On 24 Oct, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> I suspect, that if MULTICAST does what I think it is supposed to do, that it might
> be uniquely suited for ham radio links with low bandwidth. That is, say,
> for doing something like a convers or irc type chat system, where the chat messages
> were smart enough only to go down the routes where someone was listening,
> and also only go down the route once, you know. That is maybe all those hard
>problems
> are solved down in this code by clever PHd type people. Still, me I haven't
> gotten it working yet with ethernet -- though I haven't put a lot of time into it,
>and it's
> not a high priority for me.
I've been thinking about precisely the same thing. I was originally
thinking of modelling it on a hole-fill protocol like the pacsat
broadcast protocol. I think that is still a good idea, but carried over
a multicast medium.
BBS forwarding (lots of BBS on one frequency), convers, irc, DX
cluster, weather information sharing, all sorts of things. Anywhere
where you need to flood information out to multiple users on one
frequency.
Terry
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
