Nico,
I share your concerns. But, I do not have firm answer to respond your question
sated below at this start of the discussion phase except “like nslookup
command….”.
Can you recover the complete caller or destination address of a message from a
single message of a DHCP/HLR/VLR message sequence?
Rather, I suggest to form approved “working group” which defines the objective
and timeline under this community. I think this style is much productive to
complete the mission for people who separately live in this globe.
Regards,.
take
de JA5AEA
Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10
________________________________
From: Nico Palermo <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 6, 2018 1:44:33 PM
To: WSJT software development
Cc: Игорь Ч
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol
Take,
we can indeed agree that transmitting an hash key could be better than to send
a full call sign.
Anyway when you transmit an hash key you miss the possibility for receivers to
go back to the original information unless they decode a complete sequence of
messages.
With FT8 or with all the other modes implemented in WSJT-X you don't need to
listen to a complete message sequence in order to understand the source and the
destination of a message.
Such a property is not shared by the hashing scheme I've seen at the beginning
of this thread.
If you miss msg #1 and/or msg #2 you have no way to understand the origin
and/or the destination of the other four messages.
This is not a big problem in telephone and internet networks, where actually
this is an advantage, but it is an issue if you would like to mantain the
decodability of anything you receive at the single message level.
Can you recover the complete caller or destination address of a message from a
single message of a DHCP/HLR/VLR message sequence?
I guess no.
Furthermore what is an area code in HF communications? Is something we can rely
on to abbreviate our callsign and say to eavesdroppers "Hey, look! I'm NWV and
I'm calling from Italy" ?
I guess no again.
This is the problem we have to face with, not just encoding hashes in FT8 as
done in DHCP or in anything else:
Is it acceptable that anybody on the band, besides the caller and the
recipient, has no way to understand who is sending something to someone else
just because he missed part of the QSO?
73
Nico / IV3NWV
2018-09-06 4:41 GMT+02:00 Tsutsumi Takehiko
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Nico,
It sounds Igor’s proposal as futuristic but the callsign abbreviation and
subscriber profile exchange practice via control signal plane can be seen
anywhere in network protocols. Internet example is DHCP protocol, which makes
the connection possible more than 4,294,967,296 devices with IPv4 32-bit
address limitation. If you remember old telephone system, you do not need to
dial full 15 digit telephone numbers which ITU defines if you want to connect
to other party within area code or city code. If you demand subscribers to
dial 15 digits with rotary dial telephone at call setup, how long do they
spend? I am sure it will be longer than one FT8 sequence. Subscriber profile
exchange on control signal plane is similar if you look into HLR/VLR
specification of cellular networks.
Does FT8 live in Titanic age or after telephone and Internet age?
Regards,
take
de JA5AEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
