Karl F. Larsen wrote:
>
Hi Karl and all.
Well, you're in luck as I'm in the mood for philosophical debate. ;-)
> I am worried about what I read and hear now about replacements for
> the old nodes and computer things we are now using. What we need far more
> urgently are users of our current network!
Unfortunately, we HAD the users on our *current* network and they've
already left. Why? I don't know. Blame the Internet, blame an
unwillingness on the part of us node-ops and BBS ops to bankroll a
highspeed network for a bunch of users that cared to do nothing more
than to use the current system and then bitch about how slow it was
rather than learn how packet actually works and show an interest in
improving the network, but blame someone other than the users that have
left, of course.
One thing I have noticed is that those still on packet are having fun
experimenting with the mode again, myself included.
> To those who feel that if we can speed up the Ham Packet Network
> we can regain users from the internet, I say your not even aware of the
> problem!
Is this the object or even a goal of anyone on this list? For one thing
the majority of the information passed on the Internet would be illegal
on ham radio for various reasons.
A radio network is fundamentally different in its design approach than a
wired network and should probably use a completely different protocol
that is specifically designed for radio networks and not an adaptation
of wired network protocols. Also, an Internet speed radio network
probably requires using microwave frequencies for point-to-point links
with a maximum path length of 50 to 70 km over flat land. Such a
network would require an immense number of relay sites just to cover and
link the major population areas of North America. Just where will the
ham community come up with the money to rent the required site space or
construct it? Right now tower space is the hottest commodity in the
technology world (right after spectrum) so we can forget about free
access for the most part.
> The problem is that Amateur Radio holds nothing for the young
> person looking for a hobby. They all have cell phones and can talk to whom
> ever when ever. I still see teenagers back packing and running the rapids
> in the rivers, so things have not changed in a major way. But Ham Radio
> and Model planes are not being done any more.
Radio holds the same mystique for those truly interested in it today as
it has for those of previous generations. I think a lot of it has to do
with the lack of leisure time today's kids have for hobbies that require
a significant time investment unless it is something they are intensely
interested in. Those interested in radio or model planes are doing it.
I imagine these pursuits had wider participation in the past as they had
less competition for kids' time and involved those with a passing
interest as well.
> As for Kiss, I have a eprom burner and I have made a lot of kiss
> e-proms for tnc-2 tnc's. I only use the version written by G8BPQ because
> it is so well done. There is nothing wrong with this version and it runs
> faster than 115kbps.
Speed doesn't equal precise control of what's on the other end of the
KISS link.
> To those wishing for better nodes I suggest they look at the X1J
> release 4 software that makes a simple tnc-2 into a tcp/ip capable system.
> Development on this node ended simply because it works and does everything
> it should. You can even make your TNC at home a X1J-4 node and also "talk
> through the node" as if the TNC is a normal kiss type.
My experience with X1j-4 was much less stellar. If you like trips to
your remote node site, use it, otherwise forget it is my advice (This
involves personal experience with three different TNCs all of different
vintage and at two seperate sites. All suffered from lock-ups and
crashes with the code including a new 1270-C). TheNet Plus 2.08B, OTOH,
is simply bulletproof for a TNC based node.
> For Linux the existing software works just fine! All the new 2.2.0
> kernel holds for me is the ability to have 6 netrom devices. The 2.0.36
> kernel allows only 4.
Hmmm, using this logic Linus should have stopped development somewhere
around 0.99.x as IIRC he said it was serving his needs by that point.
Fortunately Linus has facilitated Linux moving forward. The AX.25
utilities must be allowed to move forward as well.
Heck, AX.25 must move forward or perhaps be scrapped and replaced
altogether. That is what makes ham radio so great, we can *experiment*
and learn what works and what doesn't. What ham radio doesn't need is a
variety of protocols, or even one for that matter, owned by corporations
or organizations or individuals and available only under a Non
Disclosure Agreement or any other restrictive agreement. I think all ham
radio protocols should be Free (LGPL?) and available to anyone wishing
to implement or attempt to improve them. If we could establish some
sort of adhoc body to act as the standards organization for ham radio
digital protocols then I think it would be one more step to fulfilling
Amateur Radio's charter as a service based in technical investigation.
After all of that, it is perfectly fine, Karl, if you and your neighbors
on the packet network opt not to update any of your systems from this
day forward. That is your choice. However, don't advocate that others
stop searching for a better way.
The more one gives to ham radio, the more ham radio gives back.
'nough said.
73, de Nate >>
--
Packet | N0NB @ WF0A.#SCKS.KS.USA.NOAM | "The more you
Internet | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | complain, the
Location | Valley Center, Kansas USA EM17hs | longer God lets
Visit my Linux + Ham Radio pages | you live."
http://homepage.netspaceonline.com/~ka0rny/ |
