
some more info on it, or recommendations forother products with
similar functions.  I would like to eventuallyhook it up to the
MFJ-1278 multimode controller (any opinions onthis device are
also appreciated).If anybody has recommendations on an
inexpensive 2m/70cm HT suitablefor packet, please email to me.
If there are reviews available, pointersto them would be great.
I am not particularly picky about wether or notit can handle
56kbps or some high speed;  2400 baud is plenty for me
fornow.Please email, as news gets expired frequently here at my
site.Tim Coldenhoff,  KD4QJF/AAinet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Sun, 16
Aug 1992 22:48:13 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!yale.edu!cs.yale.edu!ewing-martin@netwo
rk.UCSD.EDUTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>2Subject : Re: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:...>For communications *systems* use, the
wirelines are superior to>radio in ordinary day to day long haul
service. But we're supposed >to be *radio* amateurs, and the
data is secondary to the medium in >our case. I know that's a
limited way of looking at things, but >amateur packet radio is a
limited form of communications. After>all, if communications
efficiency were our only goal, we'd make>long distance phone
calls instead of cluttering 20 meters with>kilowatt DXers.>>Gary
KE4ZVMy slant on this is that radio is uniquely good at
local/portable/mobiledata communications.  Something I dearly
wish I could do now (for work)is to get 38.4 or 56 kb/s from
home to work.  Ham radio could be doingthis.  (Alas, not for
work!) Ham radio can never hope to compete with NSFNet
(Internet) in MB/sec around the country or world.  But (until
ISDN or until normal phone modems get much better) radio (in GHz
bands, probably) is the right solution.The economics seems
right.  Hams are willing to spend $100s to getconnected on
packet.  Soon, this should get you up to 9600 bps forlocal
communications to a hub node/bbs.  The hub node/bbs systemsseem
to be able to command $1000s from clubs or fat cats.  Thatshould
be enough to cadge an Internet connection from the local U,too.I
can't see the value in ever trying for transcontinental ham
linksat any speed, when Internet is free and reliable.  (If ham
satellitescan be done "free", I should think Internet
connections could be.)There's a lot of value in long radio links
connecting very remote or non-industrialized areas, but that's
not my focus here.Just some random ideas from an inquiring mind.
 (Maybe the honchosare working on this already?)Martin,
AA6E------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#222******************************------------------------------D
ate: 17 Aug 1992 21:20:51 -0700From:
[e-mail]: (none)To:
[e-mail]: from internet by attmail; Tue Aug
18 03:59 GMT 1992>From UCSD.EDU!packet-radio-relay Mon Aug 17
04:30:02 PDT 1992 remote from internetReceived: by att.att.com;
Mon Aug 17 21:49:22 EDT 1992Received: by ucsd.edu; id
AA28347    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Mon, 17 Aug 92 04:30:05 -0700
for claris!voder!nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sinclair%spi.dnetReceived: by
ucsd.edu; id AA28342    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Mon, 17 Aug 92
04:30:03 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb
-oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay
packet-radio-listMessage-Id: <[e-mail]>Date:
Mon, 17 Aug 92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: internet!ucsd.edu!packet-radio
(Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup)Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
internet!UCSD.Edu!Packet-Radio Precedence: BulkSubject:
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #222To: internet!UCSD.EDU!packet-radio
Packet-Radio Digest         Mon, 17 Aug 92       Volume 92 :
Issue 222Today's Topics:                     Baycom/Baymod-9
Help/Advice?                   Latest version of PK-88 firmware
               Packet Networks today and tommorrow
  Please help with getting on packet.            Seeking opinion
on HTs, multimode controllersSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 22:49:16 GMTFrom:
world![e-mail]: Baycom/Baymod-9 Help/Advice?To:
[e-mail], I am now into packet.  This weekend I
received the Baymod-9modem-in-a-db-connector from PacCom and
version 1.50a of the Baycomterminal program.Problem is:  I don't
have the foggiest idea of what any of this means!<g>(its not up
to my usual heathkit standard of explaination!)Anyhow, I was
successful in making the physical connections necessary
toconnect my Alinco DJ-F1T and in sending and receiving some
packets froma local Node(?).  I was also successful in
connecting to myself throughthe node, so I think all is working
fine.  However, I am not sure how to adjust any of the
parameters so that I maximize my communications whileminimizing
the generation of packets which cause collisions.Is there a
Baycom guru who can provide me with some advice on how to
usethis system to its fullest advantage, in simple Ham engilsh?
Also, anyadvice on how to check whether I have the controls of
my radio set properlywould be appreciated.  Finally, I see all
of the (what I believe to be)AX.25 "stuff" going across the
bottom of the screen, and I think that ifI understood what I was
seeing I could tell how efficient my transmissionsare being, but
right now its all GERMAN to me <g>Many thanks to all in advance!
 (FTP sites for info also appreciated!)73 and tnx!  de
KA2TMT        Rich Goldstein-- Richard D. GoldsteinSchiller &
KusmerPatent Attorneys At Law(617) 227-5454
Telephone------------------------------Date: 16 Aug 1992
09:42:36 -0700From: [e-mail]: Latest
version of PK-88 firmwareTo: [e-mail] have a AEA
PK-88 TNC and the ROM is upgaraded to the June 1, 1990 version.
As there arequite a few bugs in this ROM, could you please let
me knowif there is a more recent ROM upgrade for
PK-88?ThanksCostas Krallis  SV1XV (ex G7AHN)E-Mail:
[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 16 Aug 92 13:08:38 GMTFrom:
usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary@network.U
CSD.EDUSubject: Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Karn) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>>What hardware methods are currently
available?>>>Our best national and international WAN technology
is 300 baud HF BBS>>forwarding. It's thruput is about 15
bytes/second. It's suitable for>>Email.>>You left out the
Internet backbone links, sometimes referred to as>"wormholes".
There are quite a few regional TCP/IP networks that are>linked
to each other through the regular Internet, using
IP-inside-IP>encapsulation techniques that have been in KA9Q NOS
well over a year.>With the growth of the Internet it is not hard
at all to find at least>one site in a given metropolitan area
that has both access to the>Internet and a ham contact
interested in putting up a gateway.I left these out because they
aren't amateur radio. They work, andas long as the commercial
and institutional networks tolerate them,they are useful, but
they aren't amateur radio. We could just abandonpacket *radio*
and all run Fidonet landline BBSs, but that wouldn'tbe amateur
*radio* either. The thruput would be better though.For
communications *systems* use, the wirelines are superior toradio
in ordinary day to day long haul service. But we're supposed to
be *radio* amateurs, and the data is secondary to the medium in
our case. I know that's a limited way of looking at things, but
amateur packet radio is a limited form of communications.
Afterall, if communications efficiency were our only goal, we'd
makelong distance phone calls instead of cluttering 20 meters
withkilowatt DXers.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date:
Sun, 16 Aug 1992 17:08:06 GMTFrom:
usc!rpi!news.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Please help with getting on packet.To:
[e-mail] finally got my new 1270B TNC running,
talking to my computer at 9600 bps,and receiving packets.  I
calibrated the transmit audio level, and I verifiedhearing
packets, using a separate receiver.  But I have not been able
toconnect to any other stations!  I tried increasing TXDelay,
but to no avail.I am on 145.030.  Could I just be in a poor
location, and no other stationcan hear me?  Someone please give
me advice.  Is there a good station near114th Street on the West
side of Manhattan (NY) that I can try to connect to?I also have
440 MHz capabilities.  Thank you for all advice.73,Meir * * * *
*  =================  Internet address is
[e-mail]* * * * * * = Meir I. Green =  for
short, mail to    [e-mail] * * * * *  =================
UUCP Bang!            columbia.edu!mig* * * * * *
=================  Amateur Packet Radio
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 16 Aug
92 23:53:03 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gatech!uflorida!winnie!zach.fit.edu![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: Seeking opinion on HTs, multimode controllersTo:
[e-mail] all;I am trying to decide on a packet
setup, but know very little aboutHTs in general.  The DJ580T
looks like a fairly good deal right now,so I was hoping to get
some more info on it, or recommendations forother products with
similar functions.  I would like to eventuallyhook it up to the
MFJ-1278 multimode controller (any opinions onthis device are
also appreciated).If anybody has recommendations on an
inexpensive 2m/70cm HT suitablefor packet, please email to me.
If there are reviews available, pointersto them would be great.
I am not particularly picky about wether or notit can handle
56kbps or some high speed;  2400 baud is plenty for me
fornow.Please email, as news gets expired frequently here at my
site.Tim Coldenhoff,  KD4QJF/AAinet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Sun, 16
Aug 1992 22:48:13 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!nigel.msen.com!yale.edu!cs.yale.edu!ewing-martin@netwo
rk.UCSD.EDUTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>2Subject : Re: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:...>For communications *systems* use, the
wirelines are superior to>radio in ordinary day to day long haul
service. But we're supposed >to be *radio* amateurs, and the
data is secondary to the medium in >our case. I know that's a
limited way of looking at things, but >amateur packet radio is a
limited form of communications. After>all, if communications
efficiency were our only goal, we'd make>long distance phone
calls instead of cluttering 20 meters with>kilowatt DXers.>>Gary
KE4ZVMy slant on this is that radio is uniquely good at
local/portable/mobiledata communications.  Something I dearly
wish I could do now (for work)is to get 38.4 or 56 kb/s from
home to work.  Ham radio could be doingthis.  (Alas, not for
work!) Ham radio can never hope to compete with NSFNet
(Internet) in MB/sec around the country or world.  But (until
ISDN or until normal phone modems get much better) radio (in GHz
bands, probably) is the right solution.The economics seems
right.  Hams are willing to spend $100s to getconnected on
packet.  Soon, this should get you up to 9600 bps forlocal
communications to a hub node/bbs.  The hub node/bbs systemsseem
to be able to command $1000s from clubs or fat cats.  Thatshould
be enough to cadge an Internet connection from the local U,too.I
can't see the value in ever trying for transcontinental ham
linksat any speed, when Internet is free and reliable.  (If ham
satellitescan be done "free", I should think Internet
connections could be.)There's a lot of value in long radio links
connecting very remote or non-industrialized areas, but that's
not my focus here.Just some random ideas from an inquiring mind.
 (Maybe the honchosare working on this already?)Martin,
AA6E------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#222******************************------------------------------D
ate: 18 Aug 1992 00:56:17 -0700From:
[e-mail]: (none)To:
[e-mail]: from internet by attmail; Tue Aug
18 06:22 GMT 1992>From UCSD.EDU!packet-radio-relay Sun Aug 16
04:30:03 PDT 1992 remote from internetReceived: by att.att.com;
Tue Aug 18 01:57:53 EDT 1992Received: by ucsd.edu; id
AA13679    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Sun, 16 Aug 92 04:30:06 -0700
for claris!voder!nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sinclair%spi.dnetReceived: by
ucsd.edu; id AA13675    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Sun, 16 Aug 92
04:30:05 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb
-oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay
packet-radio-listMessage-Id: <[e-mail]>Date:
Sun, 16 Aug 92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: internet!ucsd.edu!packet-radio
(Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup)Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
internet!UCSD.Edu!Packet-Radio Precedence: BulkSubject:
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #221To: internet!UCSD.EDU!packet-radio
Packet-Radio Digest         Sun, 16 Aug 92       Volume 92 :
Issue 221Today's Topics:              Callbook Server for
Full-Service BBS calls                data compression with
packet:  legal?                  New packeteer frustration (3
msgs)                 Packet Networks today and tommorrow
              TAPR 9600 baud modem helpSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 15 Aug 92 06:56:01 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!shrike![e-mail]
: Callbook Server for Full-Service BBS callsTo:
[e-mail] wish list is to find an on-line Callbook
server thathas a listing of packet BBS calls by City/State. If
noserver, does anyone have a listing?Sure would be nice to be
able to lookup Austin, Texasand find N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA who
runs a full-service BBS.On more than one ocasion I have wanted
to send a msg toa ham in a city and had no idea of the BBS
callsign.Are you listening ARRL for the next Repeater
Directory?Dick, KD5VUKD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NAOn: 8/15/92
1:55:28 AM CST-----------

-------------------Date: 15 Aug 92 13:43:13 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
ubject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Luck Hurder KY1T) writes:>>>From the ARRL's FCC
Rulebook:>>"Above 50 MHz where data and RTTY emissions are
permitted, >unspecified digital codes may be used in
communication between stations>licensed by the FCC.  Baudot,
AMTOR and ASCII are specified in>the rules, so unspecified
includes everything else..."Let's make sure we aren't talking
apples and oranges here. Baudot andASCII are bit encodings for
*characters*, AMTOR uses the same encodingas Baudot. Meanwhile,
*compression* is done at the *text* level, notthe character
level. For example, I could zip a file and then uuencodethe zip
file. Then the file I would transmit would still be ASCII atthe
character level, but totally different from the original at
thetext level.There are *three* different levels of encoding
that must be considered.The text level, the character level, and
the symbol level. Text levelencoding includes plain text,
compressed text, and encrypted text. Onlythe latter is
restricted. Encryption may be used on certain controllinks in
amateur service, but nowhere else. At the character level,we
have Baudot, ASCII, and unspecified encodings such as EBDIC.
Theunspecified encodings are limited to the data segments above
50 MHz.Finally we have the symbol encoding. This can be NRZ,
NRZI, straightFSK, AFSK, PSK, QPSK, etc. This is what really
determines occupiedbandwidth when taken together with symbol
rate.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug
1992 16:58:55 GMTFrom:
cs.yale.edu![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail] many years of sitting
by the packet sidelines, I've set up a KAMand started decoding
the burps.  As someone who uses the Internetdaily, this has been
an eye-opening experience for me.As someone recently noted ham
packet, as currently practiced, is anadventure in
low-performance communications (but cost-effective).  Yeah,with
incredible patience and luck, I've managed to connect from
Phila-delphia to Maine.  I've seen umpteen users competing for a
single1200 baud port to a PC.  And I note that 10s of kHz of
precious HFspectrum are taken up by very unfriendly robots
chatting at **300 baud**.(They won't give you the time of day,
and the throughput is abysmal.)Now I see there's a big brouhaha
about the ARRL not defending theseterribly inefficient mail
operations to the maximum of its ability.The contrast with the
Internet is incredible.  I can easily transfera megabyte per
minute across the country, and I am somewhat annoyedI can't do
better.  I can send dozens of e-mail messages around theworld
and often get replies in minutes.  But you all know that.My
question here is where does one go for information about
digitalham networking plans - especially the (very logical) use
of Internetlinks for long haul?  It's not in QST, I think.
:-)Until I get better adjusted to VHF packet, you'll probably
find meon 20 m AMTOR.  There's a friendly medium!  Not much good
for downloadingsoftware, however.Cheers and 73s, Martin,
AA6E------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 20:45:31
GMTFrom: csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]: New
packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail] also recently
purchased a BayPac unit to connect my computer and myhandheld to
try packet. My impression is that packet is just toooo slowfor
me. I can connect to Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec.
Thismakes packet seem rather useless to me at the moment,
although I wouldhappily be educated about useful applications of
packet.-- Dave Feustel N9MYI <[e-mail]>---Given Civil
Seizure, from the DEA's point of view, winning the War onDrugs
would be killing the Goose that lays golden eggs.It's also hard
to tell which group is up to more no-good: cops
orcrooks.------------------------------Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992
04:20:10 GMTFrom: world![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail]@netcom.com (David
Feustel) writes:>I also recently purchased a BayPac unit to
connect my computer and my>handheld to try packet. My impression
is that packet is just toooo slow>for me. I can connect to
Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec. This>makes packet seem
rather useless to me at the moment, although I would>happily be
educated about useful applications of packet.>-- >Dave Feustel
N9MYI <[e-mail]>>--->Given Civil Seizure, from the
DEA's point of view, winning the War on>Drugs would be killing
the Goose that lays golden eggs.>It's also hard to tell which
group is up to more no-good: cops or>crooks.Make that three
votes for a big Question Mark concerning packet.I, too, just
received a BAYMOD-9 from PaccCom.  At 60 bucks it seemed likea
cheap way to see what all the broo ha ha was all about.  Well,
afterspending two nights here in the Boston area seeing the
sameinformation, messages and mail going back and forth at 1200
baud, I'mnot sure what the big deal is, either.  Sign me...
another kid spoiled by the Internet!73...  KA2TMT       Rich
G.-- Richard D. GoldsteinSchiller & KusmerPatent Attorneys At
Law(617) 227-5454 Telephone------------------------------Date:
Sat, 15 Aug 92 16:59:17 GMTFrom:
das.wang.com!wang![e-mail]: Packet Networks
today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail]@chicago.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
writes:>[...]>I see no reason to deprecate a long-haul linking
technology just>because it's not radio. Hams ought to take a
"systems integration">approach to networking and be as flexible
as possible in using>whatever is available to get the job done.
[...]I agree.  Look at what happened to the railroads during
this century.They should have known that they were in the
*transportation* business,not just the train business.  The
airlines dominate the transportationbusiness now.  Railroads are
good for hauling freight (I know, oversimpli-fication).Hams are
in the communications (non-)business.  Read section 97.1.We have
these precious frequency allocations because (among otherthings)
we push the state of the art, and not just by radio.  Youwill
never advance in any area unless you see the big picture.73,
Dave  KZ1O-- Dave Bushong, [e-mail] Laboratories,
Inc.Internet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug
92 03:50:50 GMTFrom:
usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!skyld!jangus@net
work.UCSD.EDUSubject: TAPR 9600 baud modem helpTo:
[e-mail], it took a few days of banging my head
against the wall, but I did getthe TAPR 9600 baud modem working
with the MFJ-1270b TNC. (Note while I waswaiting for the ringing
in my head to stop, I accidentally read the manual.)I am now
trying to get same said modem to work with the PacComm Tiny-2
TNC.I did the same 'cut jumpers' on the 20 pin header that I did
on the 1270 butthe PacComm Tiny-2 seems to insist on being a
different bird.Anyone out there already do this? Also, if you've
'married' this modem withother TNC's such as the PK-87/88 or the
DRSI cards please email some notesfor those mods as well. I try
to maintain a library of hardware connections.Thanks,
73xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space left blank intentionally. >J
Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA 90749-4425 voice (310)
324-6080------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92
#221******************************------------------------------D
ate: 18 Aug 1992 00:57:34 -0700From:
[e-mail]: (none)To:
[e-mail]: from internet by attmail; Tue Aug
18 06:22 GMT 1992>From UCSD.EDU!packet-radio-relay Sun Aug 16
04:30:03 PDT 1992 remote from internetReceived: by att.att.com;
Tue Aug 18 01:57:53 EDT 1992Received: by ucsd.edu; id
AA13679    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Sun, 16 Aug 92 04:30:06 -0700
for claris!voder!nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sinclair%spi.dnetReceived: by
ucsd.edu; id AA13675    sendmail 5.67/UCSD-2.2-sun    Sun, 16 Aug 92
04:30:05 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb
-oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radio-relay
packet-radio-listMessage-Id: <[e-mail]>Date:
Sun, 16 Aug 92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: internet!ucsd.edu!packet-radio
(Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup)Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
internet!UCSD.Edu!Packet-Radio Precedence: BulkSubject:
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #221To: internet!UCSD.EDU!packet-radio
Packet-Radio Digest         Sun, 16 Aug 92       Volume 92 :
Issue 221Today's Topics:              Callbook Server for
Full-Service BBS calls                data compression with
packet:  legal?                  New packeteer frustration (3
msgs)                 Packet Networks today and tommorrow
              TAPR 9600 baud modem helpSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 15 Aug 92 06:56:01 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!shrike![e-mail]
: Callbook Server for Full-Service BBS callsTo:
[e-mail] wish list is to find an on-line Callbook
server thathas a listing of packet BBS calls by City/State. If
noserver, does anyone have a listing?Sure would be nice to be
able to lookup Austin, Texasand find N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NA who
runs a full-service BBS.On more than one ocasion I have wanted
to send a msg toa ham in a city and had no idea of the BBS
callsign.Are you listening ARRL for the next Repeater
Directory?Dick, KD5VUKD5VU @ N5LJF.#AUS.TX.USA.NAOn: 8/15/92
1:55:28 AM CST------------------------------Date: 15 Aug 92
13:43:13 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]
ubject: data compression with packet:  legal?To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Luck Hurder KY1T) writes:>>>From the ARRL's FCC
Rulebook:>>"Above 50 MHz where data and RTTY emissions are
permitted, >unspecified digital codes may be used in
communication between stations>licensed by the FCC.  Baudot,
AMTOR and ASCII are specified in>the rules, so unspecified
includes everything else..."Let's make sure we aren't talking
apples and oranges here. Baudot andASCII are bit encodings for
*characters*, AMTOR uses the same encodingas Baudot. Meanwhile,
*compression* is done at the *text* level, notthe character
level. For example, I could zip a file and then uuencodethe zip
file. Then the file I would transmit would still be ASCII atthe
character level, but totally different from the original at
thetext level.There are *three* different levels of encoding
that must be considered.The text level, the character level, and
the symbol level. Text levelencoding includes plain text,
compressed text, and encrypted text. Onlythe latter is
restricted. Encryption may be used on certain controllinks in
amateur service, but nowhere else. At the character level,we
have Baudot, ASCII, and unspecified encodings such as EBDIC.
Theunspecified encodings are limited to the data segments above
50 MHz.Finally we have the symbol encoding. This can be NRZ,
NRZI, straightFSK, AFSK, PSK, QPSK, etc. This is what really
determines occupiedbandwidth when taken together with symbol
rate.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug
1992 16:58:55 GMTFrom:
cs.yale.edu![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail] many years of sitting
by the packet sidelines, I've set up a KAMand started decoding
the burps.  As someone who uses the Internetdaily, this has been
an eye-opening experience for me.As someone recently noted ham
packet, as currently practiced, is anadventure in
low-performance communications (but cost-effective).  Yeah,with
incredible patience and luck, I've managed to connect from
Phila-delphia to Maine.  I've seen umpteen users competing for a
single1200 baud port to a PC.  And I note that 10s of kHz of
precious HFspectrum are taken up by very unfriendly robots
chatting at **300 baud**.(They won't give you the time of day,
and the throughput is abysmal.)Now I see there's a big brouhaha
about the ARRL not defending theseterribly inefficient mail
operations to the maximum of its ability.The contrast with the
Internet is incredible.  I can easily transfera megabyte per
minute across the country, and I am somewhat annoyedI can't do
better.  I can send dozens of e-mail messages around theworld
and often get replies in minutes.  But you all know that.My
question here is where does one go for information about
digitalham networking plans - especially the (very logical) use
of Internetlinks for long haul?  It's not in QST, I think.
:-)Until I get better adjusted to VHF packet, you'll probably
find meon 20 m AMTOR.  There's a friendly medium!  Not much good
for downloadingsoftware, however.Cheers and 73s, Martin,
AA6E------------------------------Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 20:45:31
GMTFrom: csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]: New
packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail] also recently
purchased a BayPac unit to connect my computer and myhandheld to
try packet. My impression is that packet is just toooo slowfor
me. I can connect to Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec.
Thismakes packet seem rather useless to me at the moment,
although I wouldhappily be educated about useful applications of
packet.-- Dave Feustel N9MYI <[e-mail]>---Given Civil
Seizure, from the DEA's point of view, winning the War onDrugs
would be killing the Goose that lays golden eggs.It's also hard
to tell which group is up to more no-good: cops
orcrooks.------------------------------Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992
04:20:10 GMTFrom: world![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail]@netcom.com (David
Feustel) writes:>I also recently purchased a BayPac unit to
connect my computer and my>handheld to try packet. My impression
is that packet is just toooo slow>for me. I can connect to
Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec. This>makes packet seem
rather useless to me at the moment, although I would>happily be
educated about useful applications of packet.>-- >Dave Feustel
N9MYI <[e-mail]>>--->Given Civil Seizure, from the
DEA's point of view, winning the War on>Drugs would be killing
the Goose that lays golden eggs.>It's also hard to tell which
group is up to more no-good: cops or>crooks.Make that three
votes for a big Question Mark concerning packet.I, too, just
received a BAYMOD-9 from PaccCom.  At 60 bucks it seemed likea
cheap way to see what all the broo ha ha was all about.  Well,
afterspending two nights here in the Boston area seeing the
sameinformation, messages and mail going back and forth at 1200
baud, I'mnot sure what the big deal is, either.  Sign me...
another kid spoiled by the Internet!73...  KA2TMT       Rich
G.-- Richard D. GoldsteinSchiller & KusmerPatent Attorneys At
Law(617) 227-5454 Telephone------------------------------Date:
Sat, 15 Aug 92 16:59:17 GMTFrom:
das.wang.com!wang![e-mail]: Packet Networks
today and tommorrowTo:
[e-mail]@chicago.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
writes:>[...]>I see no reason to deprecate a long-haul linking
technology just>because it's not radio. Hams ought to take a
"systems integration">approach to networking and be as flexible
as possible in using>whatever is available to get the job done.
[...]I agree.  Look at what happened to the railroads during
this century.They should have known that they were in the
*transportation* business,not just the train business.  The
airlines dominate the transportationbusiness now.  Railroads are
good for hauling freight (I know, oversimpli-fication).Hams are
in the communications (non-)business.  Read section 97.1.We have
these precious frequency allocations because (among otherthings)
we push the state of the art, and not just by radio.  Youwill
never advance in any area unless you see the big picture.73,
Dave  KZ1O-- Dave Bushong, [e-mail] Laboratories,
Inc.Internet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Fri, 14 Aug
92 03:50:50 GMTFrom:
usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!skyld!jangus@net
work.UCSD.EDUSubject: TAPR 9600 baud modem helpTo:
[e-mail], it took a few days of banging my head
against the wall, but I did getthe TAPR 9600 baud modem working
with the MFJ-1270b TNC. (Note while I waswaiting for the ringing
in my head to stop, I accidentally read the manual.)I am now
trying to get same said modem to work with the PacComm Tiny-2
TNC.I did the same 'cut jumpers' on the 20 pin header that I did
on the 1270 butthe PacComm Tiny-2 seems to insist on being a
different bird.Anyone out there already do this? Also, if you've
'married' this modem withother TNC's such as the PK-87/88 or the
DRSI cards please email some notesfor those mods as well. I try
to maintain a library of hardware connections.Thanks,
73xenon!skyld!jangus   < This space left blank intentionally. >J
Angus, PO Box 4425, Carson CA 90749-4425 voice (310)
324-6080------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92
#221******************************------------------------------D
ate: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 22:22:14 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!bt
[e-mail]: A&A Packet modem kits?To:
[e-mail] recently came across A&A Baycom packet
modem kits in an ad in WorldRadio.Has anybody had any experience
with these kits?  I am really tempted to buyone at the $60
price.  Do the kits come with explicit instructions for wiring
the kit to common HT's and radios?I would also appreciate
comparisons of the A&A kits to those sold by Ramsey.  (I don't
want to hear simply that a "Baycom kit is just a Baycomkit."
Please make specific comments.)Thanks.73 de kb8cne, Brad Banko--
Brad Banko;  Dept of Physics;  U of Illinois;  [e-mail],
KB8CNE===========================================================
==============TI NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OF CHOCOLATE
CONFECTIONERY AND THE   SPATIAL DETECTION OF POLYMORPHIC STATES
OF COCOA BUTTER IN CHOCOLATE------------------------------Date:
17 Aug 92 10:32:05 EDTFrom:
psinntp![e-mail]: data compression with
packet:  legal?To: [e-mail]
rec.radio.amateur.misc, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
writes:>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Luck Hurder
KY1T) writes:>>>>>>From the ARRL's FCC Rulebook:>>>>"Above 50
MHz where data and RTTY emissions are permitted, >>unspecified
digital codes may be used in communication between
stations>>licensed by the FCC.  Baudot, AMTOR and ASCII are
specified in>>the rules, so unspecified includes everything
else...">>Let's make sure we aren't talking apples and oranges
here. Baudot and>ASCII are bit encodings for *characters*, AMTOR
uses the same encoding>as Baudot.Well, not really.  True, the
7-bit AMTOR code maps one-for-one to Baudot,but it's a different
code.  If you doubt it, try transmitting a SELCALusing the 5-bit
code and see how many stations link up to you!  (Granted,a
nit.)>Meanwhile, *compression* is done at the *text* level,
not>the character level. For example, I could zip a file and
then uuencode>the zip file. Then the file I would transmit would
still be ASCII at>the character level, but totally different
from the original at the>text level.Which goes to show the
idiocy of the existing regulations.-------Jon Bloom, KE3Z
           |  [e-mail] Radio Relay League
|225 Main St.                      |Newington, CT 06111
     |------------------------------Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992
19:39:26 GMTFrom: infonode![e-mail]: Digicom
C-64: Anyone still using it?To: [e-mail] couple of
years ago I wrote an article in 73 on connecting a Digicommmodem
to a Commodore SX-64.  At that time,  I think we were up to v.
2.10.At a hamfest this weekend I ran across v. 4.10.  I haven't
been activeon packet in a while.  Is this the latest/greatest
version of Digicomm?Does anybody still use Digicomm 64?Thanks, -
Ted Drude KA9ELV
([e-mail])------------------------------Date:
Mon, 17 Aug 1992 15:18:06 GMTFrom:
spsgate!mogate!newsgate![e-mail]: Hostmaster
vs Ka-Gold...comments?To: [e-mail] anyone have
any comments regarding Hostmaster vs Ka-Gold for a KAM? Some
friends of mine have Hostmaster and it seems fairly slick. I've
seen  ads for Ka-Gold but don't know anyone who has used it. Any
comments on thedifferences/similarities/which-is-better will be
appreciated.Thanks & 73.....   Mark
KG7JL------------------------------Date: 17 Aug 92 22:06:44
GMTFrom:
olivea!isc-br!tau-ceti!comtch!iea![e-mail]:
Hostmaster vs Ka-Gold...comments?To: [e-mail] MM>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.packet MM> Reply-To:
[e-mail] MM> Does anyone have any comments
regarding Hostmaster vs Ka-Gold for a KAM? Well I have used
both.  There is a lot of difference in the two pieces
ofsoftware, but each does do similar things.  The KaGold is a
very nifty piece ofsoftware.  I am reviewing it in the next
issue of the RTTY Digital Journal andhave previously reviewed
the HostMaster II.  There is a test drive of the KAgold which is
available I would try it before Ipurchased it.  The KaGold so
far seems to win the race.  Its fabulous on Packetand works
quite well in the other modes.  Has some very nice features. I
thinkthe HostMaster's screen is easier to configure.KaGold does
things quite different from traditional amateur software, it
hasconferences, file transfers and lots of bells and whistles.
Hostmaster IIseems to do most things fine.  Both are examples of
pretty good software in myopinion and each harness' the power of
the KAM.Each also still has some minor bugs in the software.
Gosh they hate it when Ipoint those out :-)  But each appears to
still be in dynamic change.  I thinkthat some of the features in
HostMaster II grew out of things in KaGold, whichis a nice
competitive spirit.73, Jay Ws7i * Origin: Radio Therapy BBS
(1:346/3)------------------------------Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992
11:29:09 GMTFrom:
usc!wupost!darwin.sura.net!Sirius.dfn.de!chx400!bernina!neptune!c
[e-mail]: KISS and TCP/IPTo:
[e-mail] people,I'm interesting in building a
small packet modem. The problem is byTCP/IP : I need the KISS
protocol. Does exist a piece of software that implements KISS
such that it wouldpossible for me to use the TCP/IP protocol?I
don't see another way to solve my problem :-(Thanks for any
help.73 de Cedric------------------------------Date: Mon, 17 Aug
1992 13:38:11 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!nic.umass.edu!hamp.hampshire.edu!awoodhull@networ
k.UCSD.EDUSubject: New packeteer frustrationTo:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (David Feustel)    writes:> ...My impression
is that packet is just toooo slow> for me. I can connect to
Australia via ftp at kilobytes/sec. This> makes packet seem
rather useless to me at the moment, Packet certainly isn't the
Internet, but a lot of people in othercountries, or for that
matter, young people, people with non-technicalprofessions and
many others in the developed world *do* have access toham
radio.Those of us with some experience have seen a lot of
progress... When Ifirst got into  ham radio I made many
interesting (to me) contacts with5 words/minute Morse, and by
the time I got up to 20 words/minute Irealized it was true that,
given all the abbreviations possible withMorse (the equivalent
of modern digital compression techniques?) andall the
non-informative  time-wasting words that are heard in the
usualvoice radio contact, it was true what the old-timers said,
that Morsecan be a satisfying way of carrying on a conversation
and transmittinguseful information.My first on-line experiences
were with a 110 baud modem. It hurts now when I have to use 1200
instead of 2400 baud to connect to somesystems, but back then
110 baud opened  up wonderful possibilities foraccess to
powerfal facilities,  file transfer, and e-mail.My first
computer had 256 bytes of available memory which could
beprogrammed only by switches that entered data in binary. I
would*never* go back to such a system, but at the time it
presented anenormous range of interesting, and, yes, even useful
possibilities.At a later stage that computer used cassette tape
at 2400 baud for massstorage. It seemed OK at the time, but when
I got a floppy disk I neverwanted to go back. When I got a hard
disk I never wanted to usefloppies again.  My Apple seemed
pretty fast before I saw an XT, andthat seemed  fast enough
until I got my 486...The point I want to make is that at each
level there are useful thingsthat can be done. Let's not
discourage those who don't have Internetaccess by denigrating
packet radio. Packet is still useful for manypurposes. Just as
with the comparison I made between efficient Morse and
sloppyvoice communication, it is worth keeping in mind that
wider bandwidthand faster hardware doesn't always get the job
done better.  When Igraduated from a 256 byte to a 16 Kbyte
computer it allowed me to writeprograms in BASIC rather than
setting bits, but the programs actually executed more slowly.
Much of the power of today's PCs and Macs is usedto create
easy-to-use graphic interfaces, but the programs that run
inthese environments are slowed because so many resources are
being usedto provide user convenience.73 de Al Woodhull
[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 17 Aug 92 10:36:36 EDTFrom:
psinntp![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail] rec.radio.amateur.misc,
[e-mail] (Martin Ewing) writes:>After many years
of sitting by the packet sidelines, I've set up a KAM>and
started decoding the burps.  As someone who uses the
Internet>daily, this has been an eye-opening experience for me.
 [deleted]>The contrast with the Internet is incredible.  I can
easily transfer>a megabyte per minute across the country, and I
am somewhat annoyed>I can't do better.  I can send dozens of
e-mail messages around the>world and often get replies in
minutes.  But you all know that.Why are you surprised that hams
have been unable to duplicate a networkthat cost millions to
install and maintain?  Having said that, weshould be doing a
*lot* better than we are.>My question here is where does one go
for information about digital>ham networking plans - especially
the (very logical) use of Internet>links for long haul?  It's
not in QST, I think. :-)One place to look is the proceedings of
the Computer NetworkingConferences.  These have been held
annually for 10 years, and most ofthe "movers and shakers" of
packet have published papers.-------Jon Bloom, KE3Z
     |  [e-mail] Radio Relay League       |225
Main St.                      |Newington, CT 06111
|------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 00:20:27 GMTFrom:
autodesk![e-mail]: New packeteer frustrationTo:
[e-mail][e-mail] (Martin Ewing)
writes:> > Until I get better adjusted to VHF packet, you'll
probably find me> on 20 m AMTOR.  There's a friendly medium!
