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


Expand Messages
  • Joel Yates
    But it should not be discussed on this BPQ redlector/furum. ... But it should not be discussed on this BPQ redlector/furum. On Jul 8, 2013 12:33 PM, Charles
    Message 1 of 89 , Jul 8, 2013

      But it should not be discussed on this BPQ redlector/furum.

      On Jul 8, 2013 12:33 PM, "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@...> wrote:

      Good to hear from you, K.O.
      BPQ32 is an AX25 application currently limited to Packet or Q15x25 mode, under AX25. - Not to mention several non-AX25 digital modes that BPQ32 works with, like Winmore for example.
      It has been demonstrated by W1HKJ with the FLARQ application, and by the existence of Q15x25 mode that Packet is just one of several digital modes that can be utilized under AX25 - and the excellent BPQ32 software.
      - But whether new digital modes under AX25 start to become available for use with BPQ32 or not, Packet will still always be useful. With no modification at all, just as it stands, BPQ32 is a prime candidate for utilization within the network that I propose.
      73 DE Charles, N5PVL
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 11:10 AM
      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] SGARN


      Seems to me that "BPQ32" is the wrong reflector for this subject...
      Why is it not put on "Packet" instead of e-mail?

      K.O. n0kfq

      On 7/8/2013 10:56 AM, Charles Brabham wrote:

      A great deal of Packet's unique usefulness comes not from the Packet digital mode itself, but instead from the AX25 protocol, and the software which has been developed to work with AX25.
      I have tried to encourage programmers to give us more ARQ digital modes that will work well under AX25, thus expanding the usefulness of the AX25 software that is available.
      So far, only Q15x25 has appeared - and it proved to have a few too many carriers for most available ham equipment to produce a robust signal on HF.
      Don't get me wrong; I use Packet and appreciate it - but the fact remains that other ARQ modes under AX25 could give "Packet" software capability undreamed of today.
      73 DE Charles, N5PVL
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 9:29 AM
      Subject: RE: [BPQ32] SGARN


      There is still a very strong reason to have packet as well as voice on Ham radio. 

      During disasters the local internet goes down, the local phones, cell and wired, go down and often the public service radios overload or go down.

      Many recent examples of this happening.

      Hams step in with voice and packet.  Packet is easy to set up and use, same distance as voice, same bands, uses the same VHF/UHF radios many hams have.

      Packet is very useful for lists of things like people at a shelter or supplies needed.

      Packet instead of internet, voice radios instead of cell phones.

      In my area the hams have working packet at the Red Cross, hospitals and Salvation Army which gets tested all the time but not used much.

      Mesh nets are too dependent on a network of closely spaced nodes.  An opinion.


      From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Brabham
      Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 9:46 AM
      To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: don.rolph@...
      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] SGARN



      It is true that the internet is no longer a haven of privacy - and also true that the FCC says that monitoring the ham bands effectively is far beyond their capability, or the funding for such.

      We send in the clear, without encryption or other means to conceal what we transmit ( WinLink excluded ) but who really bothers to listen to the ham bands - other than hams?

      Very few and from very few locations, one would reasonable suppose.

      73 DE Charles, N5PVL

      ----- Original Message -----

      Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 9:49 PM

      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] SGARN



      Leaving aside your feelings about Winlink, the truth is that those systems can work at least as effectively over an HSMM-MESH based radio network as they do over the wired Internet. The challenge is going to be convincing enough hams to invest in the hardware needed to implement the network; they will say "why.do we need this when we have the Internet" and the simple answer is that the wired Internet is getting too dangerous to keep these thimgs on. Just my initial 3 pennies on the topic; I will probably post again tomorrow.
      Matthew Pitts

      Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

      From: Charles Brabham <n5pvl@...>;
      To: <BPQ32@yahoogroups.com>;
      Cc: Don Rolph <don.rolph@...>;
      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] SGARN
      Sent: Mon, Jul 8, 2013 2:25:26 AM



      The internet-leveraged networks you describe are already there, I'm looking to break new ground by going all-ham radio, through and through with a network designed from the ground up to utilize the ham bands exclusively.

      I have mentioned how this will provide us with a unique test bed for advancing the radio art, something that internet-leveraged networks cannot provide because the challenge of utilizing only radio is simply not there.

      There is certainly nothing wrong with coming up with new internet-leveraged applications and networks, but that is specifically what I am working to take a step beyond with the SGARN.

      I do not feel that an independent, global amateur radio network will in any way threaten the internet or it's use.

      The old Packet network, amateur TCPIP, and APRS which now leverage the internet are already there, if you are interested in that kind of thing.

      73 DE Charles, N5PVL

      ----- Original Message -----

      From: Don Rolph

      Cc: Don Rolph

      Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 8:54 PM

      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] SGARN



      I think I have read the various responses here. iian's sounds closets to my thoughts.

      The Internet is here and does to need replacing. For high bandwidth trunk communications it is arguably very good.

      Where Internet sometimes breaks down is the last mile problem, where depending on the situation the last mile may be a mile or two, hundreds of miles, or in some cases thousands of miles.

      When amateur digital services leverage the Internet, the combination is both fascinating and arguably very effective. APRS is perhaps a good example.

      If we accept is behavior as a basic model, then a "second generation" amateur network ( wouldn't this actually be a third generation or maybe even a fourth: arguably NTS is a network) plausibly would leverage this behavior to ensure success.

      Interestingly, the HSMM activity seems to be fitting into this pattern of leveraging the Internet, but does so at a link layer.

      This is not generalizable to HF, but by extending the model to support application layer forwarding HF may be usable for selective forwarding of certain traffic.

      Consider: arguably Winlink with its use of HF, VHF, and the Internet is a worldwide amateur radio based network.

      My random thoughts to your excellent question.



      Don Rolph

      Sent from my iPad

      On Jul 6, 2013, at 11:19 PM, "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@...> wrote:



      SGARN – Second GenerationAmateur Radio Network


      The first significant amateur radio digital network, the packet radio network, rose to some prominence in the late 1980's, and then declined throughout the 1990's. Far before the turning of the century, it was effectively