1089Re: Some questions, BPQ32, AR-Cluster, and RMS Packet
- Jul 9, 2008Good info Ron,
For some reason I had it stuck in my head that to use AGWtoBPQ then
you had to have AGWPE running and then AGWtoBPQ ran on top of AGWPE.
Since RMS packet is going to need AGWtoBPQ, and I wanted the switch
functions of BPQ32 (otherwise just use only AGWPE), I needed AGWtoBPQ
and thus thought both were needed. Oops on my part. Yeah, it would be
dumb to make things more complicated than necessary and add another
layer to troubleshoot.
Other than application mask flexibility are there any advantages of
running ARCluster over one interface or the other (OCX or AGWtoBPQ)?
One more solid/reliable than the other?
Strikes me I need to just use the OCX method for AR-Cluster, set DX as
the first app in BPQ. Then I make RMS the 2nd BPQ app, cfg it for
AGWtoBPQ using mask of 0x2.
Tnx for your help (and patience)!
--- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "Ron Stordahl N5IN" <ron_n5in@...> wrote:
> --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Thomas - WA4ZKO" <wa4zko@> wrote:
> > I've got a PK-96 and rig that I'd like to run both AR-Cluster and RMS
> > Packet on the same RF port. Looks like this is possible (although
> > maybe not the best idea in the world if it gets busy, grin) but
> > figured I'd ask on here?
> > From my reading of the docs and various examples:
> > 1. I'll have to use AGWPE for the TNC.
> While you could use SV2AGW's AGWPE.EXE program to connect to the TNC,
> and then have BPQ32 interface with it via the BPQtoAGW.DLL (see
> ..\Examples\Large_with_AGWPE\bpqcfg.txt) this is unnecessarily
> complicated. You must take care to avoid port number conflicts if you
> choose this round about method.
> Normally one would put the PK-96 in KISS mode using a terminal
> emulator, such as HyperTerm, and send KISS ON, then have BPQ32
> directly interface with the TNC (see
> ..\Examples\Large_without_AGWPE\bpqcfg.txt. In such a case you would
> not run AGWPE.exe on your system.
> AGWPE.exe would normally only be used if you needed to control a sound
> card modem, and is not needed for a TNC which directly supports KISS,
> such as the PK-96.
> > 2. AR-Cluster will have to be the 1st application as apparently it's
> > hard coded to mask 1? and told to use AGWPE?
> It depends upon which interface of AR-Cluster you choose. If you
> choose the OCX interface, then AR-Cluster hard codes the application
> mask as 0x1 and AR-Cluster must correspond to the first positional
> parameter in APPLICATIONS= of bpqcfg.txt.
> If in AR-Cluster you select the AGWtoBPQ interface, then the
> applications mask is set in the Config box in AGWtoBPQ.exe and you can
> set it as you wish, which could be 0x1 to correspond to the first
> positional parameter in APPLICATIONS=, or 0x2 to correspond to the
> second positional parameter, etc.
> I am a bit concerned in your statement 'and told to use AGWPE'. I
> don't think you really are going to also run the AGWPE.exe program are
> you? While you can it's an unnecessary layer of complexity.
> > 3. RMS Packet needs to talk to AGWPE, no native support for BPQ32
> > (although I understand work is underway) thus I have to use the
> At this point you can use AGWtoBPQ.exe to interface with RMS Packet.
> This has been discussed in this forum. And since I have not actually
> tested this myself I refer you to prior postings on this forum.
> Ideally native support will be provided by the RMS author at some
> point. You would set the applications mask in AGWtoBPQ to correspond
> to the position in APPLICATIONS=. Look at the
> ..\Examples\..\bpqcfg.txt files where I tried to thoroughly explain
> > 4. AGWPE will have to be set for port 8001 ?
> Yes, if you insist upon the added complexity of using AGWPE.exe, then
> it must use a different port number than AGWtoBPQ.exe.
> > 5. BPQtoAGW will have to be setup and use port 8000 ?
> BPQtoAGW.DLL is used only if you do actually use AGWPE.exe, and if
> used it must match the port number of AGWPE.exe. You would set
> AGWPE.exe to use port 8001 and configure BPQtoAGW.DLL in bpqcfg.txt to
> match, using port 8001.
> > 6. Ports on #4 and #5 above can be other port numbers, just as long as
> > they are unique and I can keep track of what is what?
> I have suggested 8000 for AGWtoBPQ.exe and 8001 for AGWPE.exe, but
> these are programmable by the user. AGWtoBPQ.exe and AGWPE.exe do not
> talk to each other directly and in the unlikely case that you run both
> of these on the same machine, they must use different port numbers.
> If you really want to use both, then AGWtoBPQ communicates with BPQ32
> via tcp using port 8000, and BPQ32 communicates with AGWPE.exe via tcp
> using port 8001.
> You could pick other non conflicting port numbers. I suppose some
> poorly designed user program could have the port numbers hard coded,
> which could force you to make different choices, although I don't know
> of any such examples.
> Good luck Jeff!
> Ron Stordahl, N5IN
> > Jeff
> > WA4ZKO
- << Previous post in topic