Not much good for downloading> software, however.Apologies if
this is a stupid question, but I've read through theHandbook and
the Operating Manual, and can't find a clear answer:How do I
call CQ (or listen for and answer one) on HF Amtor?I hear lots
of very clear signals, that I can LISten to, but I'venever seen
a CQ or one being answered. I've got an MFJ 1278 andseveral
varieties of terminal programs from XTALK to LANLINK2.0,but I
can't for the life of me figure out how to
start!Thanks!,------------------------------Date: 17 Aug 92
12:50:34 GMTFrom:
swrinde!emory!rsiatl!ke4zv![e-mail]: New
packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Martin Ewing) writes:>After many years of sitting by the packet
sidelines, I've set up a KAM>and started decoding the burps.  As
someone who uses the Internet>daily, this has been an
eye-opening experience for me.>>As someone recently noted ham
packet, as currently practiced, is an>adventure in
low-performance communications (but cost-effective).  Yeah,>with
incredible patience and luck, I've managed to connect from
Phila->delphia to Maine.  I've seen umpteen users competing for
a single>1200 baud port to a PC.  And I note that 10s of kHz of
precious HF>spectrum are taken up by very unfriendly robots
chatting at **300 baud**.>(They won't give you the time of day,
and the throughput is abysmal.)>Now I see there's a big brouhaha
about the ARRL not defending these>terribly inefficient mail
operations to the maximum of its ability.>>The contrast with the
Internet is incredible.  I can easily transfer>a megabyte per
minute across the country, and I am somewhat annoyed>I can't do
better.  I can send dozens of e-mail messages around the>world
and often get replies in minutes.  But you all know that.>>My
question here is where does one go for information about
digital>ham networking plans - especially the (very logical) use
of Internet>links for long haul?  It's not in QST, I think.
:-)>>Until I get better adjusted to VHF packet, you'll probably
find me>on 20 m AMTOR.  There's a friendly medium!  Not much
good for downloading>software, however.Well 300 baud does seem
slow to someone who uses the government'smulti-million dollar
internet. However, 300 baud was hot stuff ontelephone lines 15
years ago. And unfortunately it's as fast as theFCC will allow
on HF right now. There's no *technical* stopper preventingfaster
operation. It wouldn't use 200 Hz shift FSK however. If you
wantto talk about slow, the 45.5 baud AMTOR is slow, and can't
even handlea full character set. It's persistent in the face of
errors however, asis packet.Today, the only practical use of HF
is for robotic forwarding of Email.The performance is too low
for any other use. The robot has greaterpatience than humans and
will continue to try until the error freetransmission is
successful. This is "good enough" for the volume ofmail
currently in the system. It's not "good enough" for the
variousother proposed uses of packet.There are techniques on the
horizon that would dramatically improveHF thruput. Clover and
Piccolo use multiple carriers to transmitbits in parallel. That
speeds thruput while keeping individual symboltimes long enough
to prevent fading and noise bursts from corruptingthem. Spread
spectrum is another technique that promises high thruputin the
face of noise and interference. Direct FSK symbol encoding is
second only to AFSK in being spectrallyinefficient and error
prone on a HF channel. PSK methods availabletoday can push 9600
baud over good HF channels. But the rules preventit.The VHF/UHF
systems *can* be much faster. We use 56 kilobaud linksin our
network. But as KA9Q and I have been discussing, multiplehops
run into problems of long delay times. The AX25 protocol isnot
well suited to dealing with this without a supervisory
transportprotocol and considerable RAM buffering in the various
switches.IMHO, outside the local area, packet is useful only as
a forwardingmedium controlled by automatic equipment with the
patience to dealwith the large delays present in the system. The
kind of speed andinteractivity associated with the internet
requires high speed landlinesand intelligent routing and
buffering. All of that costs a lot of money,and amateurs haven't
shown an interest in setting up multi-milliondollar dedicated
linking systems of comparable performance.Combination systems
that use the internet for long haul transportexist, but they
really contravene the spirit of amateur networking.Riding as
they do on leased lines owned by government and industry,they
don't form an *alternative* communications network capable
ofhelping out in an emergency when the landlines are down. If
usinggovernment leased lines is the only way we can do high
performancenetworking as radio amateurs, then I think we
shouldn't bothertrying to do high performance networks. The
government has alreadyshown that they can build and support
landline based high performancenetworks. If we go that route,
then we're the same as a DXer tryingto claim credit for a
contact he made via AT&T.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 17 Aug 92 12:55:00
GMTFrom:
csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!micromed!gate!michael.solinas@decwrl
.dec.comSubject: Standard C528A ModsTo: [e-mail]
have heard that someone has worked out mods for the Standard
C528Ahandheld.  Does anyone here have a copy that they could
send me?  I'minteresting in opening up the receive range.

------------------------------Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 18:33:38
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!mips!darwin.sura.net!cs.ucf.edu!tarpit!fang!att!cbnews
c![e-mail]: What AOR radio similar to Icom
R1?To: [e-mail],I went to Ham Radio Outlet in
Atlanta in the weekend.  Thesalesman told me that there is a
radio made by AOR which has all the Icom R1 coverage (.1 - 1000
Mhz) plus SSBcapability.  But the salesman could not remember
the model number.Does anyone know what is that radio
name?Thanks,James------------------------------Date: 17 Aug 92
20:50:40 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!cs.ucf.edu!tarpit!fang!att!cbnewsc!r
[e-mail]: What AOR radio similar to Icom
R1?To: [e-mail]|I went to Ham Radio Outlet in
Atlanta in the weekend.  The|salesman told me that there is a
radio made by AOR |which has all the Icom R1 coverage (.1 - 1000
Mhz) plus SSB|capability.  But the salesman could not remember
the model number.This is the AOR AR-1500, apparently sold in the
Asian and European/UKmarketplace, but not as of yet the USA.Why
don't you contact ACE and see if they have any target date
forimport into the USA?------------------------------Date: 17
Aug 92 12:27:09 -0600From:
usc!wupost!ukma!nntp.msstate.edu!memstvx1![e-mail]
USubject: Wormhole Info WantedTo: [e-mail] am
trying to get some info on setting up a Internet-to-Packet
wormhole from Memphis, TN to the rest of the world. If any body
has any infoon setting up a Gateway please send me a mail
message.I also would like to have a list of sites that are
connected to packetvia a gateway.Thanks in advance.Suresh
N9GSA------------------------------Date: 17 Aug 92 18:36:12
GMTFrom: das.wang.com!wang!tegra![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>1Subject : Re: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:   >>Our best national and international WAN
technology is 300 baud HF BBS   >>forwarding. It's thruput is
about 15 bytes/second. It's suitable for   >>Email.   >You left
out the Internet backbone links, sometimes referred to as
>"wormholes". There are quite a few regional TCP/IP networks
that are   I left these out because they aren't amateur radio.
They work, and   as long as the commercial and institutional
networks tolerate them,   they are useful, but they aren't
amateur radio. We could just abandon   packet *radio* and all
run Fidonet landline BBSs, but that wouldn't   be amateur
*radio* either. The thruput would be better though.   For
communications *systems* use, the wirelines are superior to
radio in ordinary day to day long haul service. But we're
supposed    to be *radio* amateurs, and the data is secondary to
the medium in    our case. I know that's a limited way of
looking at things, but    amateur packet radio is a limited form
of communications. After   all, if communications efficiency
were our only goal, we'd make   long distance phone calls
instead of cluttering 20 meters with   kilowatt DXers.What!?
Next you'll be telling us it's only a hobby and we should have
fun.jv"There are only two mistakes one can make along the road
to truth: notgoing all the way and not starting." -- Buddha
_____|     | Johnathan Vail     [e-mail]     (508)
663-7435|Tegra| [e-mail]    N1DXG@448.625-(WorldNet)
-----  MEMBER: League for Programming Freedom
([e-mail])------------------------------Date: 17
Aug 92 23:35:38 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!carbon!news.cs.indiana.edu!syscon!gator!fang!att!cbn
ewsl!cbnewsm![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>@Subject : Re: New
packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:>In article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David Feustel)
>   writes:>>> ...My impression is that packet is just toooo
slow>> for me. I can connect to Australia via ftp at
kilobytes/sec. This>> makes packet seem rather useless to me at
the moment, >>At a later stage that computer used cassette tape
at 2400 baud for mass>storage. It seemed OK at the time, but
when I got a floppy disk I never>wanted to go back. When I got a
hard disk I never wanted to use>floppies again.  My Apple seemed
pretty fast before I saw an XT, and>that seemed  fast enough
until I got my 486...>>The point I want to make is that at each
level there are useful things>that can be done. Let's not
discourage those who don't have Internet>access by denigrating
packet radio. Packet is still useful for many>purposes. When I
first heard that packet radio was only 1200 baud I was
takenaback! However the first thing I saw were ads saying that
you could upgradeyour packet modem to 2400 baud. As the prices
of packet modems start dropping down to resonable levels you
will see higher speed modems becoming more common. In the next 5
years 9600 will be close to the normand not 1200 baud. Packet
radio reminds me of the first years of computercommunications.
Overpriced slow speed modems, no real standards etc...Right now
here in the Bay Area there is just now a 9600 baud link beingput
in to speed mail forwarding through the Bay Area. For some
reason1200 baud is the standard and not 2400 baud. 1200 baud was
dropped as astandard years ago in the computer world. Is there
any reason why 2400baud is not the standard now?  Part of the
problem is none of the companiesare selling a 2400 baud TNC for
close to the same price as a 1200 baud.The 2400 baud chip set
has been out there for quite a while so it isn'tlike it's brand
new technology. Interesting question here, is ham
radiotechnology driven at all? Jeff--  Jeff Jones  AB6MB
|      If we do not succeed, [e-mail]   |
then we run the risk of failure. Infolinc BBS 415-778-5929 |
 Vice Pres. Dan Quayle------------------------------End of
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #223******************************Date:
Wed, 19 Aug 92 04:30:01 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #224To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Wed,
19 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 224Today's Topics:
       APLink and RTTY MBOs (2 msgs)                      BPQ
code in a diode matrix                           DRSI-card
wanted                     ESTIMATE program: here it is
  HK-21 - Does anybody have code for KISS mode??
    KA9q with slip and ethernet                       NEED
HELP-TR751A to KAM                  New packeteer frustration (2
msgs)             Packet Networks today and tommorrow (2 msgs)
                    Packet Radio Satellites
Ramsey Packet Garbage Modem ... $70            Seeking opinion
on HTs, multimode controllersSend Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 18 Aug 92 12:12:37 GMTFrom:
psinntp![e-mail]: APLink and RTTY MBOsTo:
[e-mail] anyone have (or know a source for) the
latest list of APLinkstations *and* RTTY MBOs? Thanks...73,
Steve, WB8IMYARRL------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug
92 11:10:32 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!us
enet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu![e-mail]
ject: APLink and RTTY MBOsTo: [e-mail] ....
For a source of APLINK or RTTY programs you might try anyoneon
the ARRL Digital Committee.73,Steve, NO8M--
------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 1992 10:30:39
-0700From: [e-mail]: BPQ code in a
diode matrixTo: [e-mail] would be interested in
hearing from anyone that really has thesolid scoop on how to
implement hardware handshaking on a PC running4.05 BPQ with a
"Netrom" type diode matrix using 3 or 4 other TNC-2's.The BPQ
documentation implies to me that CTS and RTS be wired
togeatherat the PC end, and that CD is used to inhibit BPQ
serial port transmissionwhile the RTS line is used to tell the
matrix that the BPQ node istransmitting.I could not seem to get
this to work correctly, and I could find nothingcoming out of a
diode matrix that would work properly when hooked to theCD line
on the BPQ serial port.  The matrix is using CTS and DTR fromthe
other tnc's, as described in the various TheNet and NetRom
descriptionsand works perfectly.If any reader really understands
exactly how this is supposed to be hookedup, I'd sure appreciate
being able to talk to them.Mark
[e-mail] [packet
radio][e-mail]
[internet]------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92
08:07:16 GMTFrom:
usc!wupost!darwin.sura.net!Sirius.dfn.de!th-ilmenau.RZ.TH-Ilmenau
.DE!server.systemtechnik.th-ilmenau.de![e-mail]
t: DRSI-card wantedTo: [e-mail],I'm looking
for DRSI-card because a PacketCluster (first in former East
Germany) will be build up. If anybody want to sell one (also
already used card) which workes still you wouldhelp our group to
install this Cluster quicker. The card we hoped to use
wasdemaged unfortunatly last week by rain and following
pc-crash. I hope for your PMand a good price.73 Thomas , Y32JK--
.----------------------------------------------------------------
------------.| Thomas Planke
[e-mail]
||---------------------------------------------------------------
-------------|| Technical University Ilmenau
Phone: [phone],-1420|| Fakultaet Informatik und
Automatisierung      Fax:   [phone]         || Institut
Automatisierungs- und Systemtechnik
 || P.O.Box 327,D-O6300 Ilmenau,Germany
              ||
(PacketRadio:[e-mail])|.----------------------------
------------------------------------------------.----------------
--------------Date: 19 Aug 92 02:58:15 GMTFrom:
usc!rpi!bu.edu!wang![e-mail]: ESTIMATE
program: here it isTo: [e-mail] is the
uuencoded ESTIMATE program that lets you tinker withyour TNC's
parameters without going on the air to do so.Contact the author
(for the time being, gawd, I hope so) [e-mail]
777 estimate.zipM4$L#! H      /V(=Q9ITB44WC\  -X_   ,
15-424U!5$4N15A%35K>M 2     " ,<"__^"!H     . .8#'
$Q:.3']_P#_^ XQP%!0Z"8N@\0$MZ&/__R[#@SX> @A^
<.AJACW+JQ_&!@QR='@T=%1WXPRA__?BQ[CT>.)AT0AM"<!_^'4#Z%$JN,@ Y>
R1$0P
J'52%#,^SD<L=C\_[?8Z'<P'L+("NB"+\]TM^8WCPR_H>/9U]O\&W^LT#)N4
'64_PXFA_B_^!AFO_#X"O4QDO\_PU6)Y8/LM"E97BT8(0"M&_+]H3@I!*TX&]^F)Q
XGXX_]-_]DQ38E&]HO/3PG)=/__%8OWMT>8#\*$@ HD$@\;^BP
1Q^MW\;_P_X[!25&+5@1*4HM>!@__2U/_=O;*^(E.M^HE6_!]QB5[^Z.0O?NOH>H0
PA<_XT$;ZQD_\_/S^4+@/ ..?3NA:60Q?7HOEM7<,.P^WHB"W4N!7WN!CC3?P'_
/K1W",_]L(N"'R!N-A\K(L8+@B O8U+\2?MT^VY"
!1Z)MC8^DPZ1[I_@GIA(X)Z6?I!^D@YNWI"NEMZ;ACI>GP+NG\N
NDM5HZ)Z>;IV>EB0[L,TC^-_
/IPF..Z?X.Z2CI3(TYZ:OI_A#I$>E[-D[IE.G^M$>GZ*[%CZ;WI?>G]N!*-XQY2Z0
 $]F;I;DPQ[5WW'. 4YACSP^ <X$;=;>G:M]&(LVO
2(?[:\B+:]8R.-<DVR0][_MKR=<>:Z4+I^);RVO9>8\WI@^GAZ?[:M\D>Q,>G%Z<K
I_@OI, _)Z00%Z;/IQ_$QQ[@-C1GI+.D"Y)S2_E/2
NG8<6/IMA>G]N!#2ZRJ*J>F>Z6[I'SFF\?74Z>#I5^F88OKW3O?_]T4:4O<"!O<\]
PY,MS?<S]QK6]9DQ^L40Z1SI$^I6N"A__P")QO]V!NC:^_&)P='IB?
=)BO!1NE&M!/OH:=#J=N/ML?%>7>+D7N+A?A3\'=_1X G_=
N1\_,J=AS@ZPF7\NCH]8M>M_C_CXXN'Q"
[1@9U'XN/V#S<]TX(=1;W["!)P.$<]Q)Y(-,M* ?J!#LA+ 8HMV 2R=7W)Y.
4RH/L*=K>\WO:!]H*B4:B$^$2N,0<_NWT)^W_3J*#?J*/$0!UM[KC=[N+NZ2S",Q+
H#3,U_B5\LIZR4 /H.RJ*1]X;+N@V*NZ@"$D^,4G_,.@0MN"H&4(U&IO ^'+3"T
:P_[W1\>/V[HWO;TZF4>BJ[?@+1J2#P/Y0UO(VXNF8MOKDK;Q
K$?]&#$=!Z!@9Z'D:/\3H@AE04U%2\
[G(83H!>UF[6_Z_2$(%NK\MHNCR&.A3[5S\.^TY%^A*&HE6^)?:3@CD_X])Q[C@/Y
F)T8G3XRWH_Q.U60/(ME/.)IO.Z ("IVK,HKM(*2^?F_HE\\3N'V"
:C:-+*?+I'O>T)O?1ZU'R.>Y^M\:,H!IS<'?,"0X?H/"J)_I+Q NLM;_\P*@4
>3_!./2!+DB /?A?PB)PXVWMR@"+#/K,(83Z%/K.^CSZ$(;2^@3ZU
"_%,/\]];W_O>#?_U^! -T'C'V5B/;M&]K_M]  \>%74DL$Z*;]3A+K"@ R$=FE^
GAQ@!P_+G\K[D! $  V*'\EP!*M_(W,<CJ8S$SX"FCX.Q^^GV?X%
T'-V<SN.%F^"K8_&;_5O[_#^C'_D1$1H/^M"G+T_S:#]D(AZ*"TX5K<O$SIZ.6.[?
CDVKA._
COV3KOV7AV6_E7VCMNW>,FM]^(O2N%F0?(RQ^ENVLSI/.F:8T_I_F[:M>E,Z3C-,>
G]2-.>Z5;I(?Z>Z>@7M_NC9^,?T0%97XX9S+W.X2HO)R;L<RW#29M+SA.%R3.IURN
IKZMWV_^K!ZOJXMZ8$^?@'_ 'TJ@SX__EP! '0CQP;Y +@$ #DP[ 82=
C<Q_WCV0PC].@,_^SRM4?+QH?;__@#H"A;H:Q?H= CKB4;
B4[_W<*)5L2)7L:X($ ?[#D4Y?R'$,BAMY
'BRN+,?@CBSNC3%>@TR3W;.L/_$/'C+M+]\/'\P_[\$PTA\:'4F*+/
PPAMSPP6M]"ZTH0?NM2ZUNB9$NCN?LCN%EXAHUPAQ14/8=3"
>AVU->FX!4((=38MU-K4W/Q.U-[HL1/HPM3^N&]G&*"[
.#.">A$0IC.I<ZN^D<2VS^
\&+E$7'\MN3^ZFIFYF9SA[,OH:FZFX*$8PEPQXJ/DH^8AY.@$QF7 ;GY]#KB/H_Q
Z/H1MH* /':#D%.A%X$[@^ [:$4((N.B[ZKOL?Q&[[NCT#^CQ#\#;6B
$H2X>JN#LM%$(,2OSY9OED*#]#6>/TI
8"Z(B$D*3IU_+ZBR&$D:WPK?*MT/[TK?8X_TFHM_$;8BU[>G\&+3MJ+5MQV?.'\;.
A1QM+_:XN#^/.A$$(Z12FGBJ&3R(;Z<.UDM_H+OL&!$V7
59/VE/MG.",VERJ7,+_
,'W8(AB_W*[O\1M#2UN$!TM+2U.C4M$)Q##+EBN6"YX"$4Y^;GXN?DDOS"\.FAZ>@
4DM8.Z,(0
MGX"1->[MGJ^@W9M[-GX"^T3Z*\.6O@+W&%#[Y[(RA3(_\#(Q@BMR,+(Q
[X#'G*_>$-N?RFRH,1MZ)3*^ GPAH;*0]'RRO39^
M_V="[7-EMV?[H;Q/IJ:$8/M3IZ>:N[1+H3D97MS>N3]U<(@P]^)]JI*=&M^KFAK?
SC"./]"Z\<XQ"O_NLVL^BIO
KJAKP3O/Q0M_LD-=_@+]MT''=,0Z.2!4/W8Z:%D&D+IWSSW9=_&4\_X7_H'#W\#Z9
< Z!(DMZ\G_X=7-H4(A@_@(= ?[ W0/^"[K+/\&S\P[!CB'\
%\$Z'[H_3_#N1"'0$KMVA'ZT-E]LKOY3L+WZ8_[YRGAU. !@@%_4_NC]#N
P?@*?@G!_.DHPLN-4KG:M=;G9&+R<N;IUY+2ZJ&RQ0/L/A43BNA'H&U4D1?RQ(03H
JO +\!1%#4/EY@W\M ^^<#NP2"*$-6@U8\/.'#3[H#1\.?1BQ  [>:':7'@[9<
[9ZR,.W+@8/-H M8NFNOJ&^L>-*OOQUV[
C+Z%HJUD-VBO#2^9[_,W\?AUS9!?'Z[A^RGK*/*?_MROWU(,J:0+I(X;EZ%!L*NZX
*Q_@+1<?>/O.8-*G'0<?EG4_]M\?FPJ#C.D_XM"Z#IF,REZ0WI7OZ)<33IK^GV(NE
]_G+'Z.G Z=_IG_SH'8,P\MK+"2'7T>6GM&.W"Z+WUU^[R
G.D\J_R/KOR7-(MN_WJ\J1XRD7RO#D6Z0L'\OQ\S2B:'?+EMRF[RJ<JC('"<S3&X!
?3D'\(4ZD#<Z&>WC%-,]U[WU_=533'W&N/I3/=F]T/%M%/>R]SKW_M.0]S'W#PGW*
&**]T_W'_=]*:;W%O>\]PWW(<4'"O<$]U7W%%/[M&*/W\O?=C-[WZ?>SB8/
Z+&,Z8?H2V?H[!^X00OS^&'+XNCF'^A'_0 A?_^GMQ
A65Z%8"_B1F??Y"=)UPQ]MN%K8_S9H(>A3$1$*Q^6U#N+\C8<77N7]..4&MN)CR,<
:XGORE_*K\&&.P_+3\NOR_C+'\Q?S+_-'Q[LK] LH8N/+R_?002J(VMP=$&
ORIX3;"_'7A,7HVH/P8_%/!-O8 B-_\7/C4
+@^#,K\""Z^RKR(Z!;-M#D>(#*JS-W#("V;49]@)Z#K@C=]4V!!?E?U3E1S_!E@+0
; *^C]40;'$L48;MH;P8/0"P= CT__NX4Z%'&HM^!H/'
H/^_\<!?@[_-8U&K%#H>!H@Y33K#O>*M\&CPN*]P"J/R'O*C]A^:>X$%*;'KQ>A#_
;@@('8WY[4;7O%J[SKK0QXK\;$XM1<XZZ_?RP,[R<VE(ZNGR0%'IY&<="L?RW>3HZ
A_-YIA"(^U0Z>OITZ)YZ?;$M,>JMQ!,-DSDQ[)_R^W,AT2M,,>CHI-$T]YMBD/?DN
;(
D6F,X6BK'>$YR4CAM?-CVXIGNL1#8%]C:;)G89%-SX5WA$U'EP^EV3,WI1NDPZ?VL
,=WI?^DOE/^)M/E#1?XC_"GT,5^@U].]'&__T?/3,VK_RZ//UZ
/T_[^)QH/^&W4#Z9X!B\:_MB@T__#6)'@?\\J]T[G4!_V44___H.N[H>N_HV_/HG>
[I8P'H[V 8_>E= ?K)M_P[\4G'SB&^Y@YP
>0;'3=$)C3.=Z1*I8J/I-]I"Y^O:NMK]"7[:IF0 VOP\MVA':/Z?4?_Q%H8N_T@
[UV_V (._\#_8U'4ABX?:  $$BP0@#5;4UXN/_S#=MB?
[P7Y"B8_-ZSP<W!C'1O[6MO@.# -WZ?#XE[X[RG40S,?1X.E# ]BUB03KM"H/0
N>X\_)RRW6Q7^F&&+>_^ ]UT'5T;GCX"BE \WCX#>!X?4-X/<-6OP$
M=_P"=_@2_'?X$729!N-WT'?X"BAWZ/WZHASO8U7TZ&7R8O-T\6+^Z.'_&N_MM\H$
^O!@ L'4%N-^U# OK [@'EM'2&,G4 ?*M=M?JX[WJ5@?JEA@PZP@
+]:*MXV[_4@2A7145>0QJ\7X$
74)N!C':/'I\;CN]_C#X/?H=!KH+1R#5@N'Z+L<M#8E[^'ET5(?__FYT!?L-=>%0N
3(641N@Z+<,]-)*C.AUEV+AO;@X%OSAMH3WMEMK'MM0;4F/?&^C*]H<?=?;H&:72&
XA&KICBPDQ8D<(66X+G&:$]Z #GN>?XM"JGG_'3GBHW&[>AV+N/\O:7\_SN$SAF
?JY.=2WHQ1DQ?;C!ZB6/N1F-1K 8MB_22%GH*T=KI&_-=M(G#Q@<
O-GW..W6ZR3KN/OR_=K4-!7=QV]Y$?"X_4[_ML-4+FK<5BQ[^%( ]_#\
:^D7_[[U_S2X&1?'WU!7Z'_A!H/& HL<X_S___K^MZ^0
NO$7Z9H"^KA=!-O_P^..V(P&<1>+V"L>^HF'_QYM%R:W @ KV('[
!#_M#W(#N_\/B] #TT*Q!--__-?0B^.!ZW
AY@)W!KKP_SJ]5P+[M##-(:-S%SP!M/@)S[L3I10*,P/Y_K]".P+Z
/RL,N2+R+_X^,[SI#+
JNO81X/_/^?^B3YEM%\<%JE7=/F\7OH3_Y+N3K#P]=0J#/A;]_QD I]&+ 0K
=#^Z( D\('3__^8\M"73B/")T!#PG=06*T(H?PO!&@_M
=I>(E]S_\0%.B;<A%X/#
JS0#SKP\,+;M.L9U\YB(1/^''^NNT>LV'Q<SV_<&?GR<O[AU3YO9DT.;@"8(8?I_]
"[ZV^$>M?^V;]M^ =2]#@ Z,\]>!X?_OX-G_/^C9[M[YV<#9X-[9F]_@@<X/X0"
YIYTM 4,P_*/XBQY0"]MU [N- 0 @[_)S]P+HAN'L
QXA<BIH$7*'+B6#X_#N::OQM:Q? \0[W;6<7XFT7CI'Q^K1_'TK-(1X'<P?[N/(/
8LFWA_<^X,^&OWQ(;CPM_RL&_/?)Q+DA6SW__W0*!2;2R"#%^UOK9MG> .@G
=FY<"$__+_4'RO/XP0,M\ZHS[>B'X?P>N"'+_S8(Z.T0/A[0BMD0'X
^<TSAC7(XCB;[+  A?#/_T[FMM_/*NKG5XA)''
HOW\O/___?9@^'^6ROAB_P&'Q8'\Z2'#Q8?B2:T_^/#OPIMM_\W)G_(?<O$;<O$7+
#!X#IC__SO'<PF1]^=R! /(<^&Z4!>'_NM/B0X&P_3JM/ )R"8L?
.R*1@*T3/-SOO^(,\!0RXOL\8$_JE5U)(L?_\0KPW8>.Q)W&,-:M*^!-_W82Y/\(Z
G,"_^*Z)Q?!_[0)P^G;J_\ B_K1XH;_?_(R]HORB]>
RH"*M\HK4BN#X_SG#@^X("O9T$='JT=C#_T9S]?5U]4!U T+KZPMW^-)U"0N<P;J
M1/;VPH#]/W4'XD'23NOT]\8 _W05NOQ#J7@!0E+H/2!:94J _R_9?^L,4;D'M
-/__^99@.)_"]:!YP"
"]?#B_A_AXOP@>;P?]'N_OP,$(K_88K'BON*W8KIMBLYZ,M((%VG1_]/1T/CX#___
9@OVQ,!T$XK6BO&*S8KK_P^*WXKXBL0RY(/&M"*G@_R%]'='HT=O1V=':2?#^__!U
\(/" 8/1 (/3
!+$0S_KW@I%(:CI(8?:MA]G$'K<0]1;W_70P"H[OTPF&^P>H$'4+D?S0$+_0)O$F^
'43T>;/#_[\) \+MQCO'P[ !^_\40%?IN1]87S/;B\N+TTATX?_JN"OKWU#1X
O""\$+__O#6,-5M@>PF (OL@_#A '0_[\.;W88J
.JRF]QF^/-^?Q'^F_9&_AQT%G'Q]\;!B A
M^0AUJ9QQ(?P>6-]>VUI96UB!\!_$O%W""
#YZS-5@PS[L+'^)M]&*K+\1OCKM_W^PBT8PBUXNBTXLBU8JZ40!^KM:,\?I.P%7T6
_X"G39CT,L:3"(9A_N1B[]M+ C__2KKTU8S^(E^(,/_,WX>^B3H8/Z)=B*)5E]]
(E. HE>#3GN4:;X">A"M_BOX!^)W1(/^P'\1B\P
T.TAV'!9A%GA_NLYZOA_%67P$G7FA\[C^^$,]]EBM\][1VN+V\.M6 (<!M\]
<@RYX0\>B_7H(_[IC "'(02PA["'L(>PN''C"'(7MLO@0[K+K#M
?P+3X"\KX"]!F)7,C*T(([QOO&^\;___O<RZ =A^ ]]'WT_?0M]]KU_Q
3SA/>$\;K&0/=$T*\W1/=$]T+T=CW[\CL_T8B<?V4_5Y?@\0FA_)5M__^+[%=0B_C
1YPOZ"_D+^W4#0QR Y'_:"O!^",(/_0;]!'4$@&8+P_[L^#/JM>"GYN0O
>0+W?_C?.48*=0\Y7D\*.4X&?WQU!3E6!'0&=^@+_UA?PM^HX.OUM@/2
PRGP"W[_+RGP"7;XZ=C]FJSJ'%A8,T:_?S E ( -\'^1[.D# 3/
Z_-3M"&9",'4N_2SG^/TJ=.I6^U;Z=,+#>(E&(/&!Y\S'#!"CPROP%S';;^,SQMN!
MK]_O\#\K]V7F]>F+\8IF!CTQ/_PZQ'<5<AX[PG<.<A<[/RQV G<'<A
[KG(+MD_+X]O&3\1K$T=?%X=;%XN+0+W[WUU>Q$/<AR
UR$CO:C,?0#,ER!RO3G#/:MU.;6WM8>;MD&<@C9<@0KX_SC#,/EZN6Q".9R__\"*L
30UM#@XO3VUHK5B\];M^K587O&"Z>CO^U]>6_:\\ H2_WJ\\ E.^.F4_.F%
=GQZ?'17B#_ .;U[(E&M(H%F(@S7!@XE'P#F\!>U\
J[VO<#A%_^X?:!QAC\W?&\C,:,UP\ACL>-?@ZSM"+,*?/^S#/RK,\
R4?.KCL:#[X8>&$KQ3:-UUN$ ]R727]P2^&4"
482$5:FM,0@A].;U%/46A1#UX?46]1B"0_4"UM_\$5[O7B82[\W8\?T)$LK5\AKR0
DS'M]5;U!#*0Q]G]Y._'@
35__''U0DA\ASRQ_56)AGU!L?9_>1(P._'U?_QQ_E"M&A/5]N$#XV%.3@!U=M.&UO
CX#U;Q@^YP[]]3\5WZ4_?XZQM6] [W[U"#[
:@MX9O?1@CK;Y#(X]C^CU9,V9F+RHO:O@X$Z
P!>,K#T+O0#U),#<\$S]N/V3X?MGL_2>0CWVLV#V@#Y_F'),\F+V9.2OA[(U/G\7\
A34>@& .BA %E;= EJ<, 7MP/_9P)[1 ETG#YW3PU?'\<'G"_B%_VQ68$&[@<:
^B.^5X__%_#Z"SZ=#2BMZ$;Y"_\?XG@IZPOH'/
D\#;__?GYT-N![O\#>!0L(2O.<A)-"'0A:F'_/(/_MI_TSP,.X__\*VWGQT>D/_^O
WT.OG\GCKZ^'HV?EQC'1#O?/XK3@A_JW)\#/PMX_CYB]#]AXO#J?T?N1\
._%W'J4=:^,N<\+B^KH'$/V>_9F*
9V9G._>>[SBMZ1O9TNOCFNCKW=+A#/WVX@W=1@()7@8>0ETKJ9M86BE5C!$<X(QO^
),5DI-CMO^@'^*R8R_)A_NC"__@8R_'U4_[K\_E_8GCY[/FXYP#_Z^4,(?:N]N;LV
X2HMK^2HV**^*7]!+<I0FXIF_YY8DIOK?./8\(GXF_#]4N'91OP9^NOPT'O9_<'9M
+B0/@QB;WU[\;MEN\GK<V/WKZ>/X"=M>^E'KX$*9=U3_-@
AD3+;&SPPFS@JMN+OLC48(=B*X; R!O@!"06JAY/@*Z
CE_O+E_H@0SP;/MP5]CNZW_%:XR!G2M!D'ZZ+G2Z@G2B<;W!A=@SAE
,T9X+[\&HL*Q2'&Z12A,*$<B2]K_(@',.2HM_7>E_I/\5D)C=]=W_/EW&G]PI?PQP
#OP>0+XP,$#WO7O8YFF_EN3QT:N
#IM!I51)0%V=!:AJ58$3Y'X_P_#EYD>!__CZ>NT)H?P&(E&O-?PU^L5O_<_-!BYM!
$.$=2__90:!3O !!#BN7G05B@>8]!C8LK21%^O9Z0(BC-+G^=/KX"'
^0CYMV7?@OA\^@WZR*G4HS@B+#XE.P.?R-@([R'D*N='Q]]GNM/@+ZS;2,'480B3B
M0, ='[X/1W<I]^D#YH/
T+3AP=3X"PNRZ+091!N1%(_7E\+%+G5F!1#%@&#XM#"2!N0D2PH$'W('/>0_!"8!F
\'\?PA^"^ S0%BF/PH_X#,*/^
]#C_V/C91LM=1.4$+[X#1?'PN=,=1'G(.?X#*>R[[>_1!BY$?IWL@7_92!J_>QO>&
K\=0:XM)X?Q[)CLZ)</']W@@4;N]T8S9O&%!,\Y/X0[R'T#B4[N%#GGT/]X['&JR>
[IM:P3&1L0E$0+K#+66B/4%A+6-^;DA/T#N
0#I2P2^+Z[P[Q"^ZNA&!7.*5K;BMM,+_^KKZN#';B=GHM15Y4!T4T^)Q\?[<Y?SK!
