Nate, The Space Suttle is reverse engineerable :). Anything is. Doing it can be a problem.
About anything done in radio these days is really pretty simple to reverse engineer if one wants to take the time. Good data encryption is little more difficult. However, it would be easier to build ones own D-Star control. Reverse engineering the comm between the controller and rigs only gets you that info still being tied to the controller. This D-Star data stream is a standard and can be decoded if you wish. The Gateway has been reversed engineered and products marketed to users allowing getting on without a radio and repeater. 73, ron, n9ee/r >From: Nate Duehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: 2008/05/09 Fri PM 02:17:21 CDT >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] FCC Denies Petition to Utilize 2m Sub-Band >for Digit > > >On May 9, 2008, at 11:51 AM, Ron Wright wrote: > >> Mike, >> >> You are so correct on the ICOM D-Star repeaters. I like their >> mobiles and HTs...have very well thought out features, but the >> repeater, as you said, is simply 2 mobiles in a box. From some >> locals who know much on this subject are not only not impressed with >> the repeaters, but are also disappointed. > >Our tech crew is a little disppointed here locally in the quality of >these boxes too, but we also aren't going to let that "get us down". >It's possible to make them work, we believe. Some concerns about >their overall shielding (desense) have come up during tests -- we'll >see how they do in the real world of high mountain RF sites... > >> However, since the D-Star controller talks and controls the >> repeaters with a cat-5 serial data cable/stream one is locked into >> ICOM. > >Not really. The serial stream is "reverse-engineerable", probably >mostly from the D-STAR *protocol* itself. I haven't done it, but >there's a group in California who has put a microcontroller between >the Icom controller and their repeater modules to do things like have >remote control of the repeater modules individually, delay the digital >signals coming from the controller while keying the TX to handle a >slow-to-switch VHF PA, add PTT/COS indications, etc. > >Any decent "serial protocol engineer" of which there are MANY in ham >radio, should be able to figure it out, they say. > >Additionally, the "proprietary" part of Icom's system is the Gateway >server, and there's been plenty of work already on add-on software for >the gateway that adds features people wanted (easier "nailed up" >linking, the beginnings of an IRLP-like "Reflector" system for >multiple link connects simultaneously, voice announcements, etc.), and >the ultimate "goal" of at least a few individuals is to replace or >make better the Icom Gateway system itself. > >A lot of opinions and fuss out there about stuff that "really >shouldn't be that hard" for technically minded hams willing to >experiment. I originally would have agreed that I wouldn't pay the >price tag for these things, but after getting hands-on with one, >they're not THAT bad... and the Gateway is definitely the "brains" of >the system. Lots of things can be done there to make it better, and >true callsign routing whoops P25's ass any day of the week... built >for hams, by hams... so to speak. > >If they could up the quality of the repeaters themselves, it'd be well >worth the money. > >-- >Nate Duehr, WY0X >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Ron Wright, N9EE 727-376-6575 MICRO COMPUTER CONCEPTS Owner 146.64 repeater Tampa Bay, FL No tone, all are welcome.
