On 16/01/2019 00:04, Bill Frantz wrote:
I have written a short paper about the conversion from from release 1
to release of the FT8 protocol and invite people to review the initial
draft. It is mainly oriented toward software engineers.
<https://www.dropbox.com/s/mynj3cb1ycdyk05/FT8%20Flag%20Day.txt?dl=0>
Flag Day with FT8
Bill Frantz, AE6JV
West Valley Amateur Radio Association
Northern California DX Club
Northern California Contest Club
Abstract
Recently a community of over 20,000 users did a conversion between
release 1 and release 2 of a amateur radio digital communications
protocol called FT8. The old version of the protocol was not
compatible with the new version, resulting in a flag day event for
users. However, the conversion was rapid proceeded smoothly. Lessons
from this conversion should be useful for other software projects.
Please let me know of any errors or omissions.
Thanks - Bill AE6JV
Hi Bill,
barring a typo or too, the paper seems fine but I question the general
application of "flag day" roll-outs of software you suggest. The
situation with the 75-bit to 77-bit update of the FT8 protocol has
several constraints that are uncommon elsewhere and particularly
uncommon when they are all combined, including:
1) It is a communications protocol where every user wishes to be able to
communicate with any other,
2) the old version will not understand the new protocol, at least
without an upgrade,
3) WSJT-X is FOSS with no charges for use or upgrade,
4) the core WSJT development team is tiny and has no wish to support
multiple GA versions.
Given these constraints and a desire not to consume extra valuable
digital modes bandwidth, any opportunity for old protocol users who do
not wish to upgrade should be avoided. Having a new version that still
talks the old protocol just exacerbates the potential schism of users
since it allows those reluctant to upgrade to continue using the old
protocol, at least until the number of indecipherable signals which are
QRM to their decoder overwhelms them.
Incidentally your analysis does not include the period of beta testing
where a new version, that did talk the old protocol simultaneously with
the new, was released as an intermediary step. This version came with a
recommendation that those trying the new protocol should temporarily use
a different frequency. This was done both to encourage some testing
feedback and to limit disruption to those not trying the beta test
version. Along with the points above, the complexity of the software
necessary to support two protocols simultaneously was not considered a
long term option.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