04X[*QQQ?WBZ+E_-\9&O.M^MOAGQ"+XB\0-Z<:=I.8#,
A:)H^D$YN*CQ%@_\^*H<8" =;C"!*3TQVD0 '0%MZ  $^P&^+?S&\<+X"JO"^
D5\/;!"'1_N!0)PG00]L4!R[@N&(4(:GDQ:^K4MX26#*<>Z"]CH\8>\)3B4KB<*QI
G!^J19>^'N
641@W[V3,'Q[(W_/T[=.\%UM"(M>[,8'.NM$BP"&FNN:^N____CH)A2
PS"+=NR('(#[.7X0Q1/,_%H4>8]>M@B<^\>P
!]?\SLB-.^CWH#&X6?].>_Z9_\QAG^L&I#!BXBLPA/)I\3L-?&+WM
L\"N!YRL<)^ [;J_81PY.[WL+GP@>+XA4WK'@G2= ]B_XPT03J,, "FLX@
M:(G6];#JZ=CTJ\86\H$"QD;TN/+NZ1'"K/(&82Q'A4_OK0*+%XM?_/'JB5XUM(>;
P&=&&^ND(<Z7Q\LC9POT0PNK]Z/WF_>3A=>C]&\0.B<?;["'UV@/A$2'TM ?(
?QN \0<K,.L0B]]'BG4&Z/!M</*#ZO+#[WX*BUN-5N$[RG)SJ<+Q'7\'M:P@
=&O(_B[KA) HO?[Z\LG"-X?)>1[T\AD-X@T7$7,/Z]FA^ P8U5 8#J'=M_:&
?N9=#702H'4+Y^)8
^?B\<*#\=[$*\'G\0[L"^'I90'D\"X,5OSR5N]=MBW;"1E:RRNC$$NKP$<0"ZO0?7
%KX#(-^P@
.)>H(=*G9J]L._@TU^!L?\37XM$HT"-?VRR?@)AG#JOI+H_>;]Y'0#(7R/\=?R;.Q
0Z-D!'5O8*@KX#.MP"P$+M^#O/$T&$OPNI\H/X_7P)2
Z?2>ED(<7]TK+^Z?/^"M^Q-Z_:WZZ)!.G2\]GWMPKSH_0I&8HGP
Z'9Z8N'Z$Z^*\B=P'HSR1XK!.L3F*W.FM&US,W_-<'Q7KR*M!PC =>0%&>WQ3/D
R<'Q 75")<RAOUO^&L#@ZL!X,H-^_OO\@N&Y,/;AN2
M4;@QR3N/Z,%YW.F"([FA^ IX&NIPI/S;8N,!L%/)SZGL&PP#7K#9^
U)V3J)ML,?0).Y\X%D!G@J._GV/>1,WR
X4Z>?XAO@-U.L);@\">5W__P]8"@3>D02+M!>UNK08GV1)^45<",]%6_H;:!0<)(>
&+'?%MV?#O"]P  G2+R?S_@6:M20"PMX-7GJ/Q?6N^R_;F9%(D_
ZG)\0KWV-"9N(:[+?#:*PGW1XCY@KEDBW A,@0PM\/[SHP:)T)T/4,GH^ ^
PO(4B3^""U%3_%<JVH@8WO$!PMZH=?2*] RQBZ@$M]XRDTHX8>?[_PRWW3NL"3D^
/#!TMGT_Y?\N=0%/B\>W
FV6P)U*9QUT?Z0M.KD%M#D;$[H;K$7S"9HB_R;=40&WJ>%_(_@)=N#^!G8-QP9U%P
@ AG_DYHO>MT>.+OY 8^$#F!74^@SZL#8# (Q,:%,#6,$3PJ'X&ZR+Z^ =.'+CH
U"XEBG\MJAW=GCS9U?%UM^D&HY
&UOJRB8>R10!5_%;^!XFJA=%S_IOQVHV?VHK!@_C^MQP>>WDKJ@_L%X:YW(.7_IYX
D3.;LWPF'KF/1_H/XA0>)L?_0\4(._KK\%SJ=M__":_K[ &>LC\+?WO
!U&HGP@\!\R?Z)_U.VF%C+@\8.@?[8]7\:<E6Y=?S<M5HO7C-B.P(M_=0B.\2^1'&
/WT?$"7S,]\Z2+^EZ0\=]Y_-PP'3G>WROYBJ!AM$O>XQ3D#UDA??1=H\
J9\8O^N+JPJ7$1I=HO?D+_=1Q)_C*+WD:(!R[WWU#?M_![_@4'X"AMN==_&6L$&-"
  =)4IZW0_><C\@#[[.70!P\8&_/_X 557,](RM_[@P$<T0"D. TG00[+GL^_
/MM_^PHD6JABT#__GZ(@FK!BBMQ@\!W43YA_^MS1$E,  ]_70CL ?K"0'"/
^2Z;7IQWZ8!HTYN#P#=@S6= C]+_(.L;@!*[E%M1+I14VA9C
]H#H[I,_^T_G'XJHSVM
/XB0Z^&,/_B#:O_!:N&(K&F*.P&&']M,O:&LACX\5?\$E7H#D>@ K0!B]C23* '
.:B_/Z:BTX$Y/ _Z/*;BD8$/"!RM.#Q_/!PXZ'4!H;Q
.P8.(T5S"J/V,N3C/!S;,\"+'I]#.QX^P29R"NAD O#UM2[C_B>OKV=9!V
/8+O^GK_WS+'#^^ SO+/HL+BT/_@?Z1BWD^ W^^!6R![0"MP5$'58 #GX)+>
2=$(#Y2/I(PW[X_HL6B4([FO%R".C8 0$
>SGG!NTP\/I%M#<1"<L;1!*@)2#ZX">$;_/__BFX&BDX(BG8*BE8,BGX.M/\F!@K
>03VV/[$M^/6+X[CCVE8&@_HJ=#.^]C^XYC+V \+1X!Y^\H ^_Q\Y\706NMH#M
'LA,1UM^_I_0/IT^R:)#_N_^O#X^V[W/KH8-1"*P;\,BMVT";D!
)7VH$[^4M[X";0(MY8[\.8K(BBYQB+08B/<F, .6?A.&^ T5AO@3A\-0Z"(
6*"!EZN*'KY9T(\MMYI&VX]JY\J%QBC;TBMSI.X!T#M,P>O@)57V+#HDK#CB'XX+X
"NL6\ZJ_'IO(MZO@**\A7:?A-_"X^\&+\L""*)HI;=8]0!/.K7\-71^PER03X5_I7
B\.K^WT)MXN\5@7O_N"!9_XB&W.S&!O9P^@=7]2!UHO4ZZK(VF?PO'F&@DM%]B_"J
<.&EM*\9NT>8S_XC\??'QCAYY\Z6+RX)>'X8 PY%Y%M%*OG ME>"X
0;R\FSB,KF*M2."<*>L+FTCA=0 O2)NL&75!5?19V,+N;.%T!"$
1.'=N/NI$A&SM/&X
!*SM(/D!Z%V10?@(XC+V.XKI<P2$ZA6W"N2P_N3QL';QL/@3
>N'L/@+Z[9,VEOQM@_AA? C[W_]Z?P.#P.
VV;0+S2&8]]C#&R#HAP]9X2%0]GW<!_8(Z_3?]#+2MM"[J&/W8M%39&/-6!+
!"7"T,^RE^8K"!P_I_K0V\G4Q=0.9_QCE]^.+VO?AM ]/'
<>#XE97M8M.!MK_;^V9"@KD= 3-)>L"S29R(.&=X87"RHGKV+0[N/RZM/_YS
Z-U%QO PSGKZ[0Z3:GKYT3_041:1"#^!7K4 86X8BQ0Z([P6(
)[1?^M7Y'>1IFYZ(7[1$2 /&M# '7O6<R-P@86B78;$E?XRW'2_!FR;\F@
HD'1O]KM.W8,=NE'.WX*=MXIR
SCZU__,-7L6(LVK!C1YFX*]QST^TX(T1?@J8BI#"L0M
$;SX&2X?+3UGV.)QP/YZ;YAX$,\!='K&58,4U?_-FS#L^B?]JD(\LD!B
'XM.O>0=RGKX&?X"6_]_S>."E[-^RAG^ T8P G[^]NY!IA9!<
8HP0A7%F+5@8-M']/B6;K#!##D
]!2.AF/"E!YZ(B[2L(>/IC9BD\!,.U,Q_$.6KSE;>7X# +EM_<H,Z%*%#.7X#
/*^
GE-^4\AD_E1P64^$:?$@I&ZQ=75JL8X4%O]=8-0/T.M<N30_P03/M#\"-"45NCH^B
$DT*3UW?4"JQ#02KO<2<;2Z7^M2\2+P??02(OZM_NL+PM#$J>#[:L + >CQ"=)U
Y7!=A;'[F%&_ZH^WC_Q(/\6^>L:HC;ZR*8EMF_YMN0>WW^!U+/'^HO6+[.1A4'GQ]
RDD_.9A1>GB_@P"]P@\\/=+=>M8]=VSMCP\"L+;F0Y/F0HK$\##\SHK@#
/D,\D\(MK^RW7Z[-C29;B[N2@ N_SW5%^^M5NP7\;&A$E/H(6.9=/(A9HJ)R
A@J0>)]H-']9D&SKH(BW<"__*JVXZK9^SCMH1*P":;R1@BOH0R_LO!]%OL!=#?K0L
>Q5^B*#U\HJY)$#NLSEK+P>O#]U1^JM$ZRJ;'G:4E-0Z++/_><(ZPW+9-O^?
[_=<*O!BZZE,9$$ &)\.GE>V%'JH!]M=Z%+@SVAD<YA 3^&*FMT.XM%"G@)L,'%F
?NVKF+!=!!*1X2*#;]6HM=.0=TMP$.F+74.Z-Z:Q(1BYDY
$*+/WX#PO0D-S786*U."P5!1W;O=N7%8
BOJ==FNMB47WF7#L^^/V!__U'3&2!M'Q,.2^8+ *@'Q<=X-^]SR<M 96Z+D
6/QCBU"1M_D#]X8M,:=G^*\I)BU1)TG1#%!I244<+
Q.IP/UPW3TA??W:Z<?K&XL0#D36M#&](4$%A?VUT;?@-!6+'@_\!?!C\ -B)1
0#Q_NKZGE<!(;B0)@.9.I0]PSTM</Q342OH*7 (\ PM_ L \@WP"?BPK@OU
294FP3_9MU2MR)!T/I!:;0[<OMM!P5_P%QQ1P;&1P@!F8#K?NE5VN#G[^'2&IJ17O
[_%X.P=?0*(?Y\ZN^5D H-MVVHA^,-;$^L'_]"#!O7^
;"+'ONID>_Z[L#\7]G%_G0'Z_*R^!#H']C9!*L>MZ
WA^^G\]=F[_XF#^P$>A@+WXW(C-R, Y7[_"S!95XS:CL*P"="+3?[1Z7]!M23/
_/.KB\(U\?:6XQ_^%=L% P EFCT$ ')7O?#]
L<V'!F+SO9I]SOQ=/_#M*(L\.P-W]'02 \7X=(?[#"O%
9<TBPO5@0J'!7^_B02)-B 9C0-%ZCT  7,#M<"&AP841 5M0R=0%P&&U\XT
6^+KEW/X=R':609K=01=Z]4U=Y"I\:
)T&%YM_ZJ;6:$/#G]X)/ZE<AR#^01R$OC[9OL#^(D-@\? R5?H1...
%]?5>L[;YGHM1;B/S"(M4'7KC-F.P8?5'4S^.QQV Q?\M;G:\@98#BZ1
G_46'0:V6G\#OZ%M=%\5.QYK%^'_=ESZ:1=S5O?#
0!U4(]_*]V+!XLK._-R![X<&>S_:O?^\?-SM-SO[=P0[_G]X=_"+"@/..\L\
0+K"7]_[^F)/XD<B_/Y\HL" \8[QQU
8V'IM\8L#X9'I\M?_O>GK]U[S8^G##X/C\'0UB___T[$$T^N+RP,>9Q=R)X'[_\/_
M#W<A]&T7!HX&<1>T2A]^S2$'<A2A;8O8B1<!%AAP^ $.V;<(
/4U0L$4[@KQM5HORD?SQ+"F6&N+Y"?$#9,'ZUO__7L,+TG4']_.+VHO1PXO(BT/_P
C/2\Y'PM_#/)P^/A5?#AO18*[7@8=7'%"'_\BNF*SXK[,MOO!T71XW_KT=%Q^8OQB
_NBM*=C$,:,Q"P#_<@@$!2O?&\[YT?OLT-'2*2'?377F)6VY"_\OR7FM]]GWVX/9M
 .BC_X=5+C9^>>;T_=\2W_Z">/_?]OS#Z'?U_NO+.]%U#K ?4EL[PP(1
TI:MPT*L6OU^S!#LQ)7$=XQ-BBDK\55?<J+=^!8(BZ,ZW/R#[
Y6_\'AX=WX";V9MB<&)?DCA535](+JYQK&!R23)EPF?N8D$<?&)\1;!N>L"@.W4X1
*) -D.O',"M_P#K#;H>
#O"?02^0PWCB='6#GBZ%FD*X7_]"/T&=1B^!B&)SX''^/WZZP3&M!#!&S>GX,?_I#
\&_ :%O%Z+RZ(\I_L, _P&^  ''1O9R&?OX%WHJ&>M58/@+MCO8$:
KH1N*WOVKX"RGWU?@-^-7X"W;@?+;1_@'TUND!I?U<P=;X";CP (<_M"E#3Z%+</
:]@_HB@_Q^6]N#^ _ZKO@+R5M)@_@) 8/X#OS5^
L;NOG??8/^M^OW\@_@,)$"A^X/\U=R]7&&C;Z(Y! %UM_L>
7X.06H.I_$/N9Y)3@Y]&HH%ME/&E\<B(#K7Q]>_S!:_Q&[%2@?X7(7(%K/'K'L)&2
O +Z)'CX?3JB,*O!&3XM#.WHO>+HG]WB6A7_@?_[T:DR^ FY_CO&<Z=.#U"
/#5\'Z&8=3+Q@,-IC4?&M!O,Q$=_K"Y/C.73C_J+1PV$0B3_[#L:'Y@"XT+_\+-<H
X8J'TQXD!)A^_W+,MRKQ$!B4F ,ZY=3N#? 0 H<-U!OH,_)&+/.<$W[TK^
G_=!?@T5=0@KGH/0>[M0>.Y.\>O.4P&EC%$8Q3)6#C:B01).?8
/>HZK4X>77*<NI";+V;$-$\__\*M=!5=_T\">#V+UXL_CD<,V/^J7/J4F?9'!P%T"
[
-"W_HX?_6_.\&0'34Z-+_MK]TP<NA7_^K1[-(#L-N#?]&Y5J"]5[D113J)FRNI[_L
BB]:+-Z+17PRLCMIYMB3>+_-_RI@@\#73?/!IT%,3];W_84^@9!6[3QNG;@$\&$,=
'-'Y#C]4&>[0UMS2&+\.N$TM%V"(P$!Q*[<]-6\<,&'N&.7@BT)=X?\?_KYNH>4\5
>
HE'$(]'M_Q\2B4\4B5<6B7<8B7\:G/Z'\!Z,1R",3R*,5R3TA_\FB6<*]PSZCE<(B
V<&M?\?[4_P>!U/_5R^Y EOLL*L,[
K[D\D+BUO1_/$P#-AA5G<>_2:.(82]B[.+MK8NG /^+H> 0BU\2'W0,OZWK
<\.Z/O_ A+/]/[+0/SO_SU94.C0^,KS=":+M\,8$FL=$WPL!,CV,3 /BJ3V
7)#TG[B40)5MFIV8[)"/#8
_#M"XQ40O\-M"<GW$_OUB5P%C$0'2?6+UA'IP7WR\O
)U_9'"_O0*T<);O%.^5E;607>\_VNM7P?>\U/H.?E;H\S[PU2D&ZQLM'X&XE,Y^CT
Y,SWQZYNP270K6J,M0YB#^'(YMJF'B1OMW$
^^'=D2W_4/<=GT(J!F@#TK=06!SN'P+T?V8G0$]@ !BWT0QB7GMN<[VP8
I/[%=:Y;;45^X'L&:PH
-*TVQ_^G#2JGF8^L@]\;C=%QL3?(W;*O8M6-CX"2.R\<1VT5+LH9+I"(,:>OH=B1E
B)^]0B)GI</^IY131RC'*_.O5V?
ZM>!+P_"Q!B7_)YH+I1/\(5U^H90(D_&2QO1$G]PWQ1PSX-[&)V"K\5K[WA[H9MZQ
1FX:B#= JH0#S7[U;H3_Q-J3%:TAIRYE[YK )ZLE!44[NJ
[@$2%,/"/;WMZ9@+I)&DGJGH@0.)1 R-\01UA[T6B?
MG;D..DH%)B$N0$>I&-'K8]_I*9$$M2Q\>L4OWZ_9-@SX:&7[#FB:+QX/
#VH)TPSHB'AM"K3B"('_>/UX=@GK&^S9MH"$-5^A4A*/VY,9T!^S#*DP9#,?6
#XHUVIT-H*+Q'&V>. X;L+(-E<U_>)M?
JLG4B"B]ZVV>?IB$8AT[F'L?*L:8CN@8YT"_%!'R"!@60&]_NF<
#;NJ%7MA@3,L@83T9SQ!R3JNI.1FO'O_&;1)3(7VO<)!0'V_J_1=D$O$?*-1@0:D0
;_M=PCH"E57@REYF]W:M0KFVY?1-\ SIH-_WM%J^H]U_[]DB<:!YD0 "?9U
C'VMOP!<O
RIOKL]D5L%OD!P7[8YZ5!75O7K!NAO_FKQK%7F3$CRZ_Y:Z_V)ZSWRMTRGH_4+HZ6
'_1C<<AD0$*_"8=!*@
?L,5N&;M&@I"#O&0/IUY2;'Z7QA48U6M/9$$4CC\#.A%W_2XXN,AW@I(NXLY_^N!J
KY//=(>_9PP#NC.O?/]#
&)T1H*MF=[POO(QOO'A\J[L7_C2RF?2RG5ABW[^@>?S\=_>,I$Q__?')>$4+O@*5N
ARM5)E;/ CK.KO*FMR)#@._0'R8OO] =!.XW5!7$V+;3=OE[0*[
.W].NW\=;+OMZ:%7:,OHY/R_ZVW)_0IKRXV%L1+JL>G:?RG6$O*OC.D;"4,+@&0&W
^M2S"K<M7\L8_\'>8,H2_!Z.QY'W[W8&C-
*0@B+3@KSI!\8W_RUK@:.;-&D@7;F_/[3MM#^%S%NQF'I."%!I!5!NY_@,IPH?3];
*X+1
Z\[\XXS8Z_BKM#VQ.1AKZ\;QM,\GK?L<&[4L&M#SKZ,#\M#[C_24<D'(ZM%:,VX[#
YVK:R!7Q0<9?W6>/^
N.MV:@*M$)Q!N0,J8]W51Z#["S?U;0:5-%6,H?AU6FT3O9R#/0<BQ_T1AJ#Q"P?MV
]/\/Y'<BX^=7P*X
$3@!BIABL3VU>8SP.GH#'X(B7;"&:G1A=EOARA7Z'OXMOW+\\=(-.^:MK745!3@)_
 4[&3K/&3I%XKJ&;5/;G7< K#'_$]H1'_&#;ZN[MB5;HU%;91Q;>Z?
RRHR-;.WQ2)CS)6X+%-KD'_RBE"]7_#/VWFI.!.,=_V&!MX?\_=0.Y !
I\M'A\N'^(C&KC, %[NO<SPY?'@>+P\ I\;1)(!BM\+;QJ[;UMQ&4
F"F9[=CDXUC[[1Z@,_;.CK#A[V9>$<OC)9K_*]F;_Z6;F"YYC-CYV.O7MN>EIP;R2
M]'9!_;5!_[1#X?VP8-T%_L$=0@&ML-LQ]+'+.K[D7D)Q^[NMJ#ZM*R$.O.4)%^F$
EB3ZU?GI72VWZDX(_/.J(>%I*O_X"O__15)23U(Z($Y53$P@M<&]I;C_\=&5R
%IO<OEC:"!#(/\/-"XP,"!L:6)R87)Y+/__\&]P>7)I9VATM("A#*2
Q.8<0.#@@4^IW[73^<=%N(&)Y(%=A;, @0H:'VZ1H-6 U^H?'+C3.M-/IT,[
SDO__4U1)34%412Y,3T< 2$)A=0_C9  C($32:7/X3L/_;V1E^$92M04-+
$17087A250+X6%32<P 5#_$6$1E;&%Y ,18X $.347FVTQ%3A_"L&9FM:6-I@V/E
/^/!@ , "( + $ 2[ $>_"#^/I@"< 2@"7P&6(4_@G>_PC\@03!M_-7_^
_@WO@)9H")WO@4#][H^ O'!0"1WO@4>#P $/@A%N<#_)?X"M[X$ ABM>-[ __Z=!
GP]GCX$=Z^0,;T 2@ IKSX%(#PC=Z"!P " *YX^!02$6ZZ0.*<M4
"WFO@4%?Z"WBT 9 !?0)'__O\#V?_X$" '($A%3%
@4T-2147A_TX@M')EM<W,@6U!=('3W
6\@<'+/Z2!C=7+K'P+X<V5T=/!GXO[5YF9I;&4@;W+>_*WIMR?Q_@'5P+"!D;W=N^
N(!#69T^M^P[&'P?+[I(&ME><-C:&$ '[G!L/XZ
%M5M(3R0[&2(1$]73H0/]7>B;"!M;W:G
=QY;W7.=&CU#H"5979I\;Z',*IN97BKM<*IA;4#XO((NOU))1T@>^52\_4Q%1O6\9
&40"&/*89?,9(.5]/VSQ/@*102#M$-']8V&AC/^=:1RAG(?\;V?2UE0"!47_0>L@U
FW-2Y?E\R S[L0R-371^
M@M0+K5='#];A@N.V-EQ7)U;J/X"P)'@/+O;FA(U=-F]
#,_9/VQ/X'X64N9R[ZME.:'4DZD5R#A[_^#X49)3'OAIN*$$*W(9B=L?!"XL?@+:7
,@ ,9*\TIP77EEM\DCP='5R@!=GYD-/4%FL\P Q]+[4_6$X
#+@WF5D#B9$(=-W_.'W?$D(:DKNM\J!Z\<3QM/%FV"")+
#:\V&@I/+&@.EF56;("$(X]BY]\<9"++1I:<+\FV[JMZ76@@LOQ<<[\OOV8\M#J
[79?=K1]VS_(&AO;!<AXK,-:4Y.KP!/($9%17?SMQ_Z+B/JM8J^[Z9;Q+V%DP@MD^
_.2.@!$88[I
.%U)7UGUS4@;@!7).L@2.7JM1*;M&.#[86-6^$U!_U,@,#$X,C8M,3$R.*%G:4
\7)L8<]9'
0K<VF[.?6-M*#CX=-7RQWSI;'6\(%H@)#$PAM%FSO5(1^.AX=9#*RO22
!D8R?86[C/<&Q-MZW/!\>@@*&[!$&GJ='JGZG*+*9($OBC)D/ZT:!CG.R+R,9XY
(;[O@!-UB RM,S'1.3$ .@PI#/ 2&.L 8^8E9$/U^4YO/SJ%]5O4&N@) &:@
FF9%.M'UQ3MMQ ;P_P ZM_;\)39S
BXQ9_<U]\Z#E2OQ9(OO_VT?\=?Q^+_OT%5.1$5&24Y%M1&IP]OS/^
OO_,_X"E+RK\IT8<,A;/%A^B!4<C1S@!_@+/_Q
"AP86,<8"G8MZ6%D\1,H8^$[.<H(($M:,4]CST0@?/B65%=/4DO$2%)/55?X1TA05
77):LGJM(%)!1#\<24\@*$%8+BD@3#+4];T"ZUOF)/%I;1WRD^EW(!5,9F'R\4WK?
O[KM9,.M<'1HTW5G:-'C;9'A'MZ_Z6O\"@!N^W=O<FM=Z:K06<K]X-UQZVW?HFH4M
ZL&%;&G+H?]W:'[![@9$=NWI8JRU@(4
Y/[GT1)CSP!'W(!=9F9E]!DUY>.CM5.[JXNEP"!^ECN% ;F-E+@I4&+U\^
[NZE#MVFQL;(6@9=$Z9OQB.,&M\66"M1SL'W/E7VW5M8B,$
<RT;O*AT0K>0WS1+UW2$L(>2];6[RAP+7]S>N%_$'\@M=F%L=64IX
;%!!#WZ+OYM/R^!=3$^[OX+/J]Q?&JXD%SX?WQD>78\7S:E6-!MX7)I<8C9^N.!5$
XH8D.T.NEN#74 ;)'$"R*NN DB!03:XN71SLFW
8)RU-%DM;EY;"/#Q*#'EL6W)T2=L\ #0WF)Y.BG  2R
*/<9)/%U3>'"B@3Y:7%3V1WTMFGV[<NS/L632__QD:79I(%>6O,'X#W1O-^K"^!0H
@,%#9O%CX>003/@)3;/+M;FST(@XQ(V%T+;LM[BU
4+VO<RV[[]K."(JS)\WW\O[QAWW,82!G4G-SN/%,M;V]K_5ITTWK("TU/3D%8!NG2
Z4-"ZC4*P?&RVEK8"V^R$^IU)+9B0,'_Z69EM7;<!18#KLEWE[?95$&O<3\(%[IW^
LC7\P@JR:0QP::'I/^$
@E!:QG#9HE4/MV.ERX;I*K-/+'L\N15@:5/S?\5+<<U9R[H+I\NE0+?WMX1C16,KP
Z7/$\K@NMM;SQ"FZ1\9C\<W7_H78D?2<9\3
G-)4#/P;1=]#J+C!E*RP8YS,G)KUPTM5GM  S]P8P\L@TJ!'_*V RRV
E7_NM.Y/CM]%5,5%,)"?CI<*?J)0!?9,?&149&M24,9KA6N#>KGI?#A*4Y/1/VA
/O'X?6G1TG2I4A"07"Q5>,E-W/]^!IL+03%M__A&6JYD_?@:DZ_K17-T+CTKU"?J<
R]%U!CQ,0;#2^[\.@_[R LLYS!*O3#EM^ XBU8]W(-
R.#DM05<CRT2*0\45T#5299/$QL1O"/>E1C%=A>MHXW!J>%_KM_<ZL;=)DDF4
0EGX\)93+U-%0]\H878#B&<I.KZ/FK+D_?<3]?P[ 7!6H4@!M#P'_/U !"0!- 2L
2P$M .$1\,8A_O;^'!+^0D;)_LW^Z,'^__^UJBA&([FDMY'.VV2KJ<\-BD:Y8][+
S7EM6:*QX=TNPO@*547OL;[-W[\=T6_:M-O[$*["MJ?VO=&%P_?&H+,/X"01UX7BY
T\.QJF!];Z(4X;+A;LGA9MVOI=D5X75T@[-AM;FMS(9>YWH(]^
[_^!%214?GR5+9Y/;Z__[)4[+*^!-)1B!93U4@5T%.5(=PM($$@1-1+]$E42-6"*_
$3J1GQH<E6F<JX?A00N8WX&R!314Y$O8"Q)%^Y=]F%MS_@90T%32.J!&':;0TOY3U
)%VD59#'KW1)1;^ IC_4Q)2R 1<V]V_?08
*'FM^.T8<,"&[!A-0>'[8Z&R14U05%F#^
Q(3U=X'D7"("TMR$U517HHV_3KI5!2M3T<%6.7!C?[@[4E4%O
+V^K_^!5;$O)=Y]A(+23P(O_X)J;I;7K_<+?XW+7XM.T9)4O[I0TQ!4U,
>N]T;?A"__@)= !AX_@95&\ZL/@O8>W_
'#>^!Y$^^$@M0E532$].1R#VNBAPHBG2^!IP
&6P^!YBD4E.NQ;HXDA))FE$4H79__@:97GPM(*ZMOD%#51.9)9
-:(KP3&@J^"#0JO_X+2IRL/A,<F#X4-?<S=F_^F1_.3$PM,S(S@=@^$-@E[RFV#;C
__PVZ#;P-^@TW#GD.>PY]#G___PZQ#K,.M0[R#B,/M6
]:#Z#__P_D#PL051!7$%D06Q"D$.W__Q
V$7\1@1'($1@2:!*X$@C__Q,^M$XX3WA,N%'X4@!2"%(3_[Q34%/L4_119>4YN
K__P#O:P<*#4D@OJ%U;F%BMU,+=P655U5:9Q:6,PWQ^B,%/P]IX"N'VJD$*:Y:O>
!U

1IJ+\)[#4B@>M[Z(*M1(A5H
O0=RBLH:X/'6O&FV-O1HV9HVUP*3__E]]9+TXI.B!9"
E8W>R(2HJM+2?-^EPAP:YJT6UA-+D+D2FE 64NC6T5
'ASA/[)_/>TC%7)C6QN=6'DJEKXM#AERY0(I_(]T=#^;H76NLG<-4&FT,*)2G+*VH
MAC>;M)2*)UX+&._L86@^QAMM*E%B5E3<,5KNUFZ)7-9G#!)926I<XM4'A?NN^I0$
O_X./__^/P-"E-T5:D@M3X4@1O%FLX'P)/U1F0HA.N)[1&UU>2]?ZD)ALF'3<VEZ9
E@*_M?C1$]3(#$NM>'B4LDR9%;MP<$5"AZ'E3S;R,S(*^@Z9;5%^L9OG_11#9G5NB
JYC%IH+1N9=M_?!_^/SQ'SQ*@/2  +\/ "AN=1[:OBD ,%C]>,Y)*TKA_^\C
)LALB&Y(< AM<P EX&ED_P, :0!B &\ =0!P -G\_]IF &4 10!G $<
;@#G'_\B+",R(TS^MFR.@(Z4C_R'!(]XCXR,6)3(F_B>N#_^&)ZS\__@/>RJ5*G;#
_/[\&>K_!P$2M3;#]R?_GN\B\NLW:O\#9L\3;__]7U;C4OLW$UK?3O;K$?#@3[O@C
&")U=:N<M'(W\__Q ;ZQD*
;("IJ7C,\(__^Z6R4\I_1$_0^E,C*GJ-4C___V23F\B=B7MLM*</#J,,.*.__]Y13
XM0QSKXC8:/WL4KD?A3_MZA#^:F?^Y/Z+U/S^___]SM?]U/%74S'3#Y2'>"6O;Y__
\_Z0-/.$T7;@6UM;B31@"
GY[@-WG#04/2A->7M06^KR8C#0,#\6?C])/C]]?+1>P1 "0+Q\O@)!@$"\O@*@
$#JZK6^ P$S#@2M__C\__C\__C\__C\__C0Y-;J< G_ ; 12!#_^
V$___O_5QS@?\!__@2X/R"M_P))!?_X$N(ZR!'_^&X \        !@5  "
'0&Y@.& EX!!@X?BPX, (OQM3HGWC-L#'@H CL/]\Z13N"L 4,LNBRX( (S:B>@]
!!V [@ $"G%*<(IPX[:MCL.Q ]/@B<'1X$A(B_"+^/.E">UUV/R.PH[;,?8Q_[H0
*V)Q='M2G4%K8G%MLA!S
Z3K\3')T>U*=06MB<6R$'(BT>U*=06MB<6R$-'1T>U*=06MB<6R$-'1M04&LM_^*V
.D3 *V+V+$#TN^ S^" Y =T#(CA04$FB@&JXOKKIJP(P'0T/
%TM!8C!0>OJB?N#YP^!QP @L033ZXS  =@M  *.P(GS@^8/T^N,V
'8CMCI<O\JM1D%"*@X?OE@!6X/#$(G:,?^L",!T%K0
<>+QX/G#[$$T^@!PH[")@$=Z^6MM"<!U"('"_P^.PNO8/0$ ==J+PXL^! "+-@8
<8!!@( +1  CMB.P#';^H[6MB^?[+O\O !H5  $ 4$L#! H  ( &
%R)=Q;$R9YA, D  "H1   ,
15-4M24U!5$4N1$]##0(!$B,4%38W:(F:VSP%!A(31,7VEO>+3J6:M&E0JD5=%L5:
MM*&"X&VWK-RY+D'&=
DS)TB8,U_*$-XY8X($251NV+%UZ;($@;[$AWP.,NU<MD&%!PI7[]HSW;@O2S/$BWD
NUQGP*\B[:M&/1@BP[EV[:MF'I&&^0:-_>Z=YAMG#?(O&_K@AP;UBW(LV66-QGMM;
^6-5TT]KON633'0ERON7XWP_ON6[EKA&Z0M5-&6X4;?\5_#6VY:.LZJ?Z<1WF/?LF
5;=V[:-\G[SO3BWU:34@VR["C;X"_YM'58,M#)6U;M,_6;C[W)3*'L2Z"VWKAMA!7
_^.H_S%MH4)-0AS5L.LK>Y5V>WM6+9EX(FS8WZ#1$%NT+IMV;-AIK=<NGI3/$N08L
O\N]P=PDZFJ[:3]*
K]RO:ML/I)G#>D55\-9^P9ZS!C=UDRUAXDWJ[TM&3+OHG?;\/*X5]@!9E*23$6YOW
0MW'/(['3?&-NS.G.#M%.]ZPCI;\T$/6I])GFS35/F!FE4:M"A2YS84(HWTZ).MCC
?1JT&"W"S(+>N<^\:LLQ"6<\N66>*\*K;;K-FR8XP7V97O==F(K^G5=RTYMJ/(\8G
Q+.$1U"_?5Y/J_*$HX1!JTEA.D\=-EP @UR+J;8=YAZ+0E=MLZ;5H4MXZY>
_>8VOU@ZG*&8E[K,4C<5N5\8;2RQ_C0\US/PK?;NFVPU'*"FMXANH6\M18SM(,8^B
+&U2Q%"J"]F6+)DT\Q+%E];]I:3=,^%\WUH/HAF,SJVGO.B7EMWMGFPW$X?3D:JV6
$XN]47>\\)1G>JZL'=:-F
KW$=E;ZR*G=(KQNA9H#C6[3)+M*<,JSZIB$ZOSE&\4Q4?ELM9UX;XDD\=V^V)8-;E
?7*L]-]T40<!I'4%6HIMOM+#??VK&NUBZBJW6C[)8C6O,?DQ/!G(4\(Q_6D?"%,7W
VS;U=CV?%+^!%^\B[M\=))XQ[W9;*M&+%>I3=AHDL1^K?AW(OAG-JJT'0Q<ZAFY56
W,:RG,:OIMAA2M!$NY<V2O6-U6ZVW^?\J[=D/W6B?7(%]CTT9C@(O(&N!_-JT=.QO
^L]F-X2]CM798MG'-V)O5T/:G$M5LZ[A7<17SN(UEYYN7FB6TSO/J>+'#31CV"K-+
JM'2,MI !3LT
^,A7F.@A1Z2%GV6C"G#/3K&I=-HRHK':P;TZ?:QQK9Q!%[C;NENY0MJ-$BH8K0>ET
E2CB+ZW (=VO0<\-(P:3D='
[A$C5(87$+UZO3*UU32=UM!OMMJTP&K7@W]BO%^APLBTX*Q(GTFZM%D$*:Z=.C(J
]"R+*-JLY2\\P?&_4+T=)M
4V,LZ:VVR5;M;WS)"G0C]9%5Z**>WTQ5?%,^#9[P9)MGO&FOI"/6:E'?@N'MS2ZG,
'[6;5H]6A<GII3'=YG8T$2?3OG,::F*VELUN3VVC*N(LU2;;="C3@5VM>;G,Y9O<E
"A6G1Z#:_$^B+(XM52G(NQ@EH_)5:X6S5@JB+S*Z=$=6$^/=DYHMG5##
,;%1/VU<XK9I<>VDHV*[-"T0-]C,*.:-YE=BB=^C/_]L5G0TCC!UM??MNT++(5S=L
D5P=$&T?+*O+",D;K"*V>LC[$8\_NZW=,A:XY0>GJ;TIO8"=H;9M)-%ZU;#L$9BD;
G-G\XK(%\-'C51HT*I$!-E<=JA.DZ$?JZ@
QXPIN::)T.C<M5]@8I+S#]C.W\KEER3!"(;S;%(J+6;25_$7I;]UX(=-0G#VV8'WC
J<RW\84XMXWO6,V'"J%^!U619='3ANI->HA09;:450N-!2%DQ6I>%B\9;Q'KU7<\6
>'-+MM.;E:"%6AHZ!#*S<#._3Z1%R!YDMI^/%*=F4>\U))S"NS[T#V'%^K#^;S(Z_
MU9Y4R/$W6MT-H@>XTE:H&9";:=T\)TA!X;'#BD%X.JV;0]=EX];Y5!%'9+<GMF+?
