Bruce, Being able to use an existing transceiver to use a new mode is something a lot of hams are willing to do; in fact, I've seen numerous comments on various lists that indicate it's a lot more common than we think.
Regarding what I said about DMR, it's more that the system, in their opinion, is more useful with features like being able to use a repeater locally on a second time slot while the other is connected to the worldwide DMR system. The problem I see with system is that many of the features that they point to as making it better than D-Star (and by extension anything that uses a D-Star like protocol) lock you into a single manufacturer's hardware, since those are generally manufacturer specific instead of open like the D-Star protocol or Codec2. RSSI: Yes, that probably would be a better way to do power adjustment; I'm tired and not thinking straight. On the protocol; I understand the desire for a low overhead system on HF, as we don't need to waste bandwidth with nonessential things. I can even see it on VHF and UHF for long range simplex communication as well as on thw microwave bands for the same reasons as HF. However, I think there is an interest in being able to use callsign routing and some of the other things that have developed since D-Star came out within the Codec2 community, so we should be able to provide that capability as well. All of the above things are either ky interpretation of what I've read elsewhere or my own suggestions for the project; since this is Open Source, I can add things if they aren't something that the development team is interested in adding, and I can contribute them for those that might be interested in them. Matthew Pitts N8OHU ------------------------------ On Sun, May 20, 2012 10:08 PM EDT Bruce Perens wrote: >On 05/20/2012 06:32 PM, Matthew Pitts wrote: >> Bruce, >> >> If we can demonstrate the system by plugging something into their D-Star >> transceiver, I think we can get their attention; >Codec2 voice over D-STAR just duplicates what the D-STAR radio already does, >but you have to connect some external device to make your D-STAR radio do it >with Codec2. I don't think this will excite a /lot /of people. > >It might excite someone that Codec2 should work over a 1200 Baud KISS TNC, >because the TNC has not done voice before. It might excite someone that we can >do Codec2 over HF, and that (unlike D-STAR or DMR/TRBO) it is actually legal >to use between the U.S. and another country, and that it is narrower than an >SSB channel. > >I think we need to be very careful about separating what excites /us /ffrom >what excites the larger ham community. We are excited because our new >development works, it's Free Software / Open Source, you can tweak it, etc. It >is nice that you bought D-STAR and are excited by these things, but I am not >getting the impression that they excite most D-STAR users. Although we got the >Georgia D-STAR folks to give out our brochures, we did not get invited to >speak at their meeting. I stood in the aisle and put brochures into hundreds >of people's hands at Hamvention, and a number of people told me the project >was cool, but none identified themselves as D-STAR users. >> I'm not so sure about the DMR guys, as they have issues with anything that >> doesn't have fancy features like text messaging and such included. >My APRS radio has text messaging. Is text messaging what is exciting about >DMR/TRBO? Overall it seems to me to be a loser out of the gate. Twice the >bandwidth of D-STAR, the same dumb proprietary codec, and no additional >advantages. What am I missing? Yaesu claims their major advantage is that they >have half the bandwidth of wideband FM, but D-STAR has 1/4 by that measure and >we could have 1/10. >> I also feel that we should design an adaptive system that makes use of GPS >> data to regulate power levels and bandwidth (narrow bandwidth and higher >> power output farther out and wider bandwidth with lower power closer in or >> in situations where traditional radios run into problems). We need to show >> that we can design digital modes that can keep the spirit of the rules as >> well as the letter. :) >How about adjusting power based upon feedback of RSSI from the other radio in >a point-to-point link? GPS doesn't tell you about trees and structures between >the two stations, RSSI does. >> >> Have we got a documented protocol that we are.going to use yet? I'd like to >> start working on the repeater controller code changes soon, among the other >> software projects I'm working on. >There is a proposal for a D-STAR-like protocol for VHF/UHF. But our voice >payload is potentially smaller than the overhead in such a protocol. I think >there is room for work on ultra-low-overhead schemes. > > Thanks > > Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
