Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Some questions, BPQ32, AR-Cluster, and RMS Packet

Expand Messages
  • Ron Stordahl N5IN
    ... 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
    Message 1 of 4 , Jul 9, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- 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
      BPQtoAGW?

      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 this.
      >
      > 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

      >
      73
      > Jeff
      > WA4ZKO
      >
    • Mike Melnik
      To: Jeff WA4ZKO Jeff when you get the AR Cluster setup and running let me know, I will explain an easy way To make RMS communicate with the AGWtoBPQ.EXE as Ron
      Message 2 of 4 , Jul 9, 2008
      • 0 Attachment

        To: Jeff WA4ZKO

         

        Jeff when you get the AR Cluster setup and running let me know, I will explain an easy way

        To make RMS communicate with the AGWtoBPQ.EXE as Ron mentioned.

         

        Mike Melnik

        -----Original Message-----
        From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ron Stordahl N5IN
        Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 4:50 PM
        To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [BPQ32] Re: Some questions, BPQ32, AR-Cluster, and RMS Packet

         

        --- 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
        BPQtoAGW?

        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 this.
        >
        > 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

        >
        73
        > Jeff
        > WA4ZKO
        >

      • Jeff Thomas - WA4ZKO
        Good 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
        Message 3 of 4 , Jul 9, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Good 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)!

          73
          Jeff
          WA4ZKO





          --- 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
          > BPQtoAGW?
          >
          > 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
          this.
          > >
          > > 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
          >
          > >
          > 73
          > > Jeff
          > > WA4ZKO
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.