:.A%YGUO16L20:!&C,)R[F<29]'J>+EVZ.)A1];HPH$=)'D+0E##+A"8HM@>KJI$-
!VV)RIHG)1C$$]?CIZJ$P6&1X*C]W"%!@0MFW3F,YA^.FM\"E\AY2ML<@)GK>W2O+
MYLU'H;OS"9GB$SR,[$/\1&$U\6G+I':&P8+J>*9Z0<J65=-1MJ_Z'_SGXL-Y-GSH
-BE5F#4M AJFH7L8F)!G)BEL?Z#]TY0KQ;">JVN>=)ZW;M
-X$+7R^(D@4W'$I.0?6@YIPG+_Q15L?X&/CGNZ;IR-F;WR$%=/[[!F%(,E$M))6$P
).A83CF;NFP%''942T@5UDQ*#U/4.^X=4!*H"]&12.('!4(E+U^$SM1MIG*LE\&(U
B&1B<0=DM5S+/-G6;#11"MLWV%*>@"U)>^MF:*+P1E!\S6+^THTM^^T<U#6:1U#KL
F4:ALIBP\T#4@W/HR*9)(F9QR<+9+$\V]!.X*^-7BC*JA<?M%2,,ES.(_[)E-I:%9
T,KF)9EFFBBP#A."&$^H39FT'Q5.&$C;V:T0F*FCBM'M_0JN\,)4)T2WKT1<C22N&
&%JBT^0PA
^3,?$*=-FRY@Q9>)0EDF^H*C4;FA-M;7"!U%SH"+"F\"2($#;)L.;#*,I15IT2Z3E
D?JE=FM9N(FX^^:)9K.BEIJ-9MZ_MSL(KT-_.(GQNBSI8.>4Y<'UN&M\U"K7F=E,5
.A>9BG9+CT>:93Z
I-L4LMDA1S<HC>12OX4-;'6[&KJ'H90A@>\E2X;K1N.I0'&6,IX6$*;6O0>2;,>C/
 MYQN&.(1NIQE,JN8-!P[192K.Z0;6J$**B[FC>LYMQGL(1L=,U77V16SFG(-NM.J
S+,>+?\#/T(ZG5O\TX?#FGFJ'@BOGA\)PE@K#HD<*O>;=(;86(]M,/9W8PM%/IOW[
 P!C,[C0P1YN0;71[0_5;NG%V@&",V4U6*?6\[;69:95HY
]T4H5JZMY4Q9M>C8R&)[2>K&D#\*-XW<"'-!K%FUUMM$0B5QE!--!6*:%8JE5:I4
1+OM]"25Q^F@3)G\W4B3R&X[K=I4:%$I8&RA3ZM2B?XB*8[0>:63:L65S^^F(4-(M
SOB'L$R8(+AB;H2IVJ4.LOLFS!FUV3)OO-9QI(P]KZ[*)SS%>KC@:KVNP;[6M-TR<
-IY_YHO1[)<R:81T<1HM=&H*^Z*=JF_1!5$H
%;Z$_X*OF)/LK"N4=:HMNKSNG#6\;IHU:\: GUMPP#;;)0!H4$L! @L "@
_8AW%FG2)13>/P  MWC\   P            @
$535$E-051%+D5815!+ 0(+  H    &M %R)=Q;$R9YA, D  "H1   ,
 $ (     A   !%4U1)34%412Y$83T-02P4&      (  @!T    8DD
end-- Dave Bushong, [e-mail] Laboratories,
Inc.Internet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Tue, 18 Aug
1992 12:25:36 GMTFrom:
deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!pa.dec.com!nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.d
ec.com!regent.enet.dec.com![e-mail]: HK-21 -
Does anybody have code for KISS mode??To:
[e-mail]    The subject says most of it.  I'm
wondering if anyone has a replacementprom (or the code to put
into it) to allow the Heathkit HK-21 pocket packet tnc to have a
KISS mode. It would be nice to have a portable tcp/ip station
attimes and I bought the HK-21 back before KISS was popular so I
didn't know that its omission was a large flaw. I would really
not like to have to go and buy a new portable tnc when I've
already got one!    BTW - I have extremely limited resources to
pull anyhting from an ftpsite, so if someone could send me it by
mail uuencoded, that would be super.    My address is
[e-mail]    /s/    Bob Gettys
N1BRM------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 15:40:06
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!wupost!uwm.edu!bionet!kumr![e-mail]
ct: KA9q with slip and ethernetTo:
[e-mail]@neptunus.rivm.nl (Michel van Best)
writes:>I'm using KA9q as a slip host. Now i have a connection
to the ethernet.  >Now i was wondering if its possible to route
the slip packets to the ethernet. >Is this possible with ka9q?
 Yup, I know of several sites that do routing in and out of
Internet withslip and ethernet with the KA9Q code.
       Tim-- Internet: [e-mail]               FidoNet:
 Tim Pozar @ 1:125/555UUCP:
...!uunet!kumr.lns.com!pozarSnail:    Tim Pozar / KKSF / 77
Maiden Lane / San Francisco CA 94108 / USAVoice:    +1 415 788
2022------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92 02:39:51
GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.ed
u!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!silver.ucs.indiana.edu!dreyerd@network.U
CSD.EDUSubject: NEED HELP-TR751A to KAMTo:
[e-mail] university amateur radio club recently
purchased a Kenwood TR751A 2mall-mode rig and a Kantronics KAM
multi-mode TNC.  Our problem is that wecan't figure out how to
connect the two together.  There's an externalspeaker jack on
the tranceiver--no problem there--but we can't see how toconnect
the microphone and PTT wires.  I know that you can sometimes
getalong without a separate PTT connection, but the mic
connection seems kind of important.  Anybody out there done
this, or can point us in the rightdirection?  Thanks in advance!
                  Replies to [e-mail]
                           Dan Dreyer N9KDF              --
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------    Dan Dreyer  N9KDF
INSERT    [e-mail]                 CYNICAL
   Lowly Undergraduate in Mathematics
REMARK------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 14:03:34
GMTFrom:
dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!pilot.njin.net![e-mail]:
New packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail]> How do I
call CQ (or listen for and answer one) on HF Amtor?Well, first
CQ's are done in FEC mode.  As a matter of fact you'vegot a 70%
chance that if you hear a FEC signal it's a CQ (either thator
it's an ARRL bulletin).  CQ looks pretty much like a standard
RTTYone except don't send RY's (if you were inclinded to do that
on RTTY)and send your selcall.  Mine looks something like
this:    CQ CQ CQ DE WO2L WO2L WO2L (WWOL)    CQ CQ CQ DE WO2L WO2L
WO2L (WWOL)    CQ CQ CQ DE WO2L WO2L WO2L (WWOL)    HERNDON, VA QRR
ARQ/FEC SELCAL WWOLMost of the first part is just to make the
FEC signal long enough forpeople to notice it and lock up.  Put
your call/selcal in the frontpart PLEASE.  It's such a pain to
have to sit there and watch twominutes of CQ to find out who is
calling and I can be typing theSELCAL ahead if it's given
early.The last line (other than my QTH) indicates I'm ready for
automaticreplies (either ARQ or FEC).  After this is sent I go
back intostandby (not transmiting).To answer, just push whatever
you push to initiate a ARQ connectionand enter the SELCAL (or
just call him back in FEC mode with thenormal hiscall de
yourcall.  I've had FEC QSO's, most noticably withsome guy on
Diego Garcia who's surplus SITOR equipment wouldn't eatWWOL as a
SELCAL and my AMTOR thing wouldn't eat the numeric call hecould
enter in his.-Ron (Another 20M AMTOR
fan!)------------------------------Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992
18:28:01 GMTFrom: cs.yale.edu![e-mail]: New
packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:...>>Until I get better adjusted to VHF packet,
you'll probably find me>>on 20 m AMTOR.  There's a friendly
medium!  Not much good for downloading>>software, however.>>...
If you want>to talk about slow, the 45.5 baud AMTOR is slow, and
can't even handle>a full character set. It's persistent in the
face of errors however, as>is packet.>Slow is good sometimes.
AMTOR goes nearly as fast as I can type, andabout twice the
speed I can think on-line.>Gary KE4ZVMartin
AA6E------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 18:24:52
GMTFrom: PYR.SWAN.AC.UK![e-mail]:
Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo: [e-mail]
is only a dead end because everybody has got themselves locked
intothe wrong technology. The military bods have been running
good 1200 baudover a 12.5KHz SSB channel just by choice of
better hardware and systems.To start with they are using higher
quality modems and filters withautomatic tuning to avoid
drifting of the rigs being a problem. Secondlythey are using ECC
at about 2000 baud to give an error corrected1200 baud link. If
they can do it why can't we
?Alan------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 21:59:40
GMTFrom: olivea!hal.com![e-mail]:
Packet Networks today and tommorrowTo: [e-mail]
article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Alan
Cox) writes:>To start with they are using higher quality modems
and filters with>automatic tuning to avoid drifting of the rigs
being a problem. Secondly>they are using ECC at about 2000 baud
to give an error corrected>1200 baud link. If they can do it why
can't we ?You guys are missing the obvious answer here, most
hams are not internetusers, have no idea how slow they are
actually running, and are cheap :)I run a packet BBS that has
about 600 users. Mine is different in thatit supports landline
and internet access as well as the traditional 1200baud tnc
access. What I have found is that half my users don't own a
tnc.Why, some are turned off by the performance others thefear
of not knowing how to use it and still others that don't want
toinvest in the equipment.Out of the 300 users that don't use
packet, 75 access the bbs purely bythe internet gateway. They
probably do it for the same reasons.I tried last year to get a
group purchase together for my users of9600 baud plug and play
equipment. For the price of around $400 they wouldbe up and
running, with people and a bbs to talk to. I was suprised atthe
meager response. I got less than 10 from my user base.People
argue, but when it comes to putting bucks on the table, the
roomgets mighty quiet
:)---------------------------------------------------------------
--------------Bob Arasmith   [e-mail] (work)
[e-mail] (home)   n0ary@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na
(packet)------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 11:36:09
EDTFrom: world!ksr![e-mail]: Packet Radio
SatellitesTo: [e-mail]@n8emr.cmhnet.org (Gary
Sanders) writes:>KITSAT-OSCAR 23 IS VERY SIMILAR IN>FUNCTION TO
UOSAT-OSCAR 22.  IT WILL PROVIDE PACKET>STORE-AND-FORWARD
CAPABILITY AT 9600 BITS PER SECOND, ENHANCING>WORLDWIDE PACKET
COMMUNICATIONS.Hmm.  Can any of the OSCAR satellites talk to
each other?  It occurs to methat if there were enough OSCAR
satellites in LEO, they could performreal-time packet routing
between themselves to provide a long-haul backbone.The problem
might be that they'd have trouble hearing each other withoutdish
antennas, and if they were in elliptical orbits, they couldn't
rely onfixed-aim dishes.  If the satellites were sufficiently
close in angularseparation, perhaps dedicated earth stations
could perform the inter-satelliterelay function.  4 hops would
cut the effective throughput to under 2400 baud(for a single
packet that requires a reply, that is; for bulk data
transferusing FTP and TCP/IP, say, where acks aren't required
for every packet, thethroughput would rise toward 9600), but
that's still well above the current300 baud HF links.Routing
would be an issue, but if the earth stations knew the
approximategeographic location of each IP address, it could
easily make a good guess asto which satellites (if any) are
visible to each destination.No doubt this idea has already been
beaten to death by the hard-core
pacsatfolks.------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992
08:00:35 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!bt
[e-mail]: Ramsey Packet Garbage Modem ...
$70To: [e-mail](this is a flame)this message is a
waste of bandwidth, but I just spent another 2 hour session
getting nowhere in getting my Ramsey Baycom modem tokey my
Standard HT, and I have to drag Ramsey's name throughthe mud
after they've taken $70 from me and wasted so much of my time.I
have tried a lot of different things to get this to work, and
none of them have worked.  It took me about 2 hoursto put the
thing together originally, and I have spent at least 10-15 hours
since then trying to get it to transmit on my HT.A damn modem
circuit shouldn't cause this much trouble...Ramsey was no help
when I called.  Their ad says that their modemwill work with any
radio... it probably will, if you can afford thetime and have
the tools to re-work it to do so.Ramsey's attitude seems to be
that hooking the kit up to your radiois your problem.  Little
things like missing components in the original kit lose their
relative importance on the scale of poorquality in the face of
this important failing.Give me an A&E(?) PK88.  Not only do they
suggest circuits for hooking their carefully conditioned circuit
outputs to your radio, *but* I hear that they even make a number
of custom cables for popular radios.Trash Ramsey.  KB8CNE, Brad
Banko-- Brad Banko;  Dept of Physics;  U of Illinois;
[e-mail],
KB8CNE===========================================================
==============TI NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OF CHOCOLATE
CONFECTIONERY AND THE   SPATIAL DETECTION OF POLYMORPHIC STATES
OF COCOA BUTTER IN CHOCOLATE------------------------------Date:
18 Aug 92 16:29:48 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-stat
e.edu!slc3.ins.cwru.edu!agate!rsoft!mindlink![e-mail].E
DUSubject: Seeking opinion on HTs, multimode controllersTo:
[e-mail] would suggest if you are looking to set
up a packet station you should lookinto a mobile rig rather than
an HT. The HT will work but the extra power ofthe mobile means
less retries. You could buy an HT with an additional
brickamplifier to boost your output but with all that extra
expense you may as wellspend the same amount on a 30 Watt mobile
rig. I guarantee you would be happierwith the performance.
------------------------------Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 18:18:39
GMTFrom: cs.yale.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Packet Networks
today and tommorrowIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:...>The Internet is *not* free. Our use of it is
parasitic and subject>to the whims of government and corporate
sponsors. Ham satellitesYes, but universities are effectively in
the same boat.  I thinkit's fairly safe to piggyback on
university network access.  (We needsome precedents to be set
just to be sure.)>aren't free either of course, we hitch rides
on other people's >missions. HF is a unique resource to which
hams have free access.>Our charter is to advance the
communications art. We have the>opportunity to advance beyond
what commercial users are doing>and break new ground with long
haul data communications via HF>radio.Sure, just be sure that
you see technical "payback potential".  HF at 300baud with
robots shows how to fill up spectrum all day long, but
that'sactually unhelpful.  If we could do reliable 9600 kb HF
data with exoticmodems, meteor bounce, or what have you, I'd
like that!>>>There's a lot of value in long radio links
connecting very remote >>or non-industrialized areas, but that's
not my focus here.>>Yes there is, and in addition there's value
in connecting rural users >right here in the industrial US and
Canada. And there's value in>establishing alternative paths to
wireline services for use in >emergency situations.>Effective
emergency communications is a traditional ham strength,and it
has very good PR value (like justifying a lot of our
spectrum).But this is largely a local problem (we pray).
Existing packet and BBS technology seems quite appropriate,
maybe withregional or national Internet(?) interfaces. >I should
say that I have no objection to internet connections. However,>I
don't want internet connectivity to be used as an excuse not
to>pursue alternative HF technologies.>>Gary KE4ZVWe keep
reminding ourselves it's a hobby, and people have to have fun.So
I keep on seeking those weak 20m CW stations, even though I
coulddial them up for a few bucks.  On the other hand, if I'm
going tospend $$ and time getting into a new mode, I'd like to
understandwhere it's leading, especially when it is intimately
involved withsuch a well-developed technology base as computing
and data networking.73 Martin
AA6E------------------------------Date: 18 Aug 92 12:10:13
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!nntp.msstate.edu!emory!rsiatl!ke4zv!
[e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To : [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman)Subject : Re: Packet Networks today and
tommorrowIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Martin Ewing) writes:>>I can't see the
value in ever trying for transcontinental ham links>at any
speed, when Internet is free and reliable.  (If ham
satellites>can be done "free", I should think Internet
connections could be.)The Internet is *not* free. Our use of it
is parasitic and subjectto the whims of government and corporate
sponsors. Ham satellitesaren't free either of course, we hitch
rides on other people's missions. HF is a unique resource to
which hams have free access.Our charter is to advance the
communications art. We have theopportunity to advance beyond
what commercial users are doingand break new ground with long
haul data communications via HFradio.>There's a lot of value in
long radio links connecting very remote >or non-industrialized
areas, but that's not my focus here.Yes there is, and in
addition there's value in connecting rural users right here in
the industrial US and Canada. And there's value inestablishing
alternative paths to wireline services for use in emergency
situations.I should say that I have no objection to internet
connections. However,I don't want internet connectivity to be
used as an excuse not topursue alternative HF technologies.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #224******************************Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92
04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #225To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Thu,
20 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 225Today's Topics:        2400
bps,1200 baud,DSP(was New Packeteer Frustration)
       A&A Packet modem kits?                AEA-PK232MBX vs.
MFJ-1278, Which one?                      Apple // Packet
Equipment?                              ARRL SNAFU
 data compression with packet:  legal?                    Help
MAC packet programm!!!!!                  New packeteer
frustration (2 msgs)             Packet Networks today and
tommorrow (2 msgs)                             Packet speed
  What modulation method is best for sending 10Mbit/sec?
            Where can I get a TCM3105??Send Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 20 Aug 92 11:08:13 GMTFrom:
idacrd![e-mail]: 2400 bps,1200 baud,DSP(was New
Packeteer Frustration)To: [e-mail]:
<[e-mail]>
<[e-mail]>    <1992Aug17.233538.10942@c
bnewsm.cb.att.com>    <[e-mail]>Distributio
n: world>>1200 baud is the standard and not 2400 baud. 1200 baud
was dropped as a>>standard years ago in the computer world. Is
there any reason why 2400>>baud is not the standard now?  Part
of the problem is none of the companies>What protocol is used
for 2400 BPS packet?  Is it the same as 2400 baud>protocol aimed
at telephones?  Or is it different, like 1200 baud>packet?
>However, I predict once DSP modems enter the market in force,
there The telephone chip set for doing 2400 bps (NOT 2400 BAUD!)
does V26Bin all the amateur implementations.  The performance is
bad.  The AEADSP boxes do V26B (2400 bps) and do a fair job of
it.  The demodulatorsare better optimized for radios.  V26B is
pretty lame for radios but ifyou work on the filters you can
come up with reasonable comprimises thatseem to get the job
done.  I have not had time to add my spiffy adaptiveequalizer to
it yet but maybe soon.  The 2400 bps, which is transmittedusing
QAM, is actually two bits per symbol.  It is 1200 symbols
(orBAUDS) per second and 2400 bps AFTER STARTUP OVERHEAD.Hope
this helps.Bob N4HY------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92
12:34:50 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu
.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!aw0g
[e-mail]: A&A Packet modem kits?To:
[e-mail] buil 2 of the A&A baycom kits and also
have the new TigertronicsBaypac-2.  I use them on the macintosh
with the KISS TNC software I amwriting.  I can't comment on the
IBMPC software as I haven't ever seenit running.The A&A is a kit
which is fun (for me anyway). It comes with a compleat
schematic.Stas at A&A is very helpfull with any questions.It
doesn't come with a case.  I picked one of the modems up while
it was in use and it emitted a squeal and stopped working.One of
the 12volt power supplies stopped working.The power connector is
the oposite polarity of most 12v equipment.There is a red LED
for xmit and a yellow one for carrier detect.Carrier detect is
not brought out to the connector (the 7910 modem chip doesn't
really have a good carrier detect for radio work anyway)The A&A
modem does support 300 baud HFThe Tigertronics modem is line
powered so no need for an external power supply.It comes
assembled (ick).It is has a case, it is built into a DB25
connector.It does not come with any sort of schematic.  I had to
trace some pcboard foils to figure out how to hook it to a
macintosh.  It does come with awireing diagram for ibmpc's with
both the DB25 and DB9 wireing.Since it is line powered it may
not work without a seperate power supply on IBMPCs that use non
standard line drivers with low power charge pumps, for example
the hp95.It has one surface mount tinie tiny LED that seems to
be carrier detect.I don't know if the Tigertronics supports
300baud HFTalk to John Olson for tech support.I heard that
Paccom in tampa florida has modem built into a DB25 similar
tothe Tigertronics, but I have never seen one.Although I don't
get any money for ham work I did accept discount from A&Aand a
modem from Tigertronics to use in writing macintosh software.
HopefullyI have been fair in the
descriptions.------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92
04:52:32 GMTFrom:
swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!wupost!udel!gvls1!tredysvr!undr!se
[e-mail]: AEA-PK232MBX vs. MFJ-1278, Which
one?To: [e-mail]        As a brand new packeteer, I
am torn between which TNC to buy.  I        know that I want to
get into the data modes, and I have narrowed        my choices
down to these two TNC's, so all I need now is        something
to push me one way or the other.        Any help would be
appreciated.        Sean    N3LQN---Sean Petty
        undr![e-mail]:
39'58'12"N 75'84'26"W
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92
19:57:22 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen![e-mail]
ubject: Apple // Packet Equipment?To: [e-mail] own
an Apple //c, and have just started looking into VHF packet
radio.Does anyone know of a TNC to connect to a Realistic
HTX-202 and the Apple//c?  Also, what about packet programs?73
de Scott--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------| Scott 'Scooter' Pettigrew   |        Email:
[e-mail]        || 2763 Stonebury Court
|-----------------------------------------------|| Rochester
Hills, MI  48307  | "You need love like I do, don't you?" DC
Drive|------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992
16:13:07 GMTFrom: acd4!TEFS1![e-mail]: ARRL
SNAFUTo: [e-mail] article <paulf.713809410@w6yx>
[e-mail] (Paul Flaherty)
writes:>[e-mail] (Jay Townsend)
writes:>>> Packet is not repeaters as they are currently
defined. >>97.3 Definitions>>[...]>>(34) An amateur station that
automatically retransmits the signals of>    other
stations.>>>Sounds like UAA digital operations would fit right
in.>>Packet does not retransmit the signals of other
stations.Sorry, you are wrong. In the purest sense, Packet
forwarding stations are not repeaters. In a broad sense they
are. However, in the above97.3 definition, the meaning here is
in real time much like a 2m voicerepeater. What comes in, goes
out in close to real time (some voicerepeaters have digital
delays). Also, the packet digipeater is notretransmitting "the
signals" of another station. What its doing is recording the
data in the other stations signal and putting thatdata in a
"signal" of its own and transmitting it. Careful inspectionsof
AX.25 readily show this. In fact, if you just think about it a
little bityou can understand that a packet digipeater strips
stuff of the incomming data and adds stuff to the outgoing data.
Before you jump on my case(I don't know if you will or not), let
me invite you to and if you do answer these questions when you
respond:If a packet stations receives 10 AX.25 packets on day,
holds them fora total of 10 seconds and send out the data again,
is it  a repeater?What if it holds it for 5 minutes?
           1 day?                        1 week?            1 year?The
fact remains that "retransmitting a signal" is not what a
digipeaterdoes. It retransmits the data in different form.
Therefore, digipeatersare not repeaters. Besides, how many
repeaters do you know that cando receive and transmit operations
on the same frequency? One of the maincomponents of a repeater
is OFFSET. Digipeaters have no offset. Repeaters do.>>NO.  10M
FM are REPEATERS.  Only REPEATERS have any differences and then
only>>in what *I* consider VHF segments.  Above 29 Mhz.>>1.
Check the definition above.  Repeater does not exclude
digital.No it does not exclude digital. However, in my technical
opinion, mostdigipeaters are not repeaters. Notice I said
"most". If you want a digital repeater, you can take a voice
repeater and dedicate it to digital. In that case, you have a
digital repeater that falls under thesame definitions and
regulations as a voice repeater.>-=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX/5W1JX
George Bowles, N9LKG------------------------------Date: 19 Aug
92 13:43:28 GMTFrom:
opel!slc1!vk2bea![e-mail]: data compression
with packet:  legal?To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Luck Hurder KY1T) writes: >> >> >>From the ARRL's FCC Rulebook:
>> >>"Above 50 MHz where data and RTTY emissions are permitted,
>>unspecified digital codes may be used in communication between
stations >>licensed by the FCC.  Baudot, AMTOR and ASCII are
specified in >>the rules, so unspecified includes everything
else..." > >Let's make sure we aren't talking apples and oranges
here. Baudot and >ASCII are bit encodings for *characters*,
AMTOR uses the same encoding >as Baudot. Meanwhile,
*compression* is done at the *text* level, notNot so my friend.
Whilst there is a one to one correspondence ofavailable
characters between BAUDOT(Murray) and AMTOR( plus the extra
housekeeping bytes), the encodings are quite different.AMTOR
uses seven bit characters. Each valid AMTOR character has a 4/3
ratio of mark to space (or visa-versa, I don't recall off hand).
This is used to determine if an error has been received. Many
SITOR decoders and some older AMTOR decoders outputBAUDOT, so it
can be printed on a regular teletype (tm reg).-- Michael
Katzmann      >    Broadcast Sports Technology Inc.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<    Crofton, Maryland. U.S.AAmateur Radio Stations:   >NV3Z /
VK2BEA / G4NYV
<    opel!vk2bea![e-mail]------------------------------D
ate: 19 Aug 1992 10:17:24 -0700From:
[e-mail]: Help MAC packet
programm!!!!!To: [e-mail] everyone!I'm new on
Packet using a Mac and i'd like to know if there is agood
terminal packet programm for this computer available via
FTP(freeware o shareware). If you have one please send me it via
E- mail.All info via E-mail will be wellcomed.Thank you and
73MiguelEA1EVUInternet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date:
19 Aug 92 17:53:15 GMTFrom: hayes![e-mail]:
New packeteer frustrationTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:> > Direct FSK symbol encoding is second only to
AFSK in being spectrally> inefficient and error prone on a HF
channel. Nope. I'm afraid that OOK takes the top prize! (On /
Off Keying)> PSK methods available today can push 9600 baud over
good HF channels. There's a couple of problems using PSK over
normal HF channels. First ofall, most crystal filters in HF
radios have really gross phase characteristics.This causes some
signal degradation with FSK, but more with PSK.Second, (and most
important) is that multipathing of HF signals
introducestremendeous phase distortion. The only way to combat
this problem is tolower the symbol rate so that the distortions
don't last longer than thesymbols. (Which is also why 45 baud
RTTY and even 100 baud AMTOR workon 80m, but 300 baud packet
does not)Another way to combat the multipath distortion problem
is to always operatenear the MUF, which results in clean, single
path signals. Tom Clark hadsome success running 1200 baud PSK on
10m, for example. > But the rules prevent it.Not really. The
rules dictate a maximum symbol rate (300 baud below 28 MHz)and a
maximum shift (1000 Hz below 30 MHz). Other than that, the rules
areremarkably open.Of course, you'd have a hard time stuffing
9600 bps data down a channelwith the characteristics of most HF
radios....-- Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS:
76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958Principal Software Engineer
! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QOHayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. !
UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcolemanPOB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   !
Internet: [e-mail]: "My employer
doesn't pay me to have opinions."Quote: "The same light shines
on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve
Hackett.------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992
18:32:51 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!mips!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd.e
du![e-mail]: New packeteer
frustrationTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>Well 300 baud does seem slow to someone who
uses the government's>multi-million dollar internet. However,
300 baud was hot stuff on>telephone lines 15 years ago. And
unfortunately it's as fast as the>FCC will allow on HF right
now. There's no *technical* stopper preventing>faster
operation.I guess it is a question on bandwith.  How much
bandwidth does one needto say do 4800 baud on HF?  How does that
compare with SSB voice?(not including spread-spectrum, that's
cheating :) although it should belooked into.  What are the
rules for S.S. on HF right now?  Are therecommercial S.S. kits?)
  de N3HAU------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92 18:38:12
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd.edu!
[e-mail]: Packet Networks today and
tommorrowTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan
Cox) writes:>To start with they are using higher quality modems
and filters with>automatic tuning to avoid drifting of the rigs
being a problem. Secondly>they are using ECC at about 2000 baud
to give an error corrected>1200 baud link. If they can do it why
can't we ?Why not w. a DSP modem?  Someone just has to code it
up.And, oh yeah, get the FCC to OK it on HF.de
N3HAU------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92 16:47:24
GMTFrom: psinntp!psinntp![e-mail]: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowTo: [e-mail]
rec.radio.amateur.packet, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
writes:>In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Martin Ewing) writes:>>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>>...>>>The Internet is *not* free. Our use of
it is parasitic and subject>>>to the whims of government and
corporate sponsors. Ham satellites>>>>Yes, but universities are
effectively in the same boat.  I think>>it's fairly safe to
piggyback on university network access.  (We need>>some
precedents to be set just to be sure.)>>Al Gore, yes *that* Al
Gore, is pushing a bill to commercialize the >networks we are
now using for free. When we start receiving a monthly >bill
based on bits/buck, using the landline networks is going to look
>a lot less attractive. I just want people to keep their options
open. >If we lock ourselves into the landlines for long haul
packet, we may>regret it later.Some of us are already paying for
Internet service.  And the peoplewe get it from (PSI) don't
allow us carry third-party traffic.  (Andyou thought hams were
the only ones with third-party trafficrestrictions!)  If/when
the government gets out of the businessof subsidizing the
Internet, you can expect that sort of thing to bethe rule rather
than the exception.  I agree with Gary: go ahead andmake use of
the Internet, but don't let's stop trying to build ourown,
independent network.   [deleted]>If it ain't broke, nobody is
going to pay to fix it. We've got to>load the systems until they
break to force higher capacity. Therefore>spectrum filling 300
baud HF robots *are* helpful to the cause of >high performance
networking on the amateur bands.Maybe we should be using 60 wpm
RTTY!  :-)-------Jon Bloom, KE3Z                   |
[e-mail] Radio Relay League       |225 Main St.
                   |Newington, CT 06111
|------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 14:21:56
GMTFrom: pipex!demon!edscom.demon.co.uk![e-mail]:
Packet speedTo: [e-mail] packet runs at 1200
baud which is quite slow. Access over the phone toa BBS can be
as much as 32kbps with compression. Since the audio
bandwidthavailable on a phone line is much the same as on a 2
metre FM channel, cansimilar techniques be used with packet?I
appreciate that certain countries' rules may not allow this, so
let's keepthe discussion technical. I suppose cost may be a big
factor, but is it atleast feasible and therefore worth
pursuing?Richard G4TGJ-- Richard Tomlinson, EDS Scicon, Wavendon
Tower, Milton Keynes, UK MK17 [e-mail]   Tel:
[phone]          Amateur radio: G4TGJAll opinions
expressed are mine, and are not necessarily those of my
employer.------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92 06:09:23
GMTFrom:
csus.edu!target.water.ca.gov![e-mail]: What
modulation method is best for sending 10Mbit/sec?To:
[e-mail]    Theoretically speaking (or asking),
assuming I was in theGigacycles, what method of modulation would
be best for sending 10mbit/secdata?   "Best" can fall into
different catagories.  Best BER, use of BW,S/N ratio... or
whatever you can think of.  Let's also assume the coding is the
same as used over IEEE 802.3 wire.I'll also assume full or half
duplex is irrelevant at this time.Please e-mail to me below.
I'll post if there is anything useful.
[e-mail] ------------------------------Date:
19 Aug 92 16:31:52 GMTFrom:
swrinde!sdd.hp.com!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.e
du!hagbard-celine.MIT.EDU![e-mail]: Where
can I get a TCM3105??To: [e-mail] am looking for
the TCM3105 chip to put together a Baycom modem.I've looked
through several catalogs but could not find it.  Couldanyone
tell me where I can get it?Please email any information to me, I
can then post some sort ofsummary in case anyone else is
interested.Thanks, 73,-Brit Gould
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 19
Aug 92 20:34:24 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!noc.msc.n
et!uc.msc.edu!shamash!ems!kafka.ems.cdc.com![e-mail]
.EDUTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>amasSubject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationAll this frustration of long distance stuff, rules
and other info gotme thinking.  Are there any rules about how
fast someone can send CW?I doubt it.  WHat if computers were
sending CW (I think the rulesspecify morse, which is fine), how
fast can they listen?  On 80 metersa cycle takes about 2.7e-7
seconds, if you could get computers to dealwith 3-5 cycles as a
dit, and 9-15 cycles as a dah, you could reallypush some bits
trough.  Assuming you had a really good errorcorrection code,
there could easily be reliable communications.  Ifthe computers
paid attention to error rates, the speed could varydepending on
noise, and other stuff.Or we could plead with the ARRL to change
the rules (Sorry, couldn'tresist, I thought the ARRL ran the
FCC).------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92 20:27:17
GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!aio!norm![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationIn article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:> I think the
situation right now is that 1200 is still reasonable for> local
(no hopes, or up to about 2 digi's) interactive communication.>
So, as long as the SYSOPS are running 9600 for message-passing,
there> really isn't a need to mass produce high-speed modems for
everyone.> > de N3HAU  I've heard "realtime" chats across the
packet network between southernHouston and NW Arkansas.  It's
slow, but usable.  You need to go throughquite a few sites! :-)
While we're on this topic: does anyone know of a packet path
that reachesfrom Texas (*anywhere* in Texas) to Arkansas,
without using any HF gates?I have mapped much of that region (NE
Texas) from *both* sides, hitting theArkansas side via HF gate,
and I still haven't found a VHF crossover.-- | Keith Mancus
<[e-mail]>                         ||
         N5WVR
||  "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and
live       ||  in Hell." -General Sheridan
                    |------------------------------Date: 19 Aug
92 18:28:27 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd.edu!
[e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New
packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (jeffrey.n.jones) writes:>For some
reason>1200 baud is the standard and not 2400 baud. 1200 baud
was dropped as a>standard years ago in the computer world. Is
there any reason why 2400>baud is not the standard now?  Part of
the problem is none of the companies>are selling a 2400 baud TNC
for close to the same price as a 1200 baud.>The 2400 baud chip
set has been out there for quite a while so it isn't>like it's
brand new technology. Interesting question here, is ham
radio>technology driven at all? What protocol is used for 2400
BPS packet?  Is it the same as 2400 baudprotocol aimed at
telephones?  Or is it different, like 1200 baudpacket?  I think
the situation right now is that 1200 is still reasonable
forlocal (no hopes, or up to about 2 digi's) interactive
communication.So, as long as the SYSOPS are running 9600 for
message-passing, therereally isn't a need to mass produce
high-speed modems for everyone.However, I predict once DSP
modems enter the market in force, there will be a large
switchover to higher baud rates. It just doesn't seemto wise to
buy a 2400 baud modem today, when this fall or nextspring you
could buy a DSP modem and do everything.As soon as W3EAX,
University of MD club, buys a DSP modem, I'll lety'all know how
good it works. (Should be some time this fall).de
N3HAU------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992
23:26:59 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!caen!mtu.edu![e-mail]
: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>Subject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationIn article <20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>
[e-mail] (Tom Brusehaver) writes:>>All this
frustration of long distance stuff, rules and other info got>me
thinking.  Are there any rules about how fast someone can send
CW?>I doubt it.  WHat if computers were sending CW (I think the
rules>specify morse, which is fine), how fast can they listen?
