On Mon, May 03, 1999 at 11:18:28PM +0200, Walter Koch wrote:
> >BUT there lies a problem by saying that we only compress on "pure"
> >AX.25, we therefore limit ourselves to not gaining anything on NET/ROM
> >or other protocols if the *end* stations don't agree to compress, even
> >though the two participating AX.25 stations can compress, we lose.
>
> higher protocols (end2end) suffer IMHO from the high round-trip-times
> more than from to much payload-data, which could be compressed.
On a homogenous network (is this possible in ham radio?), it might be
useful to compress just above the hardware level. Specifically for
wavelet compression, which analyzes the outgoing data and produces a
new signal, which requires wavelet decompression.
One author for such a signalling method claimed up to 30x compression
on a good link. It would seem that the Linux soundmodem would be a
good testing bed for this technique, since there is no additional
hardware design cost (ie for a new TNC). Unfortunately, I don't
know much about wavelets in any case.
--
William Burrow, VE9WIL -- New Brunswick, Canada
"No proper program contains an indication which as an operator-applied
occurrence identifies an operator-defining occurrence which as an
indication-applied occurrence identifies an indication-defining
occurrence different from the one identified by the given indication as
an indication-applied occurrence."
-- ALGOL 68 Report
