* On 2018 26 Oct 23:17 -0500, Stuart Longland wrote:
> Hi Nate,
> On 27/10/18 1:11 pm, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> > A bit of searching turned up this link:
> > 
> >   ftp://ftp.ucsd.edu/hamradio/packet/tcpip/docs/netrom.ps.gz
> > 
> > I scanned through it and it looks to be a rather complete description of
> > the Level 3 protocol.
> 
> Yes, I had seen that article, but it seemed to me more about the L4
> protocol than about L3.

It seemed complete recalling my days of watching the traffic through
G8BPQ running on my BBS computer "back in the day".

> I'll have a closer look though. :-)

I'm not sure that it was all that complex over the air as it only added
20 bytes, err, octets, to the packet.  The diagrams fit what I recall,
though I've not watched such traffic for at least 20 years.

> I note there's mention of a "mnemonic identifier", presumably this is
> not the SSID but some other ID of the station.  I'm not sure how that is
> generated, so it's still a little unclear how it all fits together.

I worked with TheNet in the late '80s and early '90s until TheNet X1J
became available, and the mnemonic was similar to a digipeater alias
that could be set in a TNC2.  It was a convenience for the user as we
generally used a local place name for it.  Nodes would do an AX.25
connection to each other using their proper callsigns, not the aliases.

> It looks as though two digipeaters would be trivial, since you know if
> station A hears station B say it can reach D via C with quality Q; that
> it can use the route A→B→C→D in the AX.25 frame.
> 
> Going further looks tricky though, if there were further hops between C
> and D, there would need to be some logic at C that can consider *its*
> routing table and forward further.

I'm not sure that Net/ROM was ever that smart.  Two or three hops was
about the practical limit.  But then most of the "network" around these
parts was all on the same frequency rather than having a proper
separation of user access frequency and backbone traffic frequency
between nodes.  Another aspect was that few understood the effect of the
Quality parameter over several hops.

> AX.25 2.0 supports up to 8 digipeaters, so maybe the answer is that in
> larger networks, you'd need this IP-enabled Net/ROM stack running so it
> can see the incoming IP frame and consult its Net/ROM routing table to
> move it the next few hops.  I take it there's no "traceroute" like
> functionality in Net/ROM?

I don't recall any such thing.  As I recall the ROSE protocol was
supposed to be a more robust implementation with more detailed routing
and a more coordinated network implementation as opposed to the ad hoc
nature of Net/ROM/TheNet.

TBH, I'm not such what the netrom part of the stack offers when running
TCP/IP.  If I were to do TCP/IP over packet radio again, I would forego
using the netrom part of the stack and simply use digipeaters and adjust
the IP parameters for best throughput.  Reflecting on my experiences
over the years, that 20 octets of overhead never really bought much.

War story time.

Back in the early '90s I was living in Enid, OK and operating an MSYS
packet BBS there.  W0KKS in Liberal, KS wanted to forward and the only
path was a series of netrom nodes out through western OK into the Texas
panhandle, up through the OK panhandle into southwest Kansas.  To make
it work I set the BBS connect script to manually connect to each node
from the previous in turn which amounted to six or seven hops in total.

The Net/ROM protocol was not reliable enough but the advantage was that
if a link between two nodes was a bit weak, handling the connection
manually would result in AX.25 handling the retries between the
individual nodes.  If that were tried using Net/ROM, that would result
in the entire link having to handle the retries from end-to-end as I
recall.  Again, this was on a "network" implemented on one frequency
with user traffic.  I only allowed forwarding to occur between 10 or 11
PM and 6 AM or so when user traffic was light.

73, Nate

-- 

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."

Web: http://www.n0nb.us  GPG key: D55A8819  GitHub: N0NB

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to