On 80 meters>a cycle takes about 2.7e-7 seconds, if you could
get computers to deal>with 3-5 cycles as a dit, and 9-15 cycles
as a dah, you could really>push some bits trough.  Assuming you
had a really good error>correction code, there could easily be
reliable communications.  If>the computers paid attention to
error rates, the speed could vary>depending on noise, and other
stuff.>>Or we could plead with the ARRL to change the rules
(Sorry, couldn't>resist, I thought the ARRL ran the FCC).The
only problem is making them hear each other.  The faster you
send, thewider your signal is.  9600 baud PSK is about as wide
as an FM voice channel(not quite, but close enough), and going
faster would just be worse.  One possibility would be to use
tone encoding so that each baud represented severalbits.  If you
could handle 4 tones instead of 2, you could fit twice as much
data in the same period of time.  I don't know how much more
bandwidth that would require, however.73 de
n8pbe------------------------------Date: 19 Aug 92 12:47:14
GMTFrom:
usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.contel.c
om!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>MReply-To : [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman)Subject : Re: Packet Networks today and
tommorrowIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Martin Ewing) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>...>>The Internet is *not* free. Our use of it
is parasitic and subject>>to the whims of government and
corporate sponsors. Ham satellites>>Yes, but universities are
effectively in the same boat.  I think>it's fairly safe to
piggyback on university network access.  (We need>some
precedents to be set just to be sure.)Al Gore, yes *that* Al
Gore, is pushing a bill to commercialize the networks we are now
using for free. When we start receiving a monthly bill based on
bits/buck, using the landline networks is going to look a lot
less attractive. I just want people to keep their options open.
If we lock ourselves into the landlines for long haul packet, we
mayregret it later.>Sure, just be sure that you see technical
"payback potential".  HF at 300>baud with robots shows how to
fill up spectrum all day long, but that's>actually unhelpful.
If we could do reliable 9600 kb HF data with exotic>modems,
meteor bounce, or what have you, I'd like that!We can. But as
long as 300 baud systems handle the load, no one isgoing to
invest in more exotic systems. If we have a permanent placeto
use the technology, rather than an expiring STA, I think usage
willincrease to the point the system will collapse from
overload. I *hope*the system collapses from overload. That's the
only way we're going toget people to spend the money to make a
better network. We've seen itat VHF. People were satisfied with
simplex digipeaters and 1200 bauduntil the number of users
increased and the systems collapsed. Onlythen did duplex
repeaters, trunk connected MANs, and 9600 baud modems become
popular around here.If it ain't broke, nobody is going to pay to
fix it. We've got toload the systems until they break to force
higher capacity. Thereforespectrum filling 300 baud HF robots
*are* helpful to the cause of high performance networking on the
amateur bands.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------End of
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #225******************************Date:
Fri, 21 Aug 92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #226To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Fri,
21 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 226Today's Topics:
       Data Carrier Detect and Packet        MFJ 1278 GOING
BRAIN DEAD IN KISS MODE ! PLEASE HELP !             Packet
Networks today and tommorrow (2 msgs)             packet radio
communications program for NeXT
Packet speed                        PK232 vs 1278 (2 msgs)
          Ramsey Packet Garbage Modem ... $70          WANTED:
W0RLI BBS for Atari ST <-> amateur PacketSend Replies or notes
for publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 20 Aug 92 11:21:37 GMTFrom:
idacrd![e-mail]: Data Carrier Detect and
PacketTo: [e-mail] DCD'ers don't have floppy
DCD's.  With that introduction, the TAPRDCD, and those I have
done for the DSP stuff are data coherence detectors.This means
that they occasionally false on `unsquelched noise' but aremuch
more robust than simple noise detectors.  At random, the
filteredoutput of your demodulators, before clock recovery and
data extraction,will look like valid data for long enough for a
real DCD to false, thatis to inform you (light up a DCD LED)
that it has detected data when thereis none present.  Given
this, it is by far the best way to do this job.These envelope
detectors, and energy in band detectors are easily fooledby
people cranking up the volume or AGC bringing up the inband
noise tothe point where detection is
declared.Bob------------------------------Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992
23:19:58 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!wupost!gumby!destroyer!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.c
a![e-mail]: MFJ 1278 GOING BRAIN DEAD IN
KISS MODE ! PLEASE HELP !To: [e-mail] I have
been using the MFJ 1278 for TCP/IP (KISS MODE) working
flawlessly for the last year. Well now when I start up kiss mode
andstart running msys or ka9q it works for a few seconds, and
thenstop working. (Specifically it will not key the
transmitter.)PS-The battery inside the TNC is fine (first thing
i checked).The kicker:If I use AX.25 mode and run normal packet
it works perfectly.I called MFJ and they said that they want me
to ship it to themfor a modification for $60 US. (PS it is out
of warranty)IF you even think that you might have an idea, I
would appreciateany help, suggestions,
hints.SincerelyJerry------------------------------Date: 20 Aug
92 20:07:51 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd.edu!
[e-mail]: Packet Networks today and
tommorrowTo: [e-mail]>In rec.radio.amateur.packet,
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:>>Al Gore, yes *that* Al
Gore, is pushing a bill to commercialize the >>networks we are
now using for free. When we start receiving a monthly >>bill
based on bits/buck, using the landline networks is going to look
>>a lot less attractive. I just want people to keep their
options open. >>If we lock ourselves into the landlines for long
haul packet, we may>>regret it later.(excuse me if I messed up
the author of the quote...)Which bill are you referring to?  I
understand the NREN will be anational research and education
network paid for by the government.It might be capable of
providing pay services, but the internetalready is (Well, CARL,
etc.)Incidently, I'd wager Al Gore is the only person on a
presidentialticket who even knows that the internet is.de
N3HAU------------------------------Date: 21 Aug 92 01:01:13
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!sdd.hp.com!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!p
ark.uvcc.edu!cc.uvcc.edu![e-mail]: Packet
Networks today and tommorrowTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jon Bloom) writes:> In
rec.radio.amateur.packet, [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
writes:>>In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Martin Ewing) writes:>>>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>>>...>>>>The Internet is *not* free. Our use of
it is parasitic and subject>>>>to the whims of government and
corporate sponsors. Ham satellites...>>>>>>Yes, but universities
are effectively in the same boat.  I think>>>it's fairly safe to
piggyback on university network access. ...>>>>Al Gore, yes
*that* Al Gore, is pushing a bill to commercialize the
>>networks we are now using for free. When we start receiving a
monthly >>bill based on bits/buck, using the landline networks
is going to look >>a lot less attractive. I just want people to
keep their options open. >>If we lock ourselves into the
landlines for long haul packet, we may>>regret it later.> > Some
of us are already paying for Internet service.  And the people>
we get it from (PSI) don't allow us carry third-party traffic.
(And> you thought hams were the only ones with third-party
traffic> restrictions!)  If/when the government gets out of the
business> of subsidizing the Internet, you can expect that sort
of thing to be> the rule rather than the exception.  I agree
with Gary: go ahead and> make use of the Internet, but don't
let's stop trying to build our> own, independent network.ER,
UMMM, (cough) As the administrator of a domain in the InternetI
may have some news to help this out.The NSF net has always been
scheduled to become a commercial network.Federal funding is
backing off by design so that the network will be selfsupporting
after a time.Our local network ("local" meaning restricted to
this state) is a part ofWESTNET.  WESTNET charges $5000 per year
for an industrial customer with a56Kbaud feed. As soon as anyone
in the state coughs up a $5000 fee, WESTNET willbecome
officially a commercial network, no longer subject to "research
network"rules for Utah originated traffic.(We are hunting for an
angel with $5K now.) Note that the fee is annual, not traffic
based.  There are no plans I know ofto do volume billing on
Internet.  Once you pay the connection fee, that's it.So
internet fees are not a problem, But, as has been pointed out,
Wirelinenetworks is the wrong answer for ham radio for many
other reasons.I want to have the anti-commercial rules changed
for amateur radio.Until "hams" start carrying some volume
traffic, there will be no needfor anything better than 300 buad
E-Mail.  Put NetNews on the air andwatch those 9600 baud and
faster modems start showing up...  Especially ifI can get my
neighborhood rural school to buy the modems so that I can
providethem with a network feed.  (Their modem, my license.  I
can't be paid to runthe radio, but nothing says I have to OWN
it, just CONTROL it.  Schools havebeen buying ham stations for
years for the benefit of thier students.  This isjust another
benefit for the students, having a netnews feed.)The opportunity
for service, as well as emergency communications would
beamazing.  (Imagine if Mackay, Idaho, had had a 56K radio link
when theearthquake hit in 84...)  Just tie the radio link to the
school network anduse every machine in the lab to type or
recieve emergency traffic.  MAYBETHE TRAFFIC WILL EVENTUALLY GET
AWAY FROM THE OLD BAUDOT TELETYPE LOOK X ATLEAST WE CAN HOPE SO
X I AM ALMOST ASHAMED TO PASS A MESSAGE IN THE OLD NTSFORMAT X
IT LOOKS LIKE A LEFTOVER FROM THE GAY 90S X SINCERLY YOURSThere
has to be a perceived need before hams will advance the state of
the art.  If the rules prevent the state of the art being
advanced, it's timeto change the rules.  At 300 baud I can
filter all messages for commercialcontent (perhaps).  At 9600,
no way.  Packetized voice at 1200 baud is a joke.at 9600, with
speach compression, it's doable.  (I have watched pro
basketballon a 168Kbaud circuit and could follow Karl Malone's
dunks.) Now if someone would write a one-to-many feed algorithm
for netnews....-- Vern Cole -- Systems Manager -- Utah Valley
Community College --------------------------------Date: 21 Aug
92 00:18:17 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!newsun![e-mail]: packet radio
communications program for NeXTTo: [e-mail] there
a packet radio communications program for the NeXT
computer?--John Scherer778 Shetland Ct. San Jose, CA
95127internet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92
19:59:05 GMTFrom:
swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hpscdc!hplextra!hpl-opus!hpnmdla!alanb@network
.UCSD.EDUSubject: Packet speedTo: [e-mail]
rec.radio.amateur.packet, [e-mail] (Richard
Tomlinson) writes:>VHF packet runs at 1200 baud which is quite
slow. Access over the phone to>a BBS can be as much as 32kbps
with compression. Since the audio bandwidth>available on a phone
line is much the same as on a 2 metre FM channel, can>similar
techniques be used with packet?>I appreciate that certain
countries' rules may not allow this, so let's keep>the
discussion technical. I suppose cost may be a big factor, but is
it at>least feasible and therefore worth pursuing?It is quite
possible to cram more than one bit per Hertz into a channel.The
tradeoff is reliability:  you need a higher signal/noise ratio
fora given bit error rate.My impression is that current TNC
modems do a very sub-optimal job ofdecoding signals in the
presence of noise.  I suspect you could increasethe baud rate
without increasing the error rate if you designed a
bettermodem.AL N1AL------------------------------Date: Thu, 20
Aug 1992 13:34:04 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.hon
eywell.com![e-mail]: PK232 vs
1278To: [e-mail], N3LQN, asked about merits of
PK232 vs 1278.  I got a number ofreplies about my comments on
the MFJ software, some agreeing with me butmany others saying
they had no problems.  Since the comments were mixed, Istill
feel I wish I had paid a few bucks extra an bought the AEA TNC.
Sean, the 1278 hardware seems fine, but I am not real thrilled
withthe software, either MFJCOM or Multicom.  I have been able
to work aroundsome of the problems, but not all. For packet
only, LANLINK works well withthe 1278.  But I want to retain
the FAX andSSTV features.  On the otherhand, most of the
software problems I have are evident in the packet mode,and the
system works pretty well with FAX and SSTV.  Its just that I
envythe people in my area that bought the AEA, as they just plug
it in, runthe software, and it works.  One of the maddening
things to me about the MFJ software is that ifthere is
compatibility with a file, for example, viewing an image
datafile that is in wrong format than specified by menu
selection, the systemhas a tendency to go over the hill, locking
up, and needing a reboot.  I wishthey would have put in a more
gentle way of telling me I had selected
somethingwrong!------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92
15:05:06 GMTFrom:
dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!pilot.njin.net![e-mail]:
PK232 vs 1278To: [e-mail] makes me ill.  I'm
really skeptical about any program thatwill sit there and
blather at a TNC for two minutes and not botherto see if
anything is there (it just sends in the blind).  Therereally
isn't any customization for different TNC types (as long aswhat
you're talking to is enough like a TNC2 you're OK) and
theparameter setup is most kindly described as hokey.On the
other hand, PAKET seems much better.  It actually interactswith
the TNC rather than typing blindly at it, and has a much
niceruser interface, on line documentation and help.   You knew
you wereinto something intersting when you see how fancy the
install programis.  The shareware contribution ask is only half
what they ask forin
LanLink.-Ron------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92
23:16:04 GMTFrom:
swrinde!emory!rsiatl![e-mail]: Ramsey Packet
Garbage Modem ... $70To:
[e-mail][e-mail] (Bradley T Banko)
writes:>(this is a flame)>this message is a waste of bandwidth,
but I just spent another >2 hour session getting nowhere in
getting my Ramsey Baycom modem to>key my Standard HT, and I have
to drag Ramsey's name through>the mud after they've taken $70
from me and wasted so much of my time.>I have tried a lot of
different things to get this to work, and >none of them have
worked.  It took me about 2 hours>to put the thing together
originally, and I have spent at least >10-15 hours since then
trying to get it to transmit on my HT.>A damn modem circuit
shouldn't cause this much trouble...Everything I've ever bought
from Ramsey has been garbage including theircounters.  I started
with the counter kit.  I put the thing together andfor the first
time before or since, could not make the damn thing work.They
used hinky RC coupling networks between counter stages that
appearedimpossible to get working.  I sent it back and got an
A/T one in return.They used an uncompensated color burst crystal
for the time base that was as stable as, well, a color TV :-)  I
yanked that out, installeda surplus Hewlett-packard ovenized
oscillator and have been pretty happy with the unit.  It burns
out displays and/or drivers fairlyoften because both are being
driven beyond ratings.I bought the two meter amp kit.  made a
fine power oscillator.  It wentback for a refund.Then I bought
the "radar gun".  This abomination uses a TVRO FET
transistorrunning as an oscillator at about 2 ghz as the rf
source.  Stability? NOT!The "display" uses an RC oscillator as
the "timebase".  They couldn't even manage to put a crystal on
the thing.  Got it together, all voltages checked out, the
display lit up and flickered several digits around zero.Clamped
the thing in the vice and walked in front of it and.... It
workedfor about 6 feet.  By "worked" I mean different numbers
appeared onthe display than when I was not moving.  I don't
think I can walk20 mph but who knows?IT's really too bad Ramsey
is like this.  We really need a good kit sourcesince Heath went
tits-up.  Unless you enjoy cussing and throwing things,Ramsey is
not the place.John-- John De Armond, WD4OQC
|Interested in high performance mobility?  Performance
Engineering Magazine (TM) |Marietta, Ga
|Interested in high tech and computers? [e-mail]
            |Write me about PE MagazineNeed Usenet public Access
in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on
Dixie.com.------------------------------Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992
15:29:56 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!vela![e-mail]
.EDUSubject: WANTED: W0RLI BBS for Atari ST <-> amateur
PacketTo: [e-mail] heard that there is a version
of the W0RLI BBS that was writtenas part of pack-et-term but I
have not had any luck in chasing it down.If someone has this
program and can pack it (lharc or zoo, etc) and the either let
me know where to get it or uuencode it and mail it tome, I would
greatly appreciate it.Thanksswood-- +========================+
 -------_________     +=========================+| WANTED - DEAD
OR ALIVE |    o\ o \     ____|o    |  If you see this lure,  ||
Creek Chub "Plunker"  |      \___\_-o-    viv   | PLEASE send me
email!!! |+========================+            viv
+=========================+------------------------------Date:
20 Aug 92 10:37:03 EDTFrom: world!ksr![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Packet
Networks today and [e-mail] (Martin
Ewing) writes:>In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:>>The Internet is *not*
free. Our use of it is parasitic and subject>>to the whims of
government and corporate sponsors. Ham satellites>Yes, but
universities are effectively in the same boat.No, universities
on the Internet are there because the Government has paidfor
their connection as a way to improve the value of their
Government-sponsored research; either that, or they've signed a
commercial contract withone of the commercial Internet
providers.  In either case, they're a line-itemon someone's
budget.>Sure, just be sure that you see technical "payback
potential".  HF at 300>baud with robots shows how to fill up
spectrum all day long, but that's>actually unhelpful.  If we
could do reliable 9600 kb HF data with exotic>modems, meteor
bounce, or what have you, I'd like that!One *can*.  But why
would anyone bother with people claiming it's a waste oftime
when the Internet provides "free" access to gigabit
cross-country fibers?Of course, when alt.binaries.pictures.*
finally saturates the Internet, causingthe government to place a
moratorium on non-official traffic on their links,and the
commercial Internet providers finally institute per-packet charg
e

s thatwill make the European PTTs green with envy, then it'll be
time to start workon HF links, right?  If there's anyone left
then who cares and knows how,anyway...Also, "The Internet" is
still chiefly a US and Canada phenomenon, and "TheFree Internet"
definitely is.  If you'd like to be able to indulge
inhigh-data-rate communications with a ham in, say, Chile,
sponging off theInternet won't do
it.------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92 12:23:36
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!wupost!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman)Subject : Re: New packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Coleman)
writes:>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:>> >> Direct FSK symbol
encoding is second only to AFSK in being spectrally>>
inefficient and error prone on a HF channel. >>Nope. I'm afraid
that OOK takes the top prize! (On / Off Keying)No, on/off keying
is fairly spectrally efficient, better than FSK. Withweak
signals and poor decoders, it's error rate can be higher
though.>> PSK methods available today can push 9600 bps over
good HF channels. >>There's a couple of problems using PSK over
normal HF channels. First of>all, most crystal filters in HF
radios have really gross phase characteristics.>This causes some
signal degradation with FSK, but more with PSK.Well if you
insist on using Japanese voice radios, you shouldn't expectgood
performance. Military radios with mechanical filters don't seem
tohave a problem.>Second, (and most important) is that
multipathing of HF signals introduces>tremendeous phase
distortion. The only way to combat this problem is to>lower the
symbol rate so that the distortions don't last longer than
the>symbols. (Which is also why 45 baud RTTY and even 100 baud
AMTOR work>on 80m, but 300 baud packet does not)>>Another way to
combat the multipath distortion problem is to always
operate>near the MUF, which results in clean, single path
signals. Tom Clark had>some success running 1200 baud PSK on
10m, for example. Multipath selective fading can be a serious
problem. Operating near theMUF is the best dodge around this,
but diversity reception will also help a lot. 9600 bps on HF is
not going to be a weak signal mode.Systems like Piccolo and
Clover that use multiple carriers to transmitbits in parallel
with long symbol durations are likely a more robustway to go at
HF.>> But the rules prevent it.>>Not really. The rules dictate a
maximum symbol rate (300 baud below 28 MHz)>and a maximum shift
(1000 Hz below 30 MHz). Other than that, the rules
are>remarkably open.>>Of course, you'd have a hard time stuffing
9600 bps data down a channel>with the characteristics of most HF
radios....You can encode 9600 bps into 600 baud, but cramming it
into 300 baudis a remarkable achievement even on excellent
circuits. With the qualityof typical HF paths, QPSK is about all
you could do today. I'd love tobe proven wrong of course.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92 12:55:01
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!kd4nc!ke
4zv![e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman)Subject : Re: New packeteer frustrationIn article
<20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com> [e-mail] (Tom
Brusehaver) writes:>>All this frustration of long distance
stuff, rules and other info got>me thinking.  Are there any
rules about how fast someone can send CW?>I doubt it.  WHat if
computers were sending CW (I think the rules>specify morse,
which is fine), how fast can they listen?  On 80 meters>a cycle
takes about 2.7e-7 seconds, if you could get computers to
deal>with 3-5 cycles as a dit, and 9-15 cycles as a dah, you
could really>push some bits trough.  Assuming you had a really
good error>correction code, there could easily be reliable
communications.  If>the computers paid attention to error rates,
the speed could vary>depending on noise, and other stuff.The
fastest real world computer to computer CW that I've
witnessedwas in the 100 WPM range. I've *heard* of attempts at
1000 WPM, don'tknow if they were sucessful or not. 100 WPM is
599 characters/minute,or about 70 bps if the characters had been
ASCII encoded instead.Not very impressive.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 20 Aug 92 12:44:54
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!kd4nc!ke
4zv![e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To : [e-mail]
(Gary Coffman)Subject : Re: New packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Thomas
Grant Edwards) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman) writes:>>Well 300 baud does seem slow to someone who
uses the government's>>multi-million dollar internet. However,
300 baud was hot stuff on>>telephone lines 15 years ago. And
unfortunately it's as fast as the>>FCC will allow on HF right
now. There's no *technical* stopper preventing>>faster
operation.>>I guess it is a question on bandwith.  How much
bandwidth does one need>to say do 4800 baud on HF?  How does
that compare with SSB voice?>(not including spread-spectrum,
that's cheating :) although it should be>looked into.  What are
the rules for S.S. on HF right now?  Are there>commercial S.S.
kits?)   4800 bps will easily fit in an SSB voice bandwidth.
Systems using multiplecarriers could do it with greater
robustness. For an example of the possible,look at the Telebit
Worldblazer technology. That does 38.4 kbps over a voicegrade
phone line with the same bandwidth as a legal SSB voice
transmission.It uses DSP with multiple carriers, a training
sequence, and half duplex with fast turnaround. It also will
automatically adjust transmission rate for channel conditions.
You can't just attach a Worldblazer to a ricebox andgo at it,
but it shows what's technically possible in the field.SS isn't
allowed on HF under current rules. It's only available at 420
MHzand above. HF STAs have been granted however. HF SS radios
are available on the military market. There aren't any plug and
play appliances yet for the ham market. This equipment has to be
purpose built, not just a $100 accessory to a ricebox like
current TNCs.High speed packet, whether UHF or HF requires
special radio hardware.You don't want to limit yourself to the
characteristics of existingvoice radios. It's better if the
modem *is* the radio. That's the waythe 56 kb RF modem GRAPES
produces works.Gary KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 21
Aug 92 03:29:22 GMTFrom:
olivea!isc-br!tau-ceti!dejavu![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>Subject : Re:  New packeteer
frustrationIn article <20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>
[e-mail] (Tom Brusehaver) writes:>>All this
frustration of long distance stuff, rules and other info got>me
thinking.  Are there any rules about how fast someone can send
CW?>I doubt it.  WHat if computers were sending CW (I think the
rules>specify morse, which is fine), how fast can they listen?
On 80 meters>a cycle takes about 2.7e-7 seconds, if you could
get computers to deal>with 3-5 cycles as a dit, and 9-15 cycles
as a dah, you could really>push some bits trough.  I wrote code
on an old TRS80 MIII that could easily do 40 WPM send and
receive (and was auto speed to boot).40 wpm x 5 characters/word
= 200 characters/min200 characters/min x 10 bits/character =
2000 bits/min (incl start/stop)2000 bits/min / 60 = about 55
baud....I could probably make my Amiga do 80-100 WPM, which
should be 100-150 baudThe limiting factor on trying to send
pulses only 2-3 rf cycles long is going to be the ability of the
transmitter to key anywhere near this fast.73, bob--RW Salnick,
Spokane,WA  |  Home: [e-mail]  Amiga 1000, WB
1.3    |  Work: mfgsys![e-mail]      WA9BVE
      |------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #226******************************Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92
04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #227To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sat,
22 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 227Today's Topics:
    Absolute beginner seems helping hand
New packeteer frustration                 Packet Networks today
and tommorrow                            PK232 vs 1278
  Ramsey Packet Garbage Modem (Baycom lesson)
Ramsey Packet Garbage Modem ... $70                  Wanted:
Used TNC for Under $100.00Send Replies or notes for publication
to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 21 Aug 92 18:04:20 GMTFrom:
mcsun!ieunet!tcdcs!maths.tcd.ie![e-mail]:
Absolute beginner seems helping handTo: [e-mail]
there an FAQ for this newsgroup?If so, I probably should
apologise for polluting your wave-band with this.I'm interested
in linking 2 computers by radiorather than over the telephone.I
assume that is what packet radio is for.On looking into it, it
seemed that before one could do thisone had to pass some sort of
amateur radio test.Is that the case everywhere?I went to a
couple of meetings of local radio-hams,but basically we weren't
on the same wavelength.They spent their time twiddling knobs and
soldering.And they spoke in this sort of techno-esperanto.Now
I'm not prejudiced.Some of my best friends have soldering
irons.But I don't want to spend my twilight yearslistening to
white noise from South America.So my question is, can I not just
buy 2 of these radio-modemsand forget about the authorities?And
if I can,what sort of money are we taking about?And how far can
I shout?Any hints (or evern FAQ's) gratefully received.--
Timothy Murphy  e-mail: [e-mail]:
[phone]s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College,
Dublin 2, Ireland------------------------------Date: 22 Aug 92
03:37:48 GMTFrom:
news.u.washington.edu!sumax!thebes!ole!ssc![e-mail]
gton.eduSubject: New packeteer frustrationTo:
[e-mail]@dejavu.spk.wa.us (There is no
substitute for displacement...) writes:: In article
<20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com> [e-mail] (Tom
Brusehaver) writes:: >: >All this frustration of long distance
stuff, rules and other info got: >me thinking.  Are there any
rules about how fast someone can send CW?: >I doubt it.  WHat if
computers were sending CW (I think the rules: >specify morse,
which is fine), how fast can they listen?  On 80 meters: >a
cycle takes about 2.7e-7 seconds, if you could get computers to
deal: >with 3-5 cycles as a dit, and 9-15 cycles as a dah, you
could really: >push some bits trough.  : : The limiting factor
on trying to send pulses only 2-3 rf cycles long is : going to
be the ability of the transmitter to key anywhere near this
fast.The limiting factor is that a string of dits 3 cycles long
on 80 meters is equivalent to AM modulating a signal with a 1
MHz (or there abouts) square wave and will put out sidebands
that won't quit.  At best,you'd end up with a signal 2 MHz or so
wide.  A bit outside the band edges.There ain't no such thing as
a free lunch.Mark Zenier  [e-mail]
------------------------------Date: 21 Aug 92 14:03:26 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!kd4nc!ke
4zv![e-mail]: Packet Networks today and
tommorrowTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:>>Which bill are you referring to?
 I understand the NREN will be a>national research and education
network paid for by the government.>It might be capable of
providing pay services, but the internet>already is (Well, CARL,
etc.)NREN legislation has a lot of baggage attached to it. One
of thethings it will do is commercialize the regional networks
andcharge for non-research traffic on the high speed network.
TheInternet was never intended to be a free network, it just
sortof grew that way. Government funding is slowly being
withdrawn forother than government sponsored research usage
today. With NREN,most of the current usage of the network will
become strictlypay for play. While this is probably as it should
be in a capitalistnation, it means our days of freeloading on
the government financednetwork are numbered.>Incidently, I'd
wager Al Gore is the only person on a presidential>ticket who
even knows that the internet is.I wouldn't be surprised, and
even he doesn't seem to have a goodgrasp of what the network
really is and what access to it reallymeans. The free flow of
information it provides is extremely valuable for US
competitiveness. On that subject, a couple ofevents have
transpired recently that show the government as a wholehas
little grasp of this fact. NASA Ames was recently raided
bysecurity types who feared that free interaction on the net
wasgiving away valuable commercializable information.They don't
seem to understand that research is only valuable ifit is
communicated widely to an audience that can use it, and
thattechnical discoveries aren't the exclusive province of the
US. Theinformation flows both ways. The real edge in
competitiveness goesto the people who *act* to commercialize
products based on the information, not to those who hoard it
tightly away from even other Americans.The second bit of
mischief is insistance by the FBI that advanceddigital networks
be "dumbed down" so that they can conduct wiretapson them. There
is a bill being introduced to Congress written atthe request of
the FBI to enforce this. Bit stream interleaving,datagram
routing, and the like are to be prohibited if they
preventreliable wiretaps using simple technology. Heaven forbid
that usersuse any form of encryption that hasn't been authorized
by the governmentand not designed so that the government can
easily break it.Right now the FBI is complaining about *call
forwarding* on thetelephone network. They claim it can be used
to circumvent wiretaps.These guys are really in the dark ages,
and want to keep us theretoo.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 21 Aug 92 21:57:52
GMTFrom: ucsbcsl!ucsbuxa![e-mail]: PK232
vs 1278To: [e-mail] have both the 1278 and 232,
use them for listening only. I dont like the 1278 method of
choosing the filters and modems. too confusing.The 232 seems to
decode rtty easier. I dont like the cartridge software for the
232 using a commodore 64. The stuff is buggy, and the type of
printer support is too limited. The printer support on the 1278
is a little less limited, but not much for the c64, still not
good enough.I still have not gotten the 1278 to print
successfully using the commodore software, but have with the
232, by buying the only printer supported and it works fine..
there are other bugs in both softwares, I hope you guys with
ibmers have better luck.  ------------------------------Date:
Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:35:03 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!bt
[e-mail]: Ramsey Packet Garbage Modem
(Baycom lesson)To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bradley T Banko) writes:        (flame deleted)I got the Ramsey kit
to work finally, and the kit design is actually prettygood, but
I still am unhappy with Ramsey for:    1)  their ridiculous price
for this kit ($70)... seems like        $50 would be plenty fair
including the case, and    2)  their lack of troubleshooting advice
in the manual or        more considerate help on the phoneThe Baycom
LessonThe Ramsey kit allows a simple rewiring to get it to work
with the Poor Man'sPacket software on a parallel printer port
(TTL levels?), but their kitonly comes with the Baycom software
(lucky I have access to the net and wasable to get a hold of the
PMP software quickly and easily... whatabout those poor hams who
don't have the luxury of access to the Internet!)I traced the
problem with the Baycom configuration to an inactive DTR
signalline on my RS232 port.  (Horowitz & Hill, The Art of
Electronics, 2d Editionhas some good sections which discuss the
RS232 standard, and lots of otherneat stuff).  I might have
blown this line at some point during my experiments (RS232 is
supposed to be pretty robust by its standard... +/- 5-12 V @
500mA and able to withstand a direct short between outputs),
*or* the DTR signal might just not be implemented in my Goldstar
clone's serial ports.(*BEWARE*, Baycom users of this potential
problem.  I wonder how common this is?  My telephone modem works
just fine on this port, and detects rings, etc.)What was
confusing me was that I was seeing a signal at the PTT
transistorbase which I now realize was a just a false "pull-up"
signal from the Mic line which works fine.  (My radio just
wasn't keying up during transmit, and since transistors are
something of a mystery to me, I started imagining allsorts of
terrible things about bad component values, etc., not realizing
that the signal levels that I *should* have been seeing are
pretty obvious... (i.e., "big", +/-12 V on the RS232 side of the
CMOS 74HC04, andTTL levels on the output sides of the
74HC04)Anyway, this is a little constructive followup which I
hope will help somebody else.73 de KB8CNE, Brad Banko-- Brad
Banko;  Dept of Physics;  U of Illinois;  [e-mail],
KB8CNE===========================================================
==============TI NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OF CHOCOLATE
CONFECTIONERY AND THE   SPATIAL DETECTION OF POLYMORPHIC STATES
OF COCOA BUTTER IN CHOCOLATE------------------------------Date:
21 Aug 92 22:09:07 GMTFrom:
ucsbcsl!ucsbuxa![e-mail]: Ramsey Packet
Garbage Modem ... $70To: [e-mail] have bought two
of Ramseys kits, the vox and the super snooper, and have been
less than satisfied.The vox kit doesnt work jwith the microphone
they push so hard in the catalog, and the super snooper quite
frankly is not that powerful of an amplifier and sounds like
shit.I did get the vox to trip by hooking the super snooper up
jto it, the suggestion jof one of their techs( why dont you try
this?, he said).their stuff reminds me of the simple circuits in
an Electronics class text book designed to demonstrate a
principle, but have no practical use because the circuits are
not sophisticated enough to be
useful.------------------------------Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992
19:55:29 GMTFrom:
uchinews!machine!chinet![e-mail]: Wanted:
Used TNC for Under $100.00To: [e-mail] am looking
to buy a used TNC for VHF packet.  Something like the PK-88would
be fine.  Internal IBM PC type TNC's are no good to me as I have
anAmiga computer.If you have a used TNC for sale, please contact
me via email. I want tospend under $100.00.-- "It is a pitty
that even a single drop of this noble  gift of God should be
spilled" - J.S. Bach on wineMark E. Sunderlin: Technocrat in
Winchester, Virginia  KD4HRI aka Dr. Megabyte:
[e-mail]  (703)
722-9330------------------------------Date: 21 Aug 92 19:30:42
GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.ed
u!noc.msc.net!uc.msc.edu!shamash!ems!kafka.ems.cdc.com!tbruseha@n
etwork.UCSD.EDUTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>,
<[e-mail]>omSubject : Re: New packeteer frustrationIn
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John F. Woods)
writes:>[e-mail] (Tom Brusehaver) writes:>>All
this frustration of long distance stuff, rules and other info
got>>me thinking.  Are there any rules about how fast someone
can send CW?>>I doubt it.  WHat if computers were sending CW (I
think the rules>>specify morse, which is fine), how fast can
they listen?  On 80 meters>>a cycle takes about 2.7e-7 seconds,
if you could get computers to deal>>with 3-5 cycles as a dit,
and 9-15 cycles as a dah, you could really>>push some bits
trough.>>First, calculate the bandwidth of the proposed
modulation scheme.Ahh, 1Hz?.. I am talking CW (Carier
Wave).Everyone, I was sorta half joking, and half serious.  The
potentialwas realized by some, and others blew it off as silly.
As otherspoint out this network is for the exchange of
information.  We areexchanging information, and trying to make
people think.  Imagine if you will, the perfect setup.  A 2Kw CW
80 meter station inNorth Dakota, Fargo maybe.  An Identical
station in Minneapolis.  Howfast could these 2 stations talk to
each other under ideal conditions?If the speed were variable
(adaptive; too many errors, slow down),could they be reliable
even under less than ideal conditions.There was an aritcle many
years ago about a Z80 based morse readerthat was good to maybe
80-100WPM.  Ok fine, how about upping that to a68020, or a RISC
chip, could that reliable handle 500-1000WPM (more?).With
current DSP chips the S/N ratio could be pretty good before
themorse reader ever saw it.  How fast can the xmitter be keyed,
thatmight be more of a limiting factor.  It ain't gonna be
cheap, but weare talking about the inter-city links for the long
distance network.Another alternative that telebit uses are
multiple carriers (tones)allowing for more 'parallel'
transmissions.  Using DTMF tones wouldgive you 8 bits at a time.
 Are there rules about this?  Yes it is sorta unreasonable,
think about it.Tommy B.------------------------------Date: 21
Aug 92 12:08:09 EDTFrom: world!ksr![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>Subject : Re: New packeteer
[e-mail] (Tom Brusehaver)
writes:>All this frustration of long distance stuff, rules and
other info got>me thinking.  Are there any rules about how fast
someone can send CW?>I doubt it.  WHat if computers were sending
CW (I think the rules>specify morse, which is fine), how fast
can they listen?  On 80 meters>a cycle takes about 2.7e-7
seconds, if you could get computers to deal>with 3-5 cycles as a
dit, and 9-15 cycles as a dah, you could really>push some bits
trough.First, calculate the bandwidth of the proposed modulation
scheme.------------------------------Date: 21 Aug 92 21:15:05
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd.edu!
[e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>rdsSubject :
Re: New packeteer frustrationIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (John F. Woods) writes:>[e-mail] (Thomas
Grant Edwards) writes:>>I guess it is a question on bandwith.
How much bandwidth does one need>>to say do 4800 baud on HF?
How does that compare with SSB voice?                 ^^^^--did
I say baud?  Someone, quick revoke my EE degree!...>couldn't go
quite that high.  However, at least when the bands are open
and>relatively noise-free, you could probably push 9600 bps
through an SSB-sized>bandwidth. OK, then why, oh why, does the
FCC limit transfer rates on HF?????????I understand bandwidth
limits, but if we can put 9600 bps into thesame bandwidth as "CQ
DX...your 59, 73! CQ DX...," then we should!Is the ARRL pushing
for bandwidth-limited data xmission on HF?(No laughter
please)-Thomas de N3HAU------------------------------Date: 21
Aug 92 15:46:21 CDTFrom:
timbuk.cray.com!hemlock.cray.com![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <20489@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>,
<[e-mail]>, <20850@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>Subject : Re:
New packeteer frustrationIn article
<20850@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com>, [e-mail] (Tom
Brusehaver) writes:> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(John F. Woods) writes:> >[e-mail] (Tom
Brusehaver) writes:> >>All this frustration of long distance
stuff, rules and other info got> >>me thinking.  Are there any
rules about how fast someone can send CW?> >>I doubt it.  WHat
if computers were sending CW (I think the rules> >>specify
morse, which is fine), how fast can they listen?  On 80 meters>
>>a cycle takes about 2.7e-7 seconds, if you could get computers
to deal> >>with 3-5 cycles as a dit, and 9-15 cycles as a dah,
you could really> >>push some bits trough.> >> >First, calculate
the bandwidth of the proposed modulation scheme.> > > Ahh,
1Hz?.. I am talking CW (Carier Wave).> > [...]> There was an
aritcle many years ago about a Z80 based morse reader> that was
good to maybe 80-100WPM.  Ok fine, how about upping that to a>
68020, or a RISC chip, could that reliable handle 500-1000WPM
(more?).> With current DSP chips the S/N ratio could be pretty
good before the> morse reader ever saw it.  How fast can the
xmitter be keyed, that> might be more of a limiting factor.  It
ain't gonna be cheap, but we> are talking about the inter-city
links for the long distance network.And thinking about it, the
BW isn't going to be 1Hz any more,either. There are better ways
to tackle this.. Ways that actuallyexploit the things DSP is
good at..> Another alternative that telebit uses are multiple
carriers (tones)> allowing for more 'parallel' transmissions.
Using DTMF tones would> give you 8 bits at a time.  Are there
rules about this?  Clover & piccolo work along these lines
(getting more bits per baud).--
andyw.    N0REN/[e-mail]    Andy Warner, Cray
Research, Inc.    [phone]------------------------------Date:
21 Aug 92 12:04:41 EDTFrom: world!ksr![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New packeteer
[e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:>I
guess it is a question on bandwith.  How much bandwidth does one
need>to say do 4800 baud on HF?  How does that compare with SSB
voice?If your question is how much bandwidth do you need for
4800 *bits per second*,a quick answer is that a 3KHz-bandwidth
US phone line is good for a littleover 20,000 bits per second
with clever encoding schemes [1]; an HF linkprobably has a
poorer S/N than a typical US phone line, so you probablycouldn't
go quite that high.  However, at least when the bands are open
andrelatively noise-free, you could probably push 9600 bps
through an SSB-sizedbandwidth.  If you really wanted to know
about 4800 symbols per second (baud),then you'll have to specify
how those symbols are encoded before you can getan answer.>(not
including spread-spectrum, that's cheating :) although it should
be>looked into.  What are the rules for S.S. on HF right now?The
rule for HF spread spectrum is, as I recall:  no.[1] One of the
hangups (pun unintended) in the current V.FAST
modemstandardization effort is the resistance of the Europeans
to accept thetop speed under consideration (24Kbps?  I don't
have an article handy)as an official standard speed option,
because so few phone lines in Europehave adequate S/N to handle
it...------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #227******************************Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92
04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #228To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sun,
23 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 228Today's Topics:
             DX Cluster systems                     Packet maps
of North AmericaSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 22 Aug 1992 18:50:27 -0700From:
[e-mail]: DX Cluster systemsTo:
[e-mail] know that the current DX Clusters use
netrom and an agressive VC modeto get the information to its
logged on users.. Has any one thought thatthe TCPIP telnet
session is far more efficient way of doing the same thingwith
out so much QRM on the much used links, Then perhaps the 3.rd
worldwars that are currently happening in most parts of Europe
between tcpip usersand the DX Cluster users who think that the
DXC is the only thing on thenetwork, may stop.. Thoughts? after
all Netrom is dead! is it not..hi tech tcpip auto-routers are
far more efficient..Barry...DC0HK / G8SAU sometimes GM8SAU/
GB7SAU mostly 44.130.24.71-74Flames
please..------------------------------Date: 22 Aug 92 21:58:07
GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!aio!norm![e-mail]
: Packet maps of North AmericaTo: [e-mail]  I have
spent a good bit of time trying to produce a map of thepacket
network that I can reach.  So far this extends across East
Texas,all of Louisiana, and parts of Arkansas, Kansas, and
Oklahoma, and Mexico.(Yes, Mexico, not New Mexico.)  Is anyone
out there interested in seeingthis information?  I should note
that the packet network changes at a ratethat makes the Internet
look slow, so there can be no guarantee that it stillmatches my
information.  It changes faster than I can update, and in
somecases the changes block my access to whole segments of the
network.  The information is in a paper notebook, not electronic
form, so itwill require some effort to type in and reformat.
Don't expect to seeit next week.  My biggest problem/frustration
to date has been my inability to finda VHF path between NE Texas
and SW Arkansas.  Actually, the dividing lineis inside Texas.  I
am forced to go through a very busy HF link in orderto access
much of the net.  In some cases I can work nodes on both sidesof
the "invisible barrier" that are only a few miles apart, but
they do nottalk to each other.  If anyone out there can get from
TXK (Texarkana) to LFKN (Lufkin) withoutHF links, I would
appreciate a quick summary of the path used.-- | Keith Mancus
<[e-mail]>                         ||
         N5WVR
||  "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and
live       ||  in Hell." -General Sheridan
                    |------------------------------End of
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #228******************************Date:
Mon, 24 Aug 92 04:30:02 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #229To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Mon,
24 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 229Today's Topics:
   Baycom source code available? (2 msgs)     KMTRM100.ZIP -
KAMterm: Host Mode prog. for Kantronics TNCs
Macintosh PD ham software needed for CD
NOS Hackers -- help              Shorting Nicad batteries to
revive them...Send Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:32:23 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!bt
[e-mail]: Baycom source code available?To:
[e-mail] the Baycom software source code
available anywhere?  Since Baycomwon't work on a number of PC
clones because the serial port implementationsare variable, it
should be possible to modify the source code to adaptit to some
of the more popular clone multi-function cards so that itcan be
used.Thanks for any leads.  (Of course I could try to make
contact withwith the original authors in Germany, but maybe
somebody else has alreadydone this?)KB8CNE, Brad Banko-- Brad
Banko;  Dept of Physics;  U of Illinois;  [e-mail],
KB8CNE===========================================================
==============TI NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OF CHOCOLATE
CONFECTIONERY AND THE   SPATIAL DETECTION OF POLYMORPHIC STATES
OF COCOA BUTTER IN CHOCOLATE------------------------------Date:
Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:05:33 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!nic.umass.edu!hamp.hampshire.edu!awoodhull@networ
k.UCSD.EDUSubject: Baycom source code available?To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail]   (Bradley T Banko) writes:> Is the
Baycom software source code available anywhere?  Since Baycom>
won't work on a number of PC clones because the serial port
implementations> are variable, it should be possible to modify
the source code to adapt> it to some of the more popular clone
multi-function cards so that it> can be used.> I tried to pursue
the question of source code more than a year ago whenI began to
play with BayCom. I wrote to the authors, sent them therequested
donation, and also wrote to the English translators of
thedocumentation. I never really got a reply, but I think the
actions ofthe authors and the current semi-commercial state of
BayCom indicate that there is little hope of getting them to
release the source.There are two cheap packet options for which
source is available. One isPoor Man's Packet (PMP) which uses
the parallel port. The other is theAX25 packet driver written by
Pawel Jalocha which allows you to use KA9Q NOS with a BayCom
modem. When I first heard of this I thought it would be nice to
be able to do TCP/IP with the BayCom interface; I didn'trealize
until I got the NOS software that it supports ordinary
AX25packet operation as well as TCP/IP.By the way, one kind of
serial port incompatibility with BayCom that can be dealt with
easily is that some serial ports don't provideenough voltage
swing on their RS232 lines to supply power to the BayCommodem.
This was the case with my laptop. Arranging to get 7 to 12
voltsfrom another source for powering the modem takes care of
this problem.Of course, if the serial port incompatibility is at
the software levelthe problem still remains.73 de Al Woodhull
[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 24 Aug 1992 01:20:43 -0700From:
[e-mail]: KMTRM100.ZIP - KAMterm: Host
Mode prog. for Kantronics TNCsTo: [e-mail] have
uploaded to
WSMR-SIMTEL20.Army.Mil:pd1:<msdos.packet>KMTRM100.ZIP
KAMterm: Host Mode prog. for Kantronics TNCsKAMterm is a Host
Mode terminal program for the Kantronics All Mode(KAM) TNC, as
well as other Kantronics TNCs which support Host Mode(e.g., the
KPC-2, KPC-3, et al).  Major features include:   *) separate
windows (each full screen) for TNC commands, monitor
output, and each active stream.  PgUp/PgDn switches between
screens.   *) when capturing screen output to a file, KAMterm
keeps track of      who said what and indicates this in the
file.   *) startup/exit configuration files --- allows you to
change the      configuration of the TNC on startup/exit
(optional)   *) special ``priority window'' for keeping an eye
on one stream      while working in another (e.g., watching a DX
cluster, etc.)   *) special AMTOR window which displays the
XMITECHO output (shows      the progress of transmitting chars
on AMTOR)   *) built in QSO logger (rather crude) with the
ability to configure      KAMterm to call an external logger
program instead (based on the      assumption that anyone using
the computer as a logbook probably      already has a logging
program they like to use....)   *) all the normal features you'd
expect, like scrollback buffers,      programmable function
keys, shell out to dos, etc.73s es cul, de n5ial/9jim-
-INTERNET: [e-mail]  |  [e-mail]  |
[e-mail]:  gagme!n5ial![e-mail]
RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)       73s de
n5ial/9------------------------------Date: 23 Aug 92 01:56:17
GMTFrom:
data.nas.nasa.gov!taligent!apple!apple.com![e-mail]
t: Macintosh PD ham software needed for CDTo:
[e-mail] received the following note from Keith
Sproul. Please help himput together a really nice collection of
Macintosh ham softwarefor inclusion on the next Buckmaster CD.
(I believe Buckmasterhas a policy of giving a free CD to anyone
who contributes a programthey've written, so you might want to
ask Keith about that.)The HyperCard stack he refers to is search
software for use with theBuckmaster callsign database. If it
hasn't been on the CD before, itwill be for the next
release.Pattyp.s. "sproul.com" isn't a real Internet site; it
gets mail throughan MX record. So unless Keith has some other
access I don't knowabout, he can't do FTPs.p.p.s. I suppose I
should say this just to be safe: Apple Computerhas no idea that
this project exists, so it obviously doesn'tendorse
it.--------------------------------------------------------------
--------Attn: Hams with Macintosh computers Buckmaster
Publishing produces a CD-ROM with the call book data andwith
lots of IBM ham-related public domain software. They want to
getsome Macintosh public domain ham-related software too. I
wrote theHyperCard stack that they are shipping with the CD-ROM.
I have alsoagreed to collect the Macintosh public domain
software for them andorginize it to go onto the CD-ROM. We have
about 100meg of spaceavailable for Mac related software...I
would like to get as much Mac software onto this fall's CD-ROM
as wecan. However, we are under some time constraints, and I
need to get thestuff SOON.If you have any public domain
ham-related Macintosh software, PLEASEsend me a copy. If it is
small, send it via AppleLink, otherwise,please send it on a
floppy to my address below. I can also be reachedvia the
Internet.Keith Sproul, WU2Z 698 Magnolia Road North Brunswick,
NJ 08902-2647AppleLink: Sproul.K Internet: [e-mail](908)
821-4828 Home [phone] Work [phone]
Fax------------------------------Date: 22 Aug 92 18:31:08
GMTFrom:
pacbell.com!pacbell!osc![e-mail]: NOS
Hackers -- helpTo: [e-mail] am having problems
successfully building NOS from several sources offUCSD.EDU --
and can't seem to locate any documentation that gives hintsfor
debugging NOS when the program is very large compared to
availablememory.  Can anyone suggest a document that helps
beginning NOS hackersand/or addresses issues related to building
NOS in Borland C++ 3.0?  Ialso could use a hint as to what is
the most stable version to workfrom these days.  NOS_1229 seemed
OK, but has loads of compile errors(at least, the version from
UCSD.EDU seems to...)  Thanks! Dave,
WQ1K([e-mail])------------------------------Date: Sun,
23 Aug 1992 22:28:06 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!bt
[e-mail]: Shorting Nicad batteries to
revive them...To: [e-mail] to one
explanation of why Nicad batteries die that I've heard,small
metal whiskers grow across the electrodes with use, and
eventuallydevelop a short which prevents the battery from
holding a charge or frombeing charged.The solution is to charge
the battery as best is as possible, and then*short* the battery
terminals for a brief (?) time which is supposed tomelt these
whiskers (and I suppose the metal flows back to the electrodeof
origin).Has anybody done this?  What exactly have you done?Must
it be done on single cells?  I am trying to do this on a
batterypack.  One pack won't take enough of a charge to warm up
the shorting wire, while another battery pack heated up the
shorting wire so fast I couldn't hold on to it (I guess you
should use pliers!). Is less than a second of shorting
enough?(I'll let you all know if it is after I charge this
battery and runit down again.)Thanks.73 de KB8CNE, Brad
BankoKB8CNE @ N9LNQ.IL-- Brad Banko;  Dept of Physics;  U of
Illinois;  [e-mail],
KB8CNE===========================================================
==============TI NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OF CHOCOLATE
CONFECTIONERY AND THE   SPATIAL DETECTION OF POLYMORPHIC STATES
OF COCOA BUTTER IN CHOCOLATE------------------------------End of
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #229******************************Date:
Tue, 25 Aug 92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and
Newsgroup <[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #230To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Tue,
25 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 230Today's Topics:
      Baycom Source Code NOT available
Packet-Radio Digest V92 #229         Shorting Nicad batteries to
revive them... (2 msgs)                 Source for TNC-less
packet programsSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 24 Aug 1992 10:18:09 -0700From:
[e-mail]: Baycom Source Code NOT
availableTo: [e-mail]> Subject: Baycom source code
available?> To: [e-mail]> > Is the Baycom software
source code available anywhere?  Since Baycom> won't work on a
number of PC clones because the serial port implementations> are
variable, it should be possible to modify the source code to
adapt> it to some of the more popular clone multi-function cards
so that it> can be used.> > Thanks for any leads.  (Of course I
could try to make contact with> with the original authors in
Germany, but maybe somebody else has already> done this?)> >
KB8CNE, Brad BankoI can tell you definitely that the BayCom
source code is NOT available foranyone the public. BayCom is
still a company with non-profit orientation, i.e. all the profit
isreentering the packet radio scene by sponsoring the Bavarian
and meanwhile parts of the German packet radio digipeater
network.The problems with a few of the PC's is due to
incompatibilities of the serialand interrupt controllers AND/OR
mostly a reason of too slow CPUs.This  3,5% of all PC's will not
be supported, because this would result in80% of the software
work to be done.This engineering power is better to put into
high speed FSK or some new digi-peater software.If you have
ideas or recommendations you are welcome to write them to me,
Iwill give it to DG3RBU (hardware) and DL8MBT (software).Fritz,
[e-mail] (the BayCom team)--  (-%   Fritz B. Raab
            # email: [e-mail]             %-) (-%   Fa.
Multinet Services GmbH    # voice: [phone] fax: -21
%-) (-%   Bretonischer Ring 7           # Member of EurOPEN,
GUUG , DIGI e.V.  %-) (-%   D-W8011 Grasbrunn,  Germany   #
Support DIGI, it will support YOU !
%-)------------------------------Date: 24 Aug 1992 12:00:53
-0700From: [e-mail]: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #229To: [e-mail] the batery..... one
can (best on a single cell) run a higher voltage(dc) thru it say
24 to 36 volts for a 1.2 volt cell and use a variable rate  PS.
start low for a few seconds and  watch the current flow. when
the current  flow is high be careful, and that should re-juvi
the cell. ( be careful) means don't leave it connected too long,
you burn up the cell.....                                   Ken
                 >>[e-mail]<<         >>PHONES
703-857-7584 >>VATECH CAMPUS 13855<<       >>FAX [phone]<<
[e-mail] >>             >>ARMY MARS
AAT3PK/AD.VA<< >>N4LYO<<                     >>IBMMAIL
(USVPITMA)<<                 ROANOKE VALLEY GRADUATE CENTER
            US SNAIL: 117 W. CHURCH AVE.
ROANOKE, VA. 24011-1905------------------------------Date: 24
Aug 92 14:22:36 GMTFrom:
dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!pilot.njin.net![e-mail]:
Shorting Nicad batteries to revive them...To:
[e-mail]> The solution is to charge the battery as
best is as possible, and then> *short* the battery terminals for
a brief (?) time which is supposed to> melt these whiskers (and
I suppose the metal flows back to the electrode> of origin).Ack,
Warning Warning Danger Danger (Run, Will Robinson, Run).  And
themetal that your using to short the pack will flow all over
yourfingers.  NiCads can deliver a lot of current.Anyway, I've
never heard of this technique.  What I have heard of iszapping
an individual CELL with about 12V to try to shock it back
intolife.  There was a pretty good article on NiCads in QST last
year.-Ron------------------------------Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992
05:19:06 GMTFrom:
usc!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com!tilde.csc.ti.com!m2.dseg.ti.com!erne
st!cmptrc![e-mail]: Shorting Nicad
batteries to revive them...To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Ron Natalie) writes:>> The solution is to charge the battery as
best is as possible, and then>> *short* the battery terminals
for a brief (?) time which is supposed to>> melt these whiskers
(and I suppose the metal flows back to the electrode>> of
origin).>>Ack, Warning Warning Danger Danger (Run, Will
Robinson, Run).  And the>metal that your using to short the pack
will flow all over your>fingers.  NiCads can deliver a lot of
current.ACHTUNG! =:-O  Be aware that NiCad's have vent holes for
a very good reason!Not only do they generate a lot of current,
they also can heat up so fastthat the battery is quite likely to
EXPLODE using the procedure you havedescribed!!!  I wouldn't try
it if it required a human being in the sameconcrete room the
NiCad pack was in - except perhaps dressed in a fullbomb
disposal outfit.Do yourself a favor and consider this:  Even if
you are able to zap thedendrites that form on the NiCad
junction, the battery will rarely performas well as a "good"
one.  Also, it the battery doesn't get hot enough tomake
explosion a possibility, then chances are the dendrites won't
getzapped either. :-(Save your sight, your limbs, your time and
a lot of frustration.  Buy a new battery pack from the
manufacturer, or buy some replacement NiCad cells and rebuild
the pack you have.  The improvement will be much better than
using "rejuvenated" NiCad's.There's no such thing as a free
lunch - not even with NiCad's. ;-)Incidentally, I don't sell
NiCad's and won't profit from this
suggestion.Cheerio!------------------------------Date: Tue, 25
Aug 1992 03:04:05 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!caen!nic.umass.edu!hamp.hampshire.edu!aw
[e-mail]: Source for TNC-less packet
programsTo: [e-mail]: Source for TNC-less
packet programsI got several requests for information on where
to find Poor Man's Packet (PMP) and the AX25 packet driver
written by Pawel Jalocha. I justchecked two sites today to
verify the files can be found there:PMP version 1.1 is available
by ftp from wsmr-simtel20.army.mil. It is in the directory
pd1:<msdos.packet>. There are two compressed files,one  with
executables and docs and the other containing C source.
Themodem circuit and theory are documented in a good article by
KevinFeeney in 73 Magazine for August, 1991.PMP was originally
posted on an ftp site at Cornell. There may be more recent
versions than the one at wsmr-simtel20. The authors
[e-mail] and
[e-mail] Jalocha's AX25 packet driver
is at ucsd.edu in/pub/hamradio/packet/tcpip/ax25. There are two
compressed files, onecontains just the executables and docs and
the other includes thesource files (MASM assembler).  The doc
file also explains theinterface between the serial port and the
modem, but does not provide acircuit of the modem. (The basic
modem circuit is in the 73 MagazinePMP article, but the PMP
modem is configured to interface with aparallel port). There is
also  an executable file with the PA0GRIversion of KA9Q NOS,
apparently modified  in some way (not reallydocumented) to work
better with the AX25 driver.  Since the AX25 driveris supposed
to follow the general Clarkson model for packet drivers itwould
seem it ought to work with other versions  of NOS also, but
Ihave tried it only with the version Pawel posted.A word of
advice -- if you haven't used TCP/IP yet you ought to getsome
additional documentation other than what is posted in the
ax25/directory at ucsd.edu. There is a lot to choose from in
variousdirectories at ucsd.edu. The NOSKIT package explains well
the severalfiles used by NOS for configuration.  It is
relatively easy to get theAX25 driver working with NOS to
provide  bare-bones AX25 packetcommunication and Jalocha
provides enough info in his ax25.doc file forthis.  Getting full
TCP/IP going is another thing.Pawel Jalocha's e-mail addresses
are:            [e-mail] or [e-mail]
[e-mail] S. Woodhull  N1AWSchool of Natural
Science, Hampshire College, Amherst, MA 01002413-549-4600 ext
581 (office), 413-549-4740 (home)[e-mail],
[e-mail]------------------------------Date:
Mon, 24 Aug 1992 14:33:11 GMTFrom:
haven.umd.edu!ni.umd.edu!sayshell.umd.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New
packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Rajiv Dewan) writes:>I do not know
about ARRL, but some of us really enjoy "CQ DX ... your>59, 73!
CQ DX...." or some other variant of it.  Its a part of the HOBBY
>that may not use the most efficient modulation possible (some
may even >question the content) but it sure is fun.Heck, if we
used a pre-loaded dictionary and a simple
Huffman-encodedcompression scheme, you could probably get the
transmitted content ofthe above message down to just 3 or 4
bits.louiewa3ymh------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92
06:34:27 GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!mojo.eng.umd.edu!disney.src.umd.edu!
[e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New
packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Rajiv Dewan) writes:>In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Thomas
Grant Edwards) writes:>>OK, then why, oh why, does the FCC limit
transfer rates on HF?????????>>I understand bandwidth limits,
but if we can put 9600 bps into the>>same bandwidth as "CQ
DX...your 59, 73! CQ DX...," then we should!>I do not know about
ARRL, but some of us really enjoy "CQ DX ... your>59, 73! CQ
DX...." or some other variant of it.  Its a part of the HOBBY
>that may not use the most efficient modulation possible (some
may even >question the content) but it sure is fun.Oh, yeah, I'm
not knocking DXing.  Heck, this weekend I was"CQ W3EAX...grid FM
18...73 QRZed"ing up and down the east cost on 2m.(What a
trough!  Post your DX VHF packet contacts!)The point is, why is
it legal for me to talk on HF SSB, yet illegal to use a DSP
modem to do 9600 bps in the exact same bandwidth?Not only that,
I'll be time-slicing with several other stations on thesame
frequency!  It's not like I'm being a bandwidth hog.  Course,
heh heh, I'll still have to do CW at 13 WPM before I _really_do
data on HF at any speed.  (I'm still pro-choice on code :)de
N3HAUmember W3EAX-University of Maryland Amateur Radio
Association------------------------------Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992
13:42:54 GMTFrom:
news.acns.nwu.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards)
writes:>...>>couldn't go quite that high.  However, at least
when the bands are open and>>relatively noise-free, you could
probably push 9600 bps through an SSB-sized>>bandwidth. >>OK,
then why, oh why, does the FCC limit transfer rates on
HF?????????>I understand bandwidth limits, but if we can put
9600 bps into the>same bandwidth as "CQ DX...your 59, 73! CQ
DX...," then we should!>Is the ARRL pushing for
bandwidth-limited data xmission on HF?>(No laughter please)>I do
not know about ARRL, but some of us really enjoy "CQ DX ...
your59, 73! CQ DX...." or some other variant of it.  Its a part
of the HOBBY that may not use the most efficient modulation
possible (some may even question the content) but it sure is
fun.  It is like archery, horse back riding and reading.Rajiv
                             aa9ch    Address:
[e-mail]:   None. Only
CW.------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#230******************************Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 04:30:03
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #231To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Wed,
26 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 231Today's Topics:
    Absolute beginner seems helping hand        Can someone
please point me to the FAQ for this group?
   Help/advice sought                              newsgroups
                    Packet w/HP95 Palm Top         Shorting
Nicad batteries to revive them... (3 msgs)              Want to
run Mac+ from a DC source... info?Send Replies or notes for
publication to: <[e-mail]>Send subscription
requests to: <[e-mail]>Problems you can't
solve otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 25 Aug 92 19:23:43 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.o
hio-state.edu!slc3.ins.cwru.edu!agate!linus!linus.mitre.org!mwvm.
mitre.org![e-mail]: Absolute beginner
seems helping handTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>            There has been
an FAQ for Packet Radio posted monthly in the past - don't
[e-mail] (Timothy Murphy) writes:
ber seeing it lately.  The latest copy I have (version 1.5) says
you can get it
          from ftp.cs.buffalo.edu.  You do need a license, they
are not overly difficult>Is there an FAQ for this newsgroup?
                    for beginning licenses in most countries.
Good luck, but don't try anything w>If so, I probably should
apologise                         ithout a proper license.>for
polluting your wave-band with this.                    Vern
Eubanks, AA7EI, Sierra Vista, AZ>>I'm interested in linking 2
computers by radio>rather than over the telephone.>I assume that
is what packet radio is for.>>On looking into it, it seemed that
before one could do this>one had to pass some sort of amateur
radio test.>Is that the case everywhere?>I went to a couple of
meetings of local radio-hams,>but basically we weren't on the
same wavelength.>They spent their time twiddling knobs and
soldering.>And they spoke in this sort of techno-esperanto.>>Now
I'm not prejudiced.>Some of my best friends have soldering
irons.>But I don't want to spend my twilight years>listening to
white noise from South America.>>So my question is, can I not
just buy 2 of these radio-modems>and forget about the
authorities?>And if I can,>what sort of money are we taking
about?>And how far can I shout?>>Any hints (or evern FAQ's)
gratefully received.>>-->Timothy Murphy>e-mail:
[e-mail]>tel: [phone]>s-mail: School of
Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2,
Ireland------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92 15:37:08
GMTFrom: retix.com![e-mail]: Can someone please
point me to the FAQ for this group?To:
[e-mail]-- Tony [All views expressed are mine
- if anyone is to blame its
me]==============================================================
====What a waste it is to lose one's mind.  Or not to have a
mind isbeing very wasteful.  How true that
is.------------------------------Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 05:07:27
GMTFrom: nic.unh.edu!unhtel!morwyn![e-mail]:
Help/advice soughtTo: [e-mail] am interested in
exploring the world of ham-radio, and interfacing thisto my
computer in order to access the internet and other computer
systems.I'm a 'newbie' and really haven't a clue as to where to
start.  I needinformation regarding equipment and its respective
costs, how to locatea site to 'hook-up to', software to use,
licensing, and anything elseinvolved.I would be very grateful if
someone would help me get started here.  Likewise,if there's a
FAQ for this group, I would appreciate getting that sent tome as
well.Please respond via email... I'm working at getting this
group fed in my news (which will be a little while).Thanks in
advance,Forrest Aldrich--        -----------          Forrest Aldrich
     -----------       -------     morwyn![e-mail]
-------       ----                             ----       --         VISION GRAPHICS
--    Dover, NH - USA           --
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 02:17:07 GMTFrom:
usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!indyvax.iupui.edu
![e-mail]: newsgroupsTo:
[e-mail] there a FAQ on the use of packet radio
and it's applications within the Internet?
Thanks!------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92 20:53:23
GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!lina
c!att!cbnewsm![e-mail]: Packet w/HP95 Palm
TopTo: [e-mail]    Has anyone put this handy little
item on packet?    What does it take?    Is there a pocket TNC that
will work with this puppy?    So far I am impressed with it.
    Articles posted that someone has
saved.        Thanks            Jeff    NK3O------------------------------Date: 24
Aug 92 13:44:30 GMTFrom:
elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!spacm1.spac.spc.com!xenon!bongo!julian@uunet.u
u.netSubject: Shorting Nicad batteries to revive them...To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Bradley T Banko) writes:>According to
one explanation of why Nicad batteries die that I've
heard,>small metal whiskers grow across the electrodes with use,
and eventually>develop a short which prevents the battery from
holding a charge or from>being charged.    One of the great "urban
legends" of amateur radio. I am notgoing to get into this in
depth. But like "NiCad memory" it can happen,it probably is not
what is wrong with your batteries.     I suggest that anyone with
questions on how to look after aNiCad battery pack read "Getting
the Most Out of Nickel-CadmiumBatteries" By Ken Stuart, W3VVN.
QST Feb 1992    Briefly NiCad batteries usually die for two
reasons: 1. Old Age2. Abuse. Abuse includes Over charging -
often with "fast" chargersand total discharge to obviate
"memory".-- Julian Macassey, [e-mail]
N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue
Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213)
653-4495------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92 13:51:03
GMTFrom: opel!slc1!vk2bea![e-mail]: Shorting
Nicad batteries to revive them...To: [e-mail]
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bradley T Banko) writes: >According to one explanation of why
Nicad batteries die that I've heard, >small metal whiskers grow
across the electrodes with use, and eventually >develop a short
which prevents the battery from holding a charge or from >being
charged. > >The solution is to charge the battery as best is as
possible, and then >*short* the battery terminals for a brief
(?) time which is supposed to >melt these whiskers (and I
suppose the metal flows back to the electrode >of origin). >
>Has anybody done this?  What exactly have you done?A better way
is to charge up a capacitor then discharge it through thenicad.
The heavy current pulse blows away the whiskers. Using
acapacitor allows you to control the amount of energy you apply
to thetask. Start with a small cap and go up till it works.--
Michael Katzmann      >    Broadcast Sports Technology
Inc.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~     <    Crofton, Maryland. U.S.AAmateur Radio
Stations:   >NV3Z / VK2BEA / G4NYV
<    opel!vk2bea![e-mail]------------------------------D
ate: 25 Aug 92 18:38:37 GMTFrom:
hayes![e-mail]: Shorting Nicad batteries to
revive them...To: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Bradley T Banko) writes:> According to one explanation of why
Nicad batteries die that I've heard,> small metal whiskers grow
across the electrodes with use, and eventually> develop a short
which prevents the battery from holding a charge or from> being
charged.This is a typical nicad death mode. Eventually they just
wear out.> The solution is to charge the battery as best is as
possible, and then> *short* the battery terminals for a brief
(?) time which is supposed to> melt these whiskers (and I
suppose the metal flows back to the electrode> of
origin).Sometimes, a nicad will short out like this prematurely.
In this case, itis sometimes possible to revive the nicad
(temporarily) by "zapping" it.Since a shorted nicad won't hold a
charge at all, you supply current froman outside source. A
suitably large capacitor charged to several voltswill do the
trick, vaporizing the 'whiskers' in the nicad with an inrushof
several amps.I've successfully zapped nicads by tapping the
individual cells with theoutput of a 20amp, 12v power supply.
The connection must be brief, lastingonly a fraction of a
second. Otherwise, the nicad will heat internally,and may
explode. Use extreme caution. I urge you to use the
capacitormethod, since the amount of energy (and the subsequent
heating) are limited.> Has anybody done this?  What exactly have
you done?> Must it be done on single cells?  I am trying to do
this on a battery> pack.  One pack won't take enough of a charge
to warm up the > shorting wire, while another battery pack
heated up the shorting wire > so fast I couldn't hold on to it
(I guess you should use pliers!). ONLY "ZAP" INDIVIDUAL CELLS!
NEVER DO THIS TO AN ENTIRE PACK! You will merelyruin the
remaining good cells in the pack. And NEVER, NEVER short out a
Nicad pack. Ever.-- Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS:
76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958Principal Software Engineer
! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QOHayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. !
UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcolemanPOB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   !
Internet: [e-mail]: "My employer
doesn't pay me t

o have opinions."Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that
makes deserts." -Steve
Hackett.------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92 20:24:26
GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]
ject: Want to run Mac+ from a DC source... info?To:
[e-mail],I'm interested in converting my mac+ to
run off a DC source, i.e., bypass thepower supply inside and run
the machine from a 5/12 VDC source.  Thisway, I could use it as
a mobile radio station or for emergency purposes.(Running it
solar/car/battery).Has anybody done this, or heard of anybody
doing this?  If so, could youplease email me what you know?  I
have schematics and other technicalinformation, but it's good to
hear about others' experience
too.Thanks,-Brent------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92
16:04:21 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]:
 [e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Shorting Nicad
batteries to revive [e-mail] (Carter
Bennett) writes:||Do yourself a favor and consider this:  Even
if you are able to zap the|dendrites that form on the NiCad
junction, the battery will rarely perform|as well as a "good"
one.||Save your sight, your limbs, your time and a lot of
frustration.  Buy a |new battery pack from the manufacturer, or
buy some replacement NiCad |cells and rebuild the pack you have.
 The improvement will be much better |than using "rejuvenated"
NiCad's.I have to agree with Carter.  I raced RC cars about 6
years ago and nothingwill save battery packs from dying.  The
cars have 6 1.2V cells.  Any one ofthese cells can go bad, of
course, and all you have to do is replace it.When I raced, I had
3 battery packs (yes, that's expensive) that I wouldalternate,
and only one ever gave me trouble.  You will never get a NiCad
cell revived to an adequate performance level.The easiest thing
you can do is buy a new cell and install it.  New cellsare only
$2-$3 anyway.just my
comment,-Brent------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92
13:47:59 EDTFrom: hayes![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationIn article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:> > OK, then
why, oh why, does the FCC limit transfer rates on HF?????????The
FCC does not limit transfer rates. They limit symbol rates and
overallfrequency shift (which can be interpreted as bandwidth).I
think the FCC did well to avoid setting transfer limits. It
reallyisn't practical to use symbol rates in excess of 300 bps
below 20 MHz.You could argue that 1200 baud transmission be
permitted on the 15 and12 meter band, since it would be useful
there.If you can figure out a way to send more information
through a 300 baud,1 KHz bandwidth channel, then get crackin'.
We hams haven't even stratchedthe surface of more efficient
digital transmissions on HF, and you areclamouring for higher
symbol rates!> I understand bandwidth limits, but if we can put
9600 bps into the> same bandwidth as "CQ DX...your 59, 73! CQ
DX...," then we should!Note that the above CQ DX would have to
occur in CW. After all, thedigital transmissions don't occur in
the voice subbands, they occurin the digital subbands. > Is the
ARRL pushing for bandwidth-limited data xmission on HF?Until we
make use of the limits we've alread been set, I don' think the
ARRLsees a need for this.-- Bill Coleman, AA4LR                !
CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958Principal Software Engineer
     ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QOHayes Microcomputer Products,
Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcolemanPOB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348
USA   ! Internet: [e-mail]: "My
employer doesn't pay me to have opinions."Quote: "The same light
shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve
Hackett.------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92 21:53:21
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pac
ific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbfsb!cbnewsb.cb.att.com!wa2ise
@network.UCSD.EDUTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Want to run
Mac+ from a DC source... info?In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Brent) writes:>Hi,>>I'm interested in converting my mac+ to run
off a DC source, i.e., bypass the>power supply inside and run
the machine from a 5/12 VDC source.  This>way, I could use it as
a mobile radio station or for emergency purposes.>(Running it
solar/car/battery).>As stated in the "running a PC off car
battery" thread a few weeks ago,the best and easiest theng to do
is get an "inverter" 12VDC to 60HZ AC(square wave" box.  You
also get isolation from car engine and alternatorspikes and
other crud.  Tripp Lite makes this things, and I remember
seeingthem in DigiKey.  Be aware that you should get an
oversized inverter, soit can handle the computer's power demand
when you turn it on.Usual disclaimer: I have no connection with
TrippLite, DigiKey, or theChinese Communist
Party.------------------------------Date: 25 Aug 92 11:42:43
EDTFrom: hayes![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationIn article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:> In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Coleman)
writes:>>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:>>> PSK methods available
today can push 9600 bps over good HF channels. >>>>There's a
couple of problems using PSK over normal HF channels. First
of>>all, most crystal filters in HF radios have really gross
phase characteristics.>>This causes some signal degradation with
FSK, but more with PSK.> > Well if you insist on using Japanese
voice radios, you shouldn't expect> good performance. Military
radios with mechanical filters don't seem to> have a problem.No
problem, Gary. We'll just have all amateurs dispose of their
rice boxesand replace them with nice, inexpensive military gear.
<grin>>>Second, (and most important) is that multipathing of HF
signals introduces>>tremendeous phase distortion. The only way
to combat this problem is to>>lower the symbol rate so that the
distortions don't last longer than the>>symbols. (Which is also
why 45 baud RTTY and even 100 baud AMTOR work>>on 80m, but 300
baud packet does not)>>>>Another way to combat the multipath
distortion problem is to always operate>>near the MUF, which
results in clean, single path signals. Tom Clark had>>some
success running 1200 baud PSK on 10m, for example. > > Multipath
selective fading can be a serious problem. Operating near the>
MUF is the best dodge around this, but diversity reception will
also > help a lot. 9600 bps on HF is not going to be a weak
signal mode.> Systems like Piccolo and Clover that use multiple
carriers to transmit> bits in parallel with long symbol
durations are likely a more robust> way to go at HF.Yes. And
note that Piccolo and Clover are *NOT* PSK. >>> But the rules
prevent it.>>>>Not really. The rules dictate a maximum symbol
rate (300 baud below 28 MHz)>>and a maximum shift (1000 Hz below
30 MHz). Other than that, the rules are>>remarkably open.>>>>Of
course, you'd have a hard time stuffing 9600 bps data down a
channel>>with the characteristics of most HF radios....> > You
can encode 9600 bps into 600 baud, but cramming it into 300
baud> is a remarkable achievement even on excellent circuits.
With the quality> of typical HF paths, QPSK is about all you
could do today. I'd love to> be proven wrong of course.Don't use
PSK, Use something else. Use multiple carriers. Use
amplitudevariation. PSK doesn't survive well unless you are
close to the MUF.So far, I've heard good things about PacTor,
which lowers the symbol rateto 200 bps, but improves
throughput.I've also heard good things about Clover, which
apparently changes encodingrates to suit conditions (which is
exactly what we need for HF).-- Bill Coleman, AA4LR
  ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958Principal Software
Engineer        ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QOHayes Microcomputer
Products, Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcolemanPOB 105203 Atlanta,
GA 30348 USA   ! Internet:
[e-mail]: "My employer doesn't pay
me to have opinions."Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards
that makes deserts." -Steve
Hackett.------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest
V92 #231******************************Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92
04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #232To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Thu,
27 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 232Today's Topics:
            Ham-weenie question                     Help/advice
sought (2 msgs)                  Link between BBS via Amateur
Radio            Need information/comparisons on dual band HTs
                     Packet w/HP95 Palm Top
           Rose              Shorting Nicad batteries to revive
them...           SOLVED:  running mac+ from DC source/car
batterySend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 03:25:22 GMTFrom:
usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!slc3.INS.
CWRU.Edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!ag807@network.
UCSD.EDUSubject: Ham-weenie questionTo: [e-mail]
...     On our PBBS we run an open phone line.  Anyone can call
the PBBSand read and send traffic, licensed or not.  Anything
that a visitorsends is held.  The sysop changes the message that
was sent to go outunder the sysop's call as third party traffic.
    There's the rub!  You have to have a third party agreement
betweenthe two countries.  I am not sure who Wales has a third
party agreementwith.  I do not believe they have one with the
U.S. (I will admit to onlychecking when the traffic demands
pouring through all the back issues ofQST to find the latest
list).  Disregard, I did have one on the disk, wedo not.  Hence,
doing it through a U.S. amateur would be illegal.     You are in
a great time period for ham classes!  They will be startingall
across the country!73,Steve, NO8M--
------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92 12:03:41 GMTFrom:
mcsun!uknet!warwick!nott-cs!ucl-cs![e-mail]:
Help/advice soughtTo: [e-mail] anyone summary up
the replies they get regardingFAQ/introduction info/books
etc?ThanksZheng------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92
17:16:40 GMTFrom:
nic.unh.edu!unhtel!morwyn![e-mail]:
Help/advice soughtTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]|  [e-mail] (Zheng Wang) writes:|
Can anyone summary up the replies they get regarding|
FAQ/introduction info/books etc?| | Thanks| Zheng[ ... ]    Hi,
it's me... the one who asked the question (still no
response).    I'm on the net now, so you can post whatever here...
    Still looking forward for some help/information,    Forrest--
-----------          Forrest Aldrich          -----------       -------
  morwyn![e-mail]      -------       ----                             ----
  --         VISION GRAPHICS --    Dover, NH - USA           --
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------Date: 26 Aug 92 22:08:03 GMTFrom:
eos!aio!norm![e-mail]: Link between BBS via
Amateur RadioTo: [e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
writes:> [e-mail] (Denis Beauregard) writes:>
>I would like to know if it is already done or not, to use> >Ham
radio to link stations in a BBS network.> >Assume 100k and 1 Meg
of daily traffic. > (Assuming distances of more than 50km
between sites.)> > At 100kb/day, you're dealing with many more
times the amount of traffic> the existing ham radio BBS network
is currently carrying.  A megabyte> with existing ham technology
is impossible. > Telephone lines and modems will be cheaper,
even for international> calls. > The ham radio packet bbs
network is really nothing more than a toy.  It> is far too
limited as far as restrictions on content, bandwidth, and>
reliability to be used in a production BBS environment of the
type that> land-line-based BBS users have been accustomed to
seeing for more than> a decade.>     - Brian  Nonsense.  You are
making assumptions about using 1200 baud VHF links.We can
achieve much higher bandwidths using good compression
strategiesand by moving up into the microwave region.  My
reading so far indicatesthat 30-40 mile microwave links running
10 Mbit/sec should be possiblewithout outrageous investments.
The existing packet network is very poor, but that's just
becauseit's dated.  Technology very quickly becomes obsolete
these days, andwe hams don't have barrels of money to burn.
Ultimately, the packet network needs to put its backbones up in
themicrowave region and run Internet speeds.--  Keith Mancus
<[e-mail]>                         |
        N5WVR                                                  |
 "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live
      |  in Hell." -General Sheridan
              |------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92
05:25:39 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ibmchs!auschs!awdprime.austin.ibm.co
m!inetnode.austin.ibm.com![e-mail]: Need
information/comparisons on dual band HTsTo:
[e-mail]!After reading through all the
doublespeak and non-information ofmanufacturer spec sheets, It's
time to get some expert help. I'm in themarket for a dual band
(2m, 70cm) handi-talkie and need some solidinformation from
people that have used them.I've been looking at the ICOM W2A,
the STANDARD 558, and the KENWOOD78. I have not yet got any info
on the YAESU. From what I read in theforums, Kenwood has a poor
service department, so I'll pass on theirgear. The ALINCO dual
bander seems to have some software problems, soagain I'll
pass.Questions:Of the remaining hardware (plus any I've missed),
does anyone have anygood reason why I should buy one over
another?I would like to do high speed packet (9600 bps +) with
the portable. Irealize that I'm asking for miracles here, but
does any handheld dualbander have a low enough phase distortion
and proper bandwidth to dothis?  Better yet, if it works, what's
the setup?Also, what about mods to open up the RX/TX? I know the
W2A can beopened up quite a bit. Others?Nobody in our area has a
Standard 558 - what does it come with and howwell do you like
it? The trade press and Standard disagree on this, soI'm
interested in what users have to say...Offbeat Questions:Has
anyone taken a commercial V.32bis modem and made it into
somethingthat would be useful for packet use? They're getting
cheap enough nowto make this feasable. I expect some
modifications to the modem gutsand possibly a "backend" of some
sort would be required.Any recommendations for mounting an
Antenna on a Mazda MX3?Closing:Thanks in advance for everyone's
help. If I get a good response, I'llpost a summary so others
will benefit.Yours, (^.^) Jason//  Jason Hernandez - Network
Engineer and Practicioner of ArcaneMagic   \\ \\ IBM AWD, Austin
Texas. [e-mail]6(JJASON) // My typing
== my opinion. Read the trade mags for myemployer's opinions.
Its a boring .signature file - deal with it!-- //  Jason
Hernandez - Network Engineer and Practicioner of Arcane Magic
\\\\ IBM AWD, Austin Texas. [e-mail]
AUSVM6(JJASON) //My typing == my opinion. Read the trade mags
for my employer's opinions.Its a boring .signature file - deal
with it!------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 92 03:55:14
GMTFrom: van-bc!rsoft!mindlink![e-mail]: Packet
w/HP95 Palm TopTo: [e-mail]> JEFF ZELL NK3O
writes:> > Msg-ID: <[e-mail]>>
Posted: 25 Aug 92 20:53:23 GMT> > Org.  : AT&T-BL,READING,PA.> >
Jeff writes:> >         Has anyone put this handy little item on
packet?>         What does it take?>         Is there a pocket
TNC that will work with this puppy?>         So far I am
impressed with it.>         Articles posted that someone has
saved.See "A Plethoric Packet Present" by Buck Rogers, K4ABT in
the December 1991issue of CQ magazine.  This article describes
the combining of an Alinco F1with a PacComm HandiPacket and the
HP 95LX.                        Doug
(VE7FGU)------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92 22:11:42
GMTFrom: eos!aio!norm![e-mail]: RoseTo:
[e-mail]  Am I the only person out there who has
given up on Rose infrustration?  Several folks out there
suggested using Rose aspart of a link, but I have had maybe one
in ten successful connects.Worse, the connection often dies very
quickly after being made.Am I overlooking some trick, or just
using Rose for something for whichit was not intended?  This
applies to the Shreveport, Dallas, and Houston Rose sites.Note
that I cannot hit *any* of these without going thru a node
ordigipeater.-- | Keith Mancus    <[e-mail]>
                        ||                 N5WVR
                                 ||  "If I owned Texas and I
owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live       ||  in Hell."
-General Sheridan
|------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92 21:02:36 GMTFrom:
swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit
.edu!news.media.mit.edu!news.media.mit.edu.![e-mail]
ubject: Shorting Nicad batteries to revive them...To:
[e-mail] don't know if someone has mentioned it
yet, but there's an articleon this topic with construction plans
for a contraption that revivesNiCads in the latest issue of
73.But let me add my voice to those who urge caution when doing
funkythings to NiCads.  And a Public Service Announcement:If you
give up and want to throw those old batteries away, please
askthe local garbage lords where you can ditch them.  The
cadmium inNiCads is nasty stuff--it's a heavy metal and it will
do bad things toanimals (including humans) that use any water
source into which itfinds its way.  In most communities it's
probably illegal to toss themin with your regular garbage.  The
fish and I thank you.------------------------------Date: 26 Aug
92 18:10:30 GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]
ject: SOLVED:  running mac+ from DC source/car batteryTo:
[e-mail] to all who replied to my note; the
suggestions were all the same andthey were simply, "use an
inverter."  I never thought too much about an inverter because I
don't know too muchabout them.  However, it does seem that using
an inverter would use morecurrent than a car battery -> 12V/5V
filtered converter.  I don't know.Once again, thanks, and I'll
look into some of these inverter kits
peoplementioned.-Brent------------------------------Date: 26 Aug
92 15:06:32 GMTFrom:
europa.asd.contel.com!emory!kd4nc!ke4zv![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman)Subject : Re: New packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Coleman)
writes:>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:>> Well if you insist on
using Japanese voice radios, you shouldn't expect>> good
performance. Military radios with mechanical filters don't seem
to>> have a problem.>>No problem, Gary. We'll just have all
amateurs dispose of their rice boxes>and replace them with nice,
inexpensive military gear. <grin>This wasn't meant to be a funny
comment. I think that it's unrealisticto expect commonly used
voice rigs to be suitable for high performancedata transmission.
We see this same problem at VHF/UHF when people insiston using
voice radios for data communications. Alinco made a half
heartedattempt at a data radio, and Kantronics has done much
better with theirD410. You don't expect a voice radio to be a
good ATV rig and you shouldn'texpect it to be a good data rig
either. Different modes need radios optimized for different
characteristics. Radios that use the Collinsmechanical filter,
or it's equivalent, have a pass characteristic moresuited to
data use than the current crop of amateur consumer voiceradios.
Yet a Collins filter can be had for $30. This isn't so mucha
cost issue as a design issue. One size does not fit all. I
suggestthat the path we took with the 56 kb RF modem is the
direction thathigh performance RF data transmission must take.
That's to make themodem the radio. That way it is optimized to
the characteristics ofthe modulation used.>Yes. And note that
Piccolo and Clover are *NOT* PSK. >>>>> But the rules prevent
it.>>>>>>Not really. The rules dictate a maximum symbol rate
(300 baud below 28 MHz)>>>and a maximum shift (1000 Hz below 30
MHz). Other than that, the rules are>>>remarkably open.Piccolo
and Clover are not PSK, but they also aren't a single 300 baud
FSKcarrier either and they are illegal under the current rules.
Transmissionof multiple carriers in the same band by the same
station is forbidden.The rules weren't designed to handle this
case. A simple bandwidthrestriction without other constraints on
signaling method would makemore sense. Note that while Clover
occupies a bandwidth of about200 Hz, Piccolo occupies a
bandwidth similar to a AM voice transmission.It's thruput is
high of course. What I'd like to see is a realignmentof the
rules to concentrate on bandwidth restrictions only. Thus
aClover or CW or FSK signal would be ok in the narrow bandwidth
subbandaand voice, SSTV, and Piccolo and the like would be ok in
the widerbandwidth segments. Concentration on modulation
*methods* rather thanmodulation *results* make the rules
unnecessarily restrictive. Thisdoesn't leave a place for SS, but
then current rules don't either.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92 15:26:10
GMTFrom:
swrinde!mips!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!kd4nc!ke
4zv![e-mail]: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary
Coffman)Subject : Re: New packeteer frustrationIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Coleman)
writes:>In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:>> >> I
understand bandwidth limits, but if we can put 9600 bps into
the>> same bandwidth as "CQ DX...your 59, 73! CQ DX...," then we
should!>>Note that the above CQ DX would have to occur in CW.
After all, the>digital transmissions don't occur in the voice
subbands, they occur>in the digital subbands. Strictly speaking
that's not completely true. CW is a digital modeand it is
permitted *anywhere* on the amateur bands. Then there'sSSTV,
it's not voice, but is allowed in the voice bands. In factit's
only allowed in the voice bands. SSTV is an interesting caseas
well because it is in practice a digital signal transmitted by
afrequency and amplitude shifted carrier. That's because all
currentgeneration SSTV equipment digitizes the video in a frame
buffer.It uses a 64 kb buffer that is transmitted in an 8 second
framefor an effective thruput of 8 kbs. This looks like a dodge
aroundthe antiquated rules. We could load the frame buffer with
dataand transmit it as a SSTV picture. The FCC doesn't require
thepictures to make sense when viewed on a monitor, except for
theID every 10 minutes.Even better, if we write the data in
columns, read it outfor transmission in rows, and use matrix
FEC, we have a ratherrobust data system that should be able to
shrug off burst errors.This the way D2 digital videotape
recording is done. Whenthe matrix is reconstructed, errors are
smeared out across thematrix so that the check bits for each row
and column can beused to reconstruct the damaged data.Gary
KE4ZV------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 92 00:50:52
GMTFrom: retix.com![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Ham-weenie
questionHey ho!I've just been reading some FAQ stuff, but I'm
not sure its answered myquestion.  So, here it is, like it or
not.  If not, please email direct.Ta.My dad is a ham (his jokes
are pretty bad too) and he's in Wales (U.K.).His call sign is
GW3GWA, for anyone who's interested (yeah, he's beengoing since
before the Blitz...).He has a bunch of gear set up for morse and
voice communication bothlocally on 2m and worldwide.  I'm not a
ham, and have no license, but would like to communicate withhim.
 Assuming that he set up a rig and his computer for packet
radio,is there any way he could send info that I could receive
on the Internet(ie, to my email address) and vice-versa?  I
suppose I'm talking aboutan internet-based gateway of some sort
that could do the conversion.Could this scenario exist without
my requiring a license?Thank you so much.Tony.-- Tony [All views
expressed are mine - if anyone is to blame its
me]==============================================================
===="What a waste it is to lose one's mind.  Or not to have a
mind isbeing very wasteful.  How true that is" Vice President
Dan Quayle------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #232******************************Date: Fri, 28 Aug
92 04:30:03 PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #233To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Fri,
28 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 233Today's Topics:
   19.2KB Packet Network Now Operational
Ham-weenie question                        Packet w/HP95 Palm
Top              Shorting Nicad batteries to revive them...
  UCSD claiming to be gateway to amateur TCP/IP (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] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:01:18 GMTFrom:
psinntp!ncrlnk!ciss!lawday![e-mail]: 19.2KB
Packet Network Now OperationalTo: [e-mail]'ve
posted a couple of articles in the past about our attempts here
inSouthwestern Ohio to build a (moderately) high speed packet
backbone,and a similar Metropolitan Area Lan.We've now completed
the first phase of the system, and have a backbonelinking
Dayton, Cincinnati, and Columbus through a set of
19.2KBpoint-to-point links (5 node sites in all), and a
full-duplex 19.2KBpacket repeater running in Dayton (currently
with 6 users).The system is built using the Kantronics D4-10 UHF
DataRadios.  Itworks.I won't take up a lot of bandwidth here
with a lengthy description, butif you're interested I'll happily
email info about this system.John Ackermann
[e-mail]9v@n8acv.#day.oh.usa-- John
R. Ackermann, Jr.        Law Department, NCR Corporation,
Dayton, Ohio(513) 445-2966
[e-mail] Radio: ag9v@n8acv
tcp/ip: [e-mail]
[44.70.12.34]------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 92
18:10:04 GMTFrom:
olivea!hal.com!thumper![e-mail]: Ham-weenie
questionTo: [e-mail] article
[e-mail], [e-mail] (Tony "Salty Dog"
Goulding) writes:>I'm not a ham, and have no license, but would
like to communicate with>him.  Assuming that he set up a rig and
his computer for packet radio,>is there any way he could send
info that I could receive on the Internet>(ie, to my email
address) and vice-versa?  I suppose I'm talking about>an
internet-based gateway of some sort that could do the
conversion.>Could this scenario exist without my requiring a
license?>Tony.The gateway I can help you with, but I require all
people that access itto have their ticket. With the new
code-less licenses it is very easy toget one. You can actually
do it in a couple weeks. If you are interestedin how let me know
and I will try to get you in touch with the properpeople. Once
you have it, we can do a lot about getting you in touch withyour
dad.When you get your ticket send a message to
[e-mail] I will register you with the
gate and send you the gateway
instructions.----------------------------------------------------
-------------------------Bob Arasmith   [e-mail] (work)
[e-mail] (home)   n0ary@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na
(packet)------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 1992 15:14:40
GMTFrom:
usc!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu!bcm!lib!oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu!jma
[e-mail]: Packet w/HP95 Palm TopTo:
[e-mail] also that, once you get the 95 running
with a TNC and radio, you can usea version of KA9Q NOS I've
ported to the 95 to get on TCP/IP. It's availablefor FTP on
ucsd.edu. It works best with either a 1 MB 95 or a RAMcard,
though.-- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to
malice that which [e-mail]      |
adequately be explained by stupidity. "Keep in mind that Amateur
Radio As We Know It Today will cease to exist            at
midnight tonight." -- Dave Newkirk,
WJ1Z------------------------------Date: 26 Aug 92 17:05:49
GMTFrom: usc!rpi!bu.edu!cvbnet![e-mail]:
Shorting Nicad batteries to revive them...To:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 27 Aug
92 16:30:27 GMTFrom:
csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]: UCSD claiming to
be gateway to amateur TCP/IPTo: [e-mail] notice
that UCSD.EDU is advertising the IP addresses of 11417
amateursin the ampr.org domain.  Does anyone know if these sites
are REALLYreachable via the internet?  mirrorshades.ucsd.edu
claims to be a gateway,but it doesn't seem to be.I'd like to
locate some worm hole operators if any would come forward.(Or is
there a list in QST somewhere?)Al
(n6rpr)[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Fri,
28 Aug 1992 01:59:28 GMTFrom:
munnari.oz.au!manuel!sserve![e-mail]: UCSD
claiming to be gateway to amateur TCP/IPTo:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date:
(null)From: (null)Does anyone know how to get the packs
apart?Does anyone know where I can get replacement cells?Is this
possible at all with the likes of BP8's etc????Thanks,
joe------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 1992 21:34:57
GMTFrom: ucsd.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Link
between BBS via Amateur RadioIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:>Yeah, sure... >And just when do you think this wish will
become true?Well, with attitudes like yours, never.Lead, follow,
or get the hell out of the way!    -
Brian------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 92 22:21:34
GMTFrom: eos!aio!norm![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Link
between BBS via Amateur RadioIn article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Uri
Blumenthal) writes:> In article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes: >>> The ham
radio packet bbs network is really nothing more than a toy.
It>>> is far too limited as far as restrictions on content,
bandwidth, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>>> reliability to be used in a
production BBS environment of the type that>>> land-line-based
BBS users have been accustomed to seeing for more than>>> a
decade.>>   Nonsense.  > How about your posting? (:-)  Naah, I
only spout nonsense at parties. :-) >> We can achieve much
higher bandwidths using good compression strategies>> and by
moving up into the microwave region.  My reading so far
indicates>> that 30-40 mile microwave links running 10 Mbit/sec
should be possible>> without outrageous investments.> Well,
there's a lot of things which *COULD* be done, if <long list>.>
Today's reality is - you don't have even 9600 bps.   What do you
mean we don't have 9600 bps?  The nodes around Houstonare mostly
running 19.2 backbones.  It would be no great trick tobring up
the user ports to 9600 if the demand were there.  And 9600bTNC's
exist; it's only a matter of time before they become the
standard.  If there's a problem with the current network, it's
that it'sunderutilized, and therefore generates little need to
improve it.Yeah, I realize that this is a Catch-22.>>   The
existing packet network is very poor, but that's just because>>
it's dated.  Technology very quickly becomes obsolete these
days, and>> we hams don't have barrels of money to burn.> OK, so
the existing PBBS is very poor (and how does it contradict> the
original statement about land BBS technology being a decade>
ahead), and hams don't have barrels of money to burn to bring>
the PBBS from obsolete to current level... Very nice. So far>
you're proving the points of what you called "nonsense".
Perhaps I read too much into the original posting.  My gut
impressionwas that the REAL message was "The packet network is
not and NEVER WILLBE more than a toy."> And there's very
important point which you chose to ignore:> RESTRICTION ON
CONTENT. Don't you think it counts?   Not really.  There are
restrictions in the content of Usenet postingstoo.  The original
posting listed three problems, too technical and onenot.  I have
very little influence over political problems, but I canalways
hack some hardware together. :-)  In other words, I simply
chosenot to address that issue, because it has never been an
issue for meand I don't expect it to become one.>>   Ultimately,
the packet network needs to put its backbones up in the>>
microwave region and run Internet speeds.> Yeah, sure...and just
when do you think this wish will become true?  Real Soon Now.
Take a look in the 1992 Handbook; read the article inSection 32
on 10/24 GHz connections running at 2 Mbit/sec (with 10
Mbit/secpossible).  I would guess another five years or so.
Look how quicklythe current packet network came about!  When was
the first commerciallyproduced TNC offered for sale?  Of course,
I readily admit that if the landlines switch over to
opticalfiber and start running another order of magnitude of
speed, we are not goingto have the bandwidth available to match
that.  But we can certainly reachtoday's Ethernet speeds with a
10/24 GHz backbone, and from what I've foundso far it needn't
cost all that much.  (I'm getting ready to do someexperiments in
the 10 GHz region, but so far it's still in the talking stage.)>
Regards,> Uri.        [e-mail]--  Keith Mancus
<[e-mail]>
       N5WVR
"If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live
       in Hell." -General Sheridan
            ------------------------------Date: (null)From:
(null)I'm one. I help run the Wormhole gateway for the ACT
region in Australia[ 44.136.0.x to 44.136.7.x ].
mirrorshades.ucsd.edu is indeed gating packetsbetween the
amateurs and the Internet.However, you may not be able to reach
some/all of the amateurs servicedby the wormholes from the
Internet for political reasons: allowing (possible)non-amateurs
to use amateur frequencies here in Australia is illegal.
Packetsfrom the Internet eventually pass over amateur
frequencies to get to theirdestination. Thus, we have decided to
setup barriers to the packetsoriginating from the Internet.In
other words, mirrorshades will pass your packets to us, we will
discardthem. Your mileage may vary with other wormholes, but I
doubt it!Sorry for the wet blanket.  Warren Toomey VK1XWT, on
the path to insanity  No longer in the bowels of ADFA Comp
Science.   `Version 7 Job Control: just use
ptrace(2).'------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 92
20:28:05 GMTFrom:
newsgate.watson.ibm.com!yktnews!admin!aixproj![e-mail]:
 [e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>xprojReply-To :
[e-mail] : Re: Link between BBS via Amateur
RadioIn article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes:|> > The ham
radio packet bbs network is really nothing more than a toy.
It|> > is far too limited as far as restrictions on content,
bandwidth, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^|> > reliability to be used in a
production BBS environment of the type that|> > land-line-based
BBS users have been accustomed to seeing for more than|> > a
decade.|> |>   Nonsense.  How about your posting? (:-)|> We can
achieve much higher bandwidths using good compression
strategies|> and by moving up into the microwave region.  My
reading so far indicates|> that 30-40 mile microwave links
running 10 Mbit/sec should be possible|> without outrageous
investments.Well, there's a lot of things which *COULD* be done,
if <long list>.Today's reality is - you don't have even 9600
bps. And it has very little to do with data compression (or did
you mean things likemultiplexing: frequency multiplexing/time
multiplexing?).|>   The existing packet network is very poor,
but that's just because|> it's dated.  Technology very quickly
becomes obsolete these days, and|> we hams don't have barrels of
money to burn.OK, so the existing PBBS is very poor (and how
does it contradictthe original statement about land BBS
technology being a decadeahead), and hams don't have barrels of
money to burn to bringthe PBBS from obsolete to current level...
Very nice. So faryou're proving the points of what you called
"nonsense".And there's very important point which you chose to
ignore:RESTRICTION ON CONTENT. Don't you think it counts?|>
Ultimately, the packet network needs to put its backbones up in
the|> microwave region and run Internet speeds.Yeah, sure... And
just when do you think this wish will become
true?--Regards,Uri.        [e-mail]------------<Disclaimer>--
----------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#233******************************Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 04:30:04
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #234To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sat,
29 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 234Today's Topics:
            [ANS] New Ham Calls
AMTOR/BITNET (3 msgs)                  FT-727R --> TNC  need R &
C values           Help with commercial short wave radio
reception.                         KPC-2 and kiss mode
           Packet driver for Excelan
Shorting nicad batteries              Shorting Nicad batteries
to revive them...            UCSD claiming to be gateway to
amateur TCP/IPSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 28 Aug 1992 19:12:15 -0700From:
[e-mail]: [ANS] New Ham CallsTo:
[e-mail][e-mail] (LEO BOBERschmidt)
writes:>The latest call signs issued by the FCC as of 1 August
1992 are:>>          Extra   Advanced   General/Technician
Novice>3rd Area: AA3BN   KE3EN      N3NCS
KB3AHH>4th Area: AV4TL   KQ4DG      ***
KD4ROY>*** = All call signs allocated from this block of calls.
In the 4th Area,>      all General, Technician, and Novice calls
come from the same call>      sign allocation block.>*>*
LEO------------------------------Date: 28 Aug 1992 09:41:24
-0700From: [e-mail]: AMTOR/BITNETTo:
[e-mail]'M LOOKING FOR A GATEWAY BETWEEN BITNET
AND AMTOR.  MY WIFEHAS  HER  GENERAL  LICENCE (KA3ZHW) AND WOULD
LIKE TO USE ANAEA PAKRATT-232 TO COMMUNICATE  THRU  THE  AMTOR
SYSTEM  TOBITNET.DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON SUCH A
GATEWAY???------------------------------Date: 28 Aug 1992
09:41:40 -0700From: [e-mail]:
AMTOR/BITNETTo: [e-mail]'M LOOKING FOR A GATEWAY
BETWEEN BITNET AND AMTOR.  MY WIFEHAS  HER  GENERAL  LICENCE
(KA3ZHW) AND WOULD LIKE TO USE ANAEA PAKRATT-232 TO COMMUNICATE
THRU  THE  AMTOR  SYSTEM  TOBITNET.DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY
INFORMATION ON SUCH A
GATEWAY???------------------------------Date: 28 Aug 1992
09:54:15 -0700From: [e-mail]:
AMTOR/BITNETTo: [e-mail]'M LOOKING FOR A GATEWAY
BETWEEN BITNET AND AMTOR.  MY WIFEHAS  HER  GENERAL  LICENCE
(KA3ZHW) AND WOULD LIKE TO USE ANAEA PAKRATT-232 TO COMMUNICATE
THRU  THE  AMTOR  SYSTEM  TOBITNET.DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY
INFORMATION ON SUCH A
GATEWAY???------------------------------Date: 29 Aug 92 06:57:30
GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]
ject: FT-727R --> TNC  need R & C valuesTo:
[e-mail] have my Yaesu FT-727R connected to a
PK-88 TNC.  The TNC has beenadjusted; the system can receive
packets fine.However, when I send packets, the HT gets keyed and
then stays keyedeven after the TNC isn't sending anything.If you
are using a 727 for packet, what values did you use for
yourTNC->727 cable?  The pk-88 manual suggests using a 0.1uF Cap
and a2200 Ohm Res for the connection, but another book suggests
using1000 Ohm and any cap between 1.0uF and 0.01uF.I have tried
a 1000 Ohm Res and 1.0uF and 0.1uF caps (and other sizes)with no
success -- the HT stays keyed or, for large resistances,
doesn'tkey at all.  I'll try the 2200 Ohm res tomorrow.Any
ideas?  All hints are
appreciated!!-Brent------------------------------Date: 28 Aug 92
23:41:47 GMTFrom:
stanford.edu!leland.Stanford.EDU![e-mail]: Help
with commercial short wave radio reception.To:
[e-mail] am trying to get the the voice of Israel
on my old (15 year oldRadio Shack Realistic DX 66) SW radio, and
I just barely managed todo it several times, but the reception
was terrible.   I am looking for some advice as to what I need
to do to be ableto receive it.   Will a new digital radio help
very much? Or do I need an excellentantena. (up to now, I just
hooked up a long wire to the radio andhung it outside the
appartment).   If the answer is that a good antena will probably
do the trick,then do you know where I can get one, and what I
should get?   At HAM-Radio outlet they wanted to sell me an
"eavesdropper" antenafor $80 . Do I really need to invest that
kind of money in an antena?   With regards to the radio, I heard
that most of the "commercial" (ones offered to the general
public rather than the ones that the serious amateur buys), are
not very good in terms of sensitivity andselectivity. Is that
right? Specifically I have seen a sony ICF 2010.Is it also
rather poor on the specs side? Do you know of somethingthat is
good on the reception side of things and not necessarily
sostrong on the glitz? Do I really need to invest hundreds of
dollars (or more) in a good receiver?   If you know how I could
get a decent cheap SW radio, I'd appreciateit too.   Thanks for
your time and help,
Gideon.Gideon Friedmannwk [phone]hm [phone]E-mail:
 [e-mail]------------------------------Date: 29
Aug 92 01:49:56 GMTFrom:
munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au!level
s![e-mail]: KPC-2 and kiss modeTo:
[e-mail] friend here has a KPC 2 with 2.x software
rom(s) dated about 1986?Will this unit support kiss mode ?, if
not where can we source the codeto blow a kiss rom for this
unit, or a later rev of the normal software.Can it be mailed,
purchased, if so from where/who ??73's ... Rob
vk5xxx------------------------------Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992
14:49:33 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uunet.ca!geac!alias!chk@netw
ork.UCSD.EDUSubject: Packet driver for ExcelanTo:
[e-mail]'m looking for a packet driver so that I
can use NOS on a 286 with anExcelan EXOS 205 Ethernet card. Does
anyone know where I can find one?Please reply by mail; If
there's interest I'll summarize to the net.    Thanks!--"You are at
wit's end.      | C. Harald Koch  Alias Research, Inc. Toronto,
ONPassages lead off in all    | [e-mail]
(work-related mail)directions..."  -related by |
[e-mail]     (permanent address)    Bryan
Manske, 13-Aug-92 | VE3TLA@VE3OY.#SCON.ON.CA.NA
(AMPRNet)------------------------------Date: 27 Aug 92
18:34:00From:
news.claremont.edu!ucivax!ofa123![e-mail]:
Shorting nicad batteriesTo: [e-mail],I don't
recommend shorting the cells out as you are doing.  I doubt that
ithelps, and I am afraid that you and/or your equipment may be
damaged by doing so.    After years of trying non-scientific
(i.e.  pass/fail) means ofrejuvinating my ni-cad's I have
adopted the following.  I try to charge theindividual battery or
cell "normally" with a 1/16 C rate. If it is in a packof cells I
open the pack and isolate the cell with jumpers, alligator
clips,or straight pins under the insulation.  If that doesn't
work I give it theshock treatment.  I happen to have an old RS
CB power supply, it puts out 2Amps continuous and 3 Amps peak at
12 Vdc.    I apply the output from the power supply to the
offending cell(s) untilthe circuit breaker pops.  At that time I
measure the cell voltage and, if it is anything but 0 V, place
it under normal charge for 16 hours.  If the celldoes not show
any voltage I repeat the shock treatment a few more times.  Ifit
doesn't pick up I figgure that I have fried it and toss it out.
If it was a cell in a pack I remove and replace the bad cell.  I
seem to have a fairsuccess rate with this method, and have never
had a cell explode or changeshape.    An alternate method which
I have read about but not experimented withsounded interesting:
  The author used a scale to measure cells before use, and after
they would no longer charge.  He found the latter cells to be
lighter than they wereoriginally.  He injected distilled water
till they were their original weight and claimed that most would
begin functioning again.  Sounds feasable, no?    Anyway,
welcome to the world of the rechargeable cells.  Be sure to
leteveryone know how your experiments come out!=== ~ SPEED 1.00
[NR] ~ Don't drink and park.  Accidents cause people!--- DB
1.37/003346------------------------------Date: 28 Aug 92
14:57:34 GMTFrom: ulowell!tegra![e-mail]:
Shorting Nicad batteries to revive them...To:
[e-mail] article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (cvbnet) writes:   From article
<[e-mail]>, by
[e-mail] (Brent):   > You will never get a NiCad
cell revived to an adequate performance level.   > The easiest
thing you can do is buy a new cell and install it.  New cells
> are only $2-$3 anyway.   I have a couple of dead ICOM battery
packs.   Does anyone know how to get the packs apart?   Does
anyone know where I can get replacement cells?   Is this
possible at all with the likes of BP8's etc????With the likes of
BP8s it is easy to get it apart, just unscrew thescrews and pry
the halves apart.Several companies make pre-made "inserts" to
replace the cells inthese packs.  Periphex has been my favorite
at 800 634-8132.The newer "S" series of packs are ultrasonically
welded and cannot befixed, at least they were not designed to
be.jv"Cel-e-brate, the being right, of the doing right, of your
heart" _____|     | Johnathan Vail     [e-mail]     (508)
663-7435|Tegra| [e-mail]    N1DXG@448.625-(WorldNet)
-----  MEMBER: League for Programming Freedom
([e-mail])------------------------------Date: 28
Aug 92 23:47:06 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!kumr![e-mail].E
DUSubject: UCSD claiming to be gateway to amateur TCP/IPTo:
[e-mail]@netcom.com (Al) writes:>I notice that
UCSD.EDU is advertising the IP addresses of 11417 amateurs>in
the ampr.org domain.  Does anyone know if these sites are
REALLY>reachable via the internet?  mirrorshades.ucsd.edu claims
to be a gateway,>but it doesn't seem to be.>>I'd like to locate
some worm hole operators if any would come forward.>(Or is there
a list in QST somewhere?)>>Al (n6rpr) [e-mail]    I do
have a router sitting on the Internet and that talks to our
localamateur tcp/ip group.  Since 44.x.x.x is not routed my
direction (and Iwouldn't want it to), amateurs need to telnet
into my unix box (kumr) and then they can telnet out to the
Internet. Mail and news can be routed via kumr to/from the
Internet and the amateurs that are in my local area.  Ihaven't
set up a worm hole at this time. If there is interest, I
wouldlike to look into it with folks.         Tim-- Internet:
[e-mail]               FidoNet:  Tim Pozar @
1:125/555UUCP:     ...!uunet!kumr.lns.com!pozarSnail:    Tim
Pozar / KKSF / 77 Maiden Lane / San Francisco CA 94108 /
USAVoice:    [phone]------------------------------Date:
Sat, 29 Aug 1992 03:06:02 GMTFrom:
sdd.hp.com!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!park.uvcc.edu!
cc.uvcc.edu![e-mail]:
[e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Subject : Re: Link
between BBS via Amateur RadioIn article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Uri
Blumenthal) writes:> In article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes:> > |> > The ham
radio packet bbs network is really nothing more than a toy.  It>
|> > is far too limited as far as restrictions on content,
bandwidth, and>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> |> > reliability to be used in a
production BBS environment of the type that> |> >
land-line-based BBS users have been accustomed to seeing for
more than> |> > a decade.> |> > |>   Nonsense.  > > How about
your posting? (:-)> > |> We can achieve much higher bandwidths
using good compression strategies> |> and by moving up into the
microwave region.  My reading so far indicates> |> that 30-40
mile microwave links running 10 Mbit/sec should be possible> |>
without outrageous investments.> > Well, there's a lot of things
which *COULD* be done, if <long list>.> Today's reality is - you
don't have even 9600 bps. And it has very > little to do with
data compression (or did you mean things like> multiplexing:
frequency multiplexing/time multiplexing?).> > |>   The existing
packet network is very poor, but that's just because> |> it's
dated.  Technology very quickly becomes obsolete these days,
and> |> we hams don't have barrels of money to burn.> > OK, so
the existing PBBS is very poor (and how does it contradict> the
original statement about land BBS technology being a decade>
ahead), and hams don't have barrels of money to burn to bring>
the PBBS from obsolete to current level... Very nice. So far>
you're proving the points of what you called "nonsense".> > And
there's very important point which you chose to ignore:>
RESTRICTION ON CONTENT. Don't you think it counts?> > |>
Ultimately, the packet network needs to put its backbones up in
the> |> microwave region and run Internet speeds.> > Yeah,
sure... > And just when do you think this wish will become
true?> --> Regards,> Uri.        [e-mail]> ------------>
<Disclaimer>-- -- Vern Cole -- Systems Manager -- Utah Valley
Community College --------------------------------Date: 28 Aug
92 19:14:11 GMTFrom:
newsgate.watson.ibm.com!yktnews!admin!aixproj![e-mail]:
 [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>Reply-To :
[e-mail] : Re: Link between BBS via Amateur
RadioIn article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes:|>   Naah, I only
spout nonsense at parties. :-)(:-)|> What do you mean we don't
have 9600 bps?  The nodes around Houston|> are mostly running
19.2 backbones.  Any details, please? Technical preferrably?
What kind of equipment?Frequencies? Bandwidth?|> And 9600b|>
TNC's exist; it's only a matter of time before they become the
standard.Yeah, that was my slip. Of course 9600b TNCs were there
even severalyears ago. Still they don't seem to enjoy much
usage...|> If there's a problem with the current network, |>
it's that it's underutilized, and therefore generates |> little
need to improve it.Well, I disagree. Today's PBBS is pain in ***
to use, becauseit takes almost MINUTES to get ONE string
through. Surely,higher speeds could improve response time, which
I'dthink would be welcomed by everybody?What's then the
reason(s) it's not used? Just the lack of widely available
19.2Kbps and faster TNCs? |>   Perhaps I read too much into the
original posting.  My gut impression|> was that the REAL message
was "The packet network is not and NEVER WILL|> BE more than a
toy."Yes, I think you read too much there. I think it was an
answerto something like "whether it's worth to try to
establishInternet-like network on the radio?". And the
answerwas: "No, today land-line BBS is much cheaper andfar more
effective than PBBS." Which I completely agree with.About "never
will be more than a toy"? Well, I don't know.If military can
transmit zillions of data over very wideband UHF links - why
can't we utilize similar approach?On the other hand - apparently
we haven't so far...|> > And there's very important point which
you chose to ignore:|> > RESTRICTION ON CONTENT. Don't you think
it counts?|>  |> Not really.  There are restrictions in the
content of Usenet postings|> too.  Well, Usenet restrictions are
MUCH less, err, "restrictive". Andyou don't lose your license
for violating them either (:-).|> The original posting listed
three problems, too technical and one|> not.  I have very little
influence over political problems, but I can|> always hack some
hardware together. :-)  Yeah, sure,  but the point is - if this
political problem [potentially] can deter [potential] users...
What's thereason for building a complicated [and expensive]
networkyou only a handful of users,  if most of those, who
couldbenefit from such a Net would go elsewhere (since there'sat
least one choice - Usenet, to say nothing about lots'nlots of
land-line BBS's)?I doubt that those who'll start HighSpeedPBBS
project canignore this issue.|> In other words, I simply chose|>
not to address that issue, because it has never been an issue
for me|> and I don't expect it to become one.Ah, that's
understandable. But that it's not an issue for you stilldoesn't
mean that it can't drive many other "customers" away.|>   Real
Soon Now.  Take a look in the 1992 Handbook; read the article
in|> Section 32 on 10/24 GHz connections running at 2 Mbit/sec
(with 10 Mbit/sec|> possible).  I would guess another five years
or so.  Look how quickly|> the current packet network came
about!  When was the first commercially|> produced TNC offered
for sale?Well, I believe about 1989? One or two years earlier?|>
 But we can certainly reach|> today's Ethernet speeds with a
10/24 GHz backbone, and from what I've found|> so far it needn't
cost all that much.  (I'm getting ready to do some|> experiments
in the 10 GHz region, but so far it's still in the talking
stage.)So unlike me, you are doing something constructive in
this area
(:-).--Regards,Uri.        [e-mail]------------<Disclaimer>--
----------------------------Date: 28 Aug 92 18:56:02 GMTFrom:
newsgate.watson.ibm.com!yktnews!admin!aixproj![e-mail]:
 [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>GReply-To :
[e-mail] : Re: Link between BBS via Amateur
RadioIn article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Brian Kantor) writes:|> >And just when do you think this wish
will become true?|> |> Well, with attitudes like yours,
never.Fine, what about your attitude? Bark-bark?|> Lead, follow,
or get the hell out of the way!I don't see you leading [i.e.
offering solution(s)], you don't seem to follow [for what IS
there tofollow today?] - therefore YOU get the
hellout.Continuation of this fruitful discussion - please
forward to /dev/null.  I've responded to what Iperceived as sort
of personal attack, but I'm not going to get involved in any
long-term
flame-war.--Regards,Uri.        [e-mail]------------<Disclaim
er>------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#234******************************Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 04:30:03
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #235To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Sun,
30 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 235Today's Topics:        BBS
via Amateur radio content restrictions -- ACT NOW
  FT-727R --> TNC  need R & C values      Legality Question:
Packet Access For Hams Via BBS (2 msgs)
Packet/Internet Message Forwarding                   RSGB GB2RS
NEWS 30th August 1992Send Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 19:59:20 GMTFrom:
dog.ee.lbl.gov!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!park.uvcc.edu!c
c.uvcc.edu![e-mail]: BBS via Amateur radio
content restrictions -- ACT NOWTo: [e-mail] am
cross referencing two threads here.....There is one thread in
r.r.a.packet about the poor performance of the present packet
network... I don't know who made the first comment...> > |> >
The ham radio packet bbs network is really nothing more than a
toy.  It> |> > is far too limited as far as restrictions on
content, bandwidth, and>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> |> > reliability to be used in a
production BBS environment of the type that> |> >
land-line-based BBS users have been accustomed to seeing for
more than> |> > a decade.> > And there's very important point
which you chose to ignore:> RESTRICTION ON CONTENT. Don't you
think it counts?Yes!  It counts a lot, because it is precisly
the content restrictions whichkeep us from carrying the data
which a high speed network thrives on.We need content rules
which will permit NetNews to be carried "live" on hamradio.
The answer is NOW before us!Please refer to article
<pschleck.714803051@cwis>.  It is the text of a Notice of
Proposed Rule Making:  "Ammendment to Part 97 of the
Commission's Rules toRelax the Restrictions on the Scope of
Permissible Communications in the^^^^^!Amateur Service.The
proposed rule modifies 97.113(a)(2) to read: [no amateur station
shalltransmit:] Communications in which the station licensee or
control operatorhave a pecuniary interest...This will make it
possible for my station to transmit "business" traffic provided
I do not profit from it.  It is a necessary step which must
beapplauded and supported.  The problem is that the rule changes
in other areas do not go far enough...We can transmit
notification of ham gear for sale or trade "provided that
suchactivity is not conducted on a regular basis". This would
prohibit arec.radio.amateur.forsale newsgroup -- since
newsgroups operate on a "regularbasis."  Other .forsale groups
would seem to be legal provided all traffic wasthird party -- no
ham can post his own stuff.  (The language also seems toprohibit
a regular "swap net" on 2 meter phone.)The prohibition against
transmitting music is still unclarified.  The directproblem of
music in space shuttle re-broadcasts was considered and
rejected, however, the FCC did suggest that "Interested parties
... may comment regardingwhether transmissions of music should
be allowed."  I firmly believe that thewording should permit
incedental transmission of music.  The point here wouldbe that
the trasmission of audible music in real time is not the direct
intentof the station.  If I get music on hold during a phone
patch or am working neara marching band in a parade I should not
be required to shut downcommunications.  On the other hand, I
should not be sticking the mic up tothe speaker on my stereo so
that a ham buddy can hear the latest record. Digitized music,
computer programs which produce music, or images of sheetmusic
should by no means be forbidden.Another sticky point is the
proscription against "obscene, indecent, or profanelanguage."
Does the phone company have a similar restriction on
theirmicrowave radios?  If so, do they monitor every long
distance call to ensurecompliance?  I agree that radio operators
should not initiate obscene traffic,and I would prefer that
alt.sex not appear on the amateur bands.  Unfortunatly,the rule
requires that every bit of traffic forwarded through an
automaticstation be filtered for possible profane language!
This is an impossible taskfor the operator of a news link. The
rule should contain language to the effectthat operators of
stations in automatic forwarding operation should make
a"reasonable effort" to block transmission of such morally
objectionabletraffic.May I suggest that everyone interested in a
high speed packet network get outtheir word processors and start
letting Uncle Charlie know what we need?Complete instructions on
how to make comments are included in Paul Schleck'sorigial
article (in rec.radio.amateur.packet or by ftp from
/pub/ham-radio onftp.cs.buffalo.edu) or in the September QST.
Comments must be filed by October 1, 1992.-- -- Vern Cole --
Systems Manager -- Utah Valley Community College -- KF7XM-- --
Vern Cole -- Systems Manager -- Utah Valley Community College
--------------------------------Date: 29 Aug 92 23:14:12
GMTFrom:
swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu![e-mail]
ject: FT-727R --> TNC  need R & C valuesTo:
[e-mail] my previous post, I have it
working now.  As I mentioned, I hadused various values for both
C and R.  However, I wasn't able to use thesuggested 2200 Ohm
resistor since I didn't have any.  I bought some today.To make a
long story short, the key to getting this to work is to use0.1uF
capac

itance and 2200 ohm resistance.  When making the
connections,make them as short as possible (mine are 1/8" long
leads now).  Once Idid this, the 727 worked fine.A side note:
the 727 uses a 12V battery pack (12.5 actually).  TheYaesu
charger/DC supply does not supply enough current to drive the
727at full power.  I am using a 13.8V DC (auto "12" volt) supply
to run theTNC and the 727.  I tweaked the output voltage to
13.25 (from 13.8) andit can supply the 727 with as much current
as it needs.  This was animportant fact when using the HT -- if
it doesn't have enough juice totransmit, the packet's beginning
will be lost.Thanks to all who
responded!-Brent------------------------------Date: Sat, 29 Aug
1992 14:17:10 GMTFrom:
anomaly.sbs.risc.net![e-mail]: Legality
Question: Packet Access For Hams Via BBSTo:
[e-mail], I was talking to some hams in the
area who are involved in modemBBS communications. They had never
tried packet radio, so I said: Gee,wouldn't it be neat if you
could access my TNC and utilize packet via myBBS.This is very
possible, since my TNC is connected to a serial port on myUNIX
system. All I would have to do is establish a command and
appropriatesecurity on my BBS to restrict TNC access to
registered Ham Radio operatorsonly.Now, the question becomes:
what type of legalities should I be concernedabout?This isn't
quite "repeater operation", but I assume I would still be
thecontrol operator of the equipment, since it is, after all, my
station.How would the remote-access Ham set MYCALL on my TNC?
THEIRCALL/MYCALL?THEIRCALL via MYCALL?Anything else I should be
concerned about?I'd be interested in hearing from other people
who have worked on a similarproject.MD-- --  Michael P. Deignan
                    / Sex is hereditary. If your --  Domain:
[e-mail]            /  parents never had it, chances
--    UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd  /   are you won't
either...-- Telebit: [phone]
/------------------------------Date: 29 Aug 92 18:46:38 GMTFrom:
dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!pilot.njin.net![e-mail]:
Legality Question: Packet Access For Hams Via BBSTo:
[e-mail]> This isn't quite "repeater operation",
but I assume I would still be the> control operator of the
equipment, since it is, after all, my station.If they were hams,
they could very well be control operators of thestation.  They
would be operating it on remote control.> How would the
remote-access Ham set MYCALL on my TNC? THEIRCALL/MYCALL?>
THEIRCALL via MYCALL?Probably the best mode is to make the thing
function like a node.  Thething would source packets that appear
to come from the user's call(but via your station).
Theoretically, they could just set their callon the TNC though
and still be legal.-Ron------------------------------Date: 30
Aug 92 02:22:58 GMTFrom:
andromeda.rutgers.edu![e-mail]:
Packet/Internet Message ForwardingTo: [e-mail]
have an Uncle in Nicosia, Cyprus who is an operator and has
beensince the 1930's.  I keep in contact with him mostly via
fax, but sinceI am on the net so much, I was curious if there is
a way to use theresources of the Internet (e-mail, etc) to send
and receive messages fromhim and other members of the radio club
in Nicosia.I am not an operator myself, so I need any
information provided ina non-technical format please.Any and all
replies and follow-ups are appreciated.Thanks !!-- David De
Trolio -
([e-mail])_________________________________
_________________"We're sailing on the wind of better
days"------------------------------Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992
16:49:05 +0000From:
pipex!demon!tedb.demon.co.uk![e-mail]: RSGB GB2RS
NEWS 30th August 1992To:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Sat, 29
Aug 1992 04:37:10 GMTFrom:
uw-coco!nwnexus!ole!ssc![e-mail]:
[e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>pSubject : Re: New packeteer
frustrationIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Gary Coffman) writes:>Piccolo and Clover are
not PSK, but they also aren't a single 300 baud FSK>carrier
either and they are illegal under the current rules.
Transmission>of multiple carriers in the same band by the same
station is forbidden.The ARRL says it's legal in "The FCC
Rulebook" in the Emissions chapterin the RTTY subsection.
Piccolo is not multiple carrier, but amultifrequency FSK system
with only one frequency at a time.Clover seems to be mutating.
The first description was of a variablebaud rate PSK, but Clover
II seems to be something else.Mark Zenier  [e-mail]
------------------------------End of Packet-Radio Digest V92
#235******************************Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 04:30:02
PDTFrom: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup
<[e-mail]>Errors-To:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: BulkSubject: Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #236To: packet-radioPacket-Radio Digest         Mon,
31 Aug 92       Volume 92 : Issue 236Today's Topics:
Legality Question: Packet Access For Hams Via BBS
                 NOS                   rsgb gb2rs news 30th
august 1992            UCSD claiming to be gateway to amateur
TCP/IPSend Replies or notes for publication to:
<[e-mail]>Send subscription requests to:
<[e-mail]>Problems you can't solve
otherwise to [e-mail] 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 textherein consists of
personal comments and does not represent the officialpolicies or
positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So
there.-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 30 Aug 92 21:30:21 +1000From:
munnari.oz.au!manuel!sserve!hhcs.gov.au![e-mail]
bject: Legality Question: Packet Access For Hams Via BBSTo:
[e-mail] article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan) writes:> This is
very possible, since my TNC is connected to a serial port on my>
UNIX system. All I would have to do is establish a command and
appropriate> security on my BBS to restrict TNC access to
registered Ham Radio operators> only. > How would the
remote-access Ham set MYCALL on my TNC? THEIRCALL/MYCALL?>
THEIRCALL via MYCALL?There is an easy way to give them full
access.  Find yourself acheap AT and configure it to run KA9Q
NOS, specifically the WG7Jor PA0GRI varients. They are available
on ucsd.edu.Attach your TNC, in KISS mode, to the AT and attach
the AT to theUnix box via a slip line.  You can set up the user
permissions inthe /ftpusers file on the AT so that only the
users you specifycan get on.  Your users then just telnet from
the unix box to theAT, login with their callsign and, if you use
the wg7j or pa0griversions, connect out via the radio using
their own callsign.As an added bonus users on the radio side can
also get to yourUnix box.We're planning to do this locally with
a 386bsd box via ethernet,a novell file server (running novell
TCP/IP and NFS) andG8BPQ/AA4RE.  The NOS box will be the radio
handler and allowconnections to these services as well as cross
band connections.(We have multiple ports on the BBS now.)Carl.--
Carl Makin, MVS/ESA Systems Programmer, VAX/VMS Dabbler. Dept.
Health, Housing and Community Services, Canberra,
Australia.sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au!hhcs!makinc   -
[e-mail]           -   [e-mail]
  -   Packet Radio"I'm from the Government and I'm here to help
you."------------------------------Date: 30 Aug 92 18:42:51
GMTFrom: nic.unh.edu!unhtel!morwyn![e-mail]:
NOSTo: [e-mail] am looking for the src code to
NOS... I looked on ucsd.edu, and itappears that there are
several versions of this.  I'm looking for a version I can port
to my Unix machine... (not sure if that's beendone yet or
not).Could someone tell me which version to get?Thank you.--
-----------          Forrest Aldrich          -----------       -------
  morwyn![e-mail]      -------       ----                             ----
  --         VISION GRAPHICS --    Dover, NH - USA           --
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------Date: 30 Aug 92 08:42:36 GMTFrom:
pipex!demon!tedb.demon.co.uk![e-mail]: rsgb gb2rs
news 30th august 1992To: [e-mail] is a test
uploading of the Radio Society of Great Britainsweekly GB2RS
news broadcast. I hope this is of interest to non-ukreaders..I
have removed all the local news.. 73 Ted G8LWY @
[e-mail] morning. It's Sunday the
30th of August and here is the GB2RS newsbroadcast, prepared by
the Radio Society of Great Britain.First the headlines:-The RSGB
and the Diana tapes; an RAE certificate forger has been
convicted;and some new RLOs in RSGB Zone C.An article that
appeared in the National Press this week suggested that it wasa
radio 'ham' who allegedly intercepted a telephone call from
Princess Diana.The RSGB can confirm that Mr Cyril Reenan is not,
nor has been in the past, amember of the Radio Society of Great
Britain. We can also confirm that to thebest of our knowledge Mr
Reenan is not a licenced amateur. The RSGB haspositively reacted
to dispel any association between the hobby of amateurradio and
the indiscriminate use of scanners.Some time ago, a suspected
forged Radio Amateurs Examination pass slip waspassed to the
Radiocommunications Agency by the Radio Amateur Licensing
Unit.On the 12th of August the case was heard at Cardiff
Magistrates Court wherethe defendant pleaded guilty to Sections
one and three of the Forgery andCounterfeiting Act 1981. The
defendant was given a conditional discharge oftwelve months and
was ordered to pay 50 costs.Now some good news:Among the RSGB
VHF/UHF certificates to be awarded recently were two
slighlyunusual applications involving QRP operation. The 432MHz
Standard was issuedto Chris Rolinson, G0MLY, for having
confirmed contacts with 20 counties and 4countries on the 70
centimetre band. Thirteen of the contacts were made using2.5
watts and the other 7 contacts with 5 watts to a vertically
polarisedcollinear antenna. The other noteworthy achievement was
the first RSGB 10GHzdistance certificate to be awarded to a
novice licensee. This was issued toSarah Jewell, 2E1AJE, for the
contact with G4BRK. This contact between2E1AJE's home in Ipswich
and G4BRK's portable location on the White Horse Hillwas over a
distance of 203 kilometres, using of course the Novice power of
3watts. Full information on all RSGB VHF, UHF and Microwave
awards may beobtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed
envelope to RSGB VHF AwardsManager Ian Cornes, G4OUT, QTHR.The
Derbyshire 50 and 70MHz beacons, GB3BUX, are now operational
with effectfrom the 21st of August. The frequencies are
50.000MHz and 70.000MHzrespectively and for propagation
evaluation purposes they share the samekeying cycle. Further
information on these beacons can be obtained from TonyWhitaker,
G3RKL.Now news of RSGB Liaison Officers for Zone C.A new RLO for
Kent is Fred Stewart, G0CSF, whose address is
'Shingles',Ingleborough Lane, St Mary's Platt, Sevenoaks, Kent,
TN15 8JU. His telephonenumber is 0732 780721. Next a change of
RLO for Essex, the contact person isnow Malcolm Salmon, G3XVV,
54 Church Road, Rivenhall, Witham, Essex, CM8 3PH.His telephone
number is 0376 514377. With immediate effect, Bill
Higgins,G3PNR, 65 Hayden Court, Eleanor Road, Norwich, NR1 2RG
will be resuming hisduties as RLO for Norfolk and
Suffolk.Attention all RSGB HF Contest Trophy winners. Would all
trophy winners pleasereturn their trophies to RSGB HQ as soon as
possible so that they can bepresented to this year's winners at
the RSGB HF Convention.Now some items of HF DX news from the
weekly RSGB DX News Sheet which isedited by Brendan McCartney,
G4DYO. This week, our DX news concerns Poland:The Polish Contest
club SP6PAZ will sign 3Z25PAZ to celebrate its 25thanniversary,
during September until the end of December. And to celebrate
the35th anniversary of the Polish Amateur Union, PZK, SP6TPM
will sign SP0TPMfrom the 1st of September to 31st of
December.Rally news now and we know of four events for today
Sunday the 30th.There is the Coleraine and District Amateur
Radio Group, Radio Rally and Bringand Buy which is being held at
The Golf Links Hotel, Portrush, County Antrim.The event opens at
12 noon and food and refreshments are available. Talk-in ison
channel S22.The Galashiels and District Amateur Radio Society
Open Day which is being heldat Focus Centre, Livingstone Place,
Galashiels. Doors open at 11.00am. Thereare the usual
activities, a bring and buy stall, trade stands and club
stalls,etc. Refreshments are available.The Torbay Amateur Radio
Society Mobile Rally which is being held at theNorthern Telecom
Social Club, Brixham Road, Paignton, Devon. Starts at10.00am.
There is a bring and buy stall, refreshments are available, and
amplecar parking space.The White Rose Amateur Radio Society Open
Day is being held at the MoortownRugby Union Football Club, Moss
Valley, Kings Lane, Leeds, to celebrate theClub's Silver
Jubilee. Activities begin at 12.00 noon featuring special
eventstation GB0WRR, a barbecue and something for all the
family.There is one event for Bank Holiday Monday the 31st of
August, this is theHuntington Amateur Radio Society Annual Rally
and Junk Sale which is to beheld at the Medway Centre,
Coneygeare Road, Huntington. Doors open at 10.00am.There will be
trade stands, a bring and buy stall, components stands and
junksale. Refreshment will be available. Talk-in will be on
channel S22 and viaGB3OV. Further details can be obtained from
G7DIU by telephoning 0480 431333.We know of a further four event
scheduled for next Sunday the 6th of September:The Bristol Radio
Rally which is to be held at the Brunel's Great Train
Shed,Bristol Old Station, Temple Mead. Doors open at 10.30am.
There will be theusual trade stands, a bring and buy stall, club
stands, and ATV and PacketRadio demonstrations. Refreshments
will be available and talk-in will be onchannel S22. Further
details from G4WUB on 0275 839855.The Milton Keynes and District
Amateur Radio Society Car Boot Rally will beheld at Cranfield
Airfield (South Side), Cranfield, Bedfordshire. Take
eitherjunction 13 or 14 off the M1 motorway. Talk-in will be on
channel S22 usingthe callsign G8MKC. Further details can be
obtained from G1LRU, by telephoning0908 660798.The Preston
Amateur Radio Society Mobile Rally will be held at the
Universityof Lancaster. Doors open at 11.00am, 10.30am for
disabled visitors.There willbe trade stands, club and repeater
group stands and a bring and buy stall.Free parking available on
campus. Further details can be obtained from GEamshaw, by
telephoning 0772 718175.The Vange Amateur Radio Society Rally
which is to be held at the LaindonCummunity Centre, Laindon High
Road/Aston Road, Laindon, Basildon, Essex. TheCentre is short
walk from Laindon BR Station on the Fenchurch-Shoeburynessline.
Approach roads will be signposted. Doors open at 10.30am. There
will betrade stands, a bring and buy stall and refreshments.
Talk-in will be onchannel S22. Further details can be obtained
from G4NVT, by telephoning 0268543025.Contest news now:The RSGB
SSB Field Day takes place over next weekend the 5th and 6th
ofSeptember. The rules can be found in June's RadCom. Also over
the same periodthe JARL AA SSB contest takes place. Monday the
7th sees the start of the RSGBQRS Cumulative contests. Further
details can be found in July's RadCom.On the VHF/UHF bands, the
next scheduled RSGB event is the 144MHz Trophy andSWL Contest
for Saturday and Sunday the 5th and 6th of September. The
rulescan be found in April's RadCom.Next news of special events
stations this week:On Monday the 31st of August the Meirion and
Dolgellau Amateur Radio Societyare using the club call GC4LZP/P
in support of the Multi Charities Gala beingheld at Tal-Y-Bont,
Barmouth. The station will be operational on HF, VHF andUHF and
also TV and Packet as a demonstration of Amateur Radio
Activities.Further information can be obtained from GW3GKZ, by
telephoning 0341 422447On Saturday the 5th of September, the
Central Lancs Amateur Radio Club willoperate the Special Event
call signs GB92APG from the Fulwood Barracks,Preston, Lancs. The
event is a Military Tatoo and Beating of the Retreat bythe Navy,
Army and Airforce within the Barracks. This Military Open Day
isbeing held in conjunction with the Preston Guild-92 and is
open to the public.Further information can be obtained from
G0LRE, by telephoning 0257 274243.Some satellite news now:Anyone
who uses the satellite OSCAR-10 may like to know that AMSAT-UK
areoffering the technical manual free of charge to anyone
sending them an A5 orlarger Self-Addressed Stamped Envelope. The
address is AMSAT-UK, London, E125EQ. Please do not phone for
this offer.And now the solar factual data:This week, for the
period 17th to the 23rd August, solar activity was low upto the
20th then a number of M flares caused a severe magnetic storm.
Four Mflares, the largest being up to an M4.0/1B, were reported
on the 20th andthree more M flares occurred on the 21st. These
caused a collapse of HF bandconditions and an aurora was
reported during the night of the 23rd. Sun spotcounts declined
from 134 on the 17th down to only 34 by the 23rd giving a meanof
84 for the period. Solar flux levels also declined from 141 down
to 111units giving an average of 131 units. The geomagnetic
activity rose from veryquiet on the 17th up to storm levels with
an Ap index of 59 units, giving anaverage of 22.2 units for the
period. The state was nil up to the 19th then amagnetic storm
started and a proton alert was issued, followed by the
flareactivity. The radio quality indices declined from well
above normal on allcircuits on the 17th down to very low levels
by the 23rd on all circuit witheast/west paths being extremely
poor. The aa indices, as supplied by theBritish Geological
Survey for the period 11th to 17th August, were mainlyquiet
giving a daily average of 18.3 nanoTeslas.Now the ionospheric
data for England and Wales:The F2 daytime critical frequencies
at Slough as reported by Appleton averaged7.3MHz, but varied
from 9.0MHz on the 19th, down to only 4.5MHz on the 23rd.The
darkness hour lows averaged 3.3MHz but varied from 4.4MHz on the
17th downto 1.6MHz by the 23rd due to the magnetic storm and
flare activity, there wasalso a lot of absorption, blanketing E,
spread F, and other phenomena, lastingup to 8 hours some days
which has taken a heavy toll on the HF bands.Now the ionospheric
data for the north:The F2 daytime critical frequencies at
Irkutsk averaged 6.2MHz and thedarkness hour lows 3.3MHz.And
lastly the solar forecast:This week, the more active side of the
sun will be looking our way. Solar fluxlevels are expected to be
about the 130s, and the geomagnetic activity isexpected to be
just unsettled. Ionospheric MUFs during daylight are expectedto
reach 24MHz and the darkness hour lows 14MHz. North/south paths
should bebest most times, but some east/west paths could open on
14MHz around midnight.Bartells rotation 2173 starts tomorrow the
31st.And that is the end of the solar information.Finally in the
main news, the licence issuing agency, SSL, has informed
theSociety that as of last Wednesday morning, the latest
callsigns issued were inthe G0 S I and G7 N O series, and Novice
calls in the 2 0 A Dand 2 1 B A series. .You're listening to
GB2RS, the news broadcasting service of the Radio Societyof
Great Britain, transmitting in the 80, 40, 6 and 2 metre
bands..------------------------------Date: 30 Aug 92 04:48:35
GMTFrom:
data.nas.nasa.gov!taligent!apple![e-mail]: UCSD
claiming to be gateway to amateur TCP/IPTo:
[e-mail] thought Brian would have posted a
complete answer to this by now,but I'll chime in with what I
know...In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Al)
writes:>I notice that UCSD.EDU is advertising the IP addresses
of 11417 amateurs>in the ampr.org domain.  Does anyone know if
these sites are REALLY>reachable via the internet?
mirrorshades.ucsd.edu claims to be a gateway,>but it doesn't
seem to be.I don't know what Al means by "advertising", but
ucsd.edu acts as thenameserver for the ampr.org domain. Because
of the unique nature of Net 44, finding an Internet address for
one of these nodes doesn'tguarantee that you can actually reach
it.But sometimes you can. As a couple of other people have
mentioned,there are some gateways between the Internet and
AMPRnet. Then thereare situations like my (now outdated)
"mac.n6bis.ampr.org" listing,which has an ampr.org name but was
actually on Net 129. In otherwords, it was reachable over the
Internet, but not over amateur radio!Is everyone sufficiently
confused yet? :-)Patty--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
    ::   Patty Winter N6BIS           Internet: [e-mail]
::             ::   Sunnyvale, California           AMPRNet: 44.4.0.44
         ::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
------------------------------Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 23:21:50
GMTFrom:
news.u.washington.edu!raven.alaska.edu!acad3.alaska.edu!ifjrs@bea
ver.cs.washington.eduTo: [e-mail]
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>.eduSubject : Re: Link
between BBS via Amateur RadioIn article
<[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Keith Mancus) writes:> In article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brian Kantor)
writes:>> [e-mail] (Denis Beauregard) writes:>>
>I would like to know if it is already done or not, to use>>
>Ham radio to link stations in a BBS network.> >   Nonsense.
You are making assumptions about using 1200 baud VHF links.> We
can achieve much higher bandwidths using good compression
strategies> and by moving up into the microwave region.  My
reading so far indicates> that 30-40 mile microwave links
running 10 Mbit/sec should be possible> without outrageous
investments.    Oh Right!  Let's see...between me and Fairbanks,
that would meanonly about 12 to 16 new sites and their
associated equipment...what was    that about "hams don't have
barrels of money to burn"?How much would you estimate the cost
of ONE complete microwave station,incl. hardware, software
and/or node/tcp-ip setup?  I've already spentthousands already
just setting up HF/VHF equipment at this QTH for packetuse as a
bbs/forwarding station--not to mention what I'm putting
intotrying to get 9600 baud use (rigs/modems/tncs) going.Well,
let's see...I forgot I've got two major mountain ranges to
cross,one with a 20,400 mountain to cross...yes, we've used
knife-edge on 2mto get across before...but microwave?  Better
add 10 or so more sites,just to make sure...>   The existing
packet network is very poor, but that's just because> it's
dated.  Technology very quickly becomes obsolete these days,
and> we hams don't have barrels of money to burn.>   Ultimately,
the packet network needs to put its backbones up in the>
microwave region and run Internet speeds.> > -- >  Keith Mancus
  <[e-mail]>                         |>
            N5WVR
  |>   "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas
and live       |>   in Hell." -General Sheridan
                         |-- --John
[e-mail]        BITNET:
IFJRS@[e-mail]        kl7jl.ampr.org
[44.22.0.1]"God is the Answer!"   "Oh?? ... er, ... What was the
Question?"--------------------------------End of Packet-Radio
Digest V92 #236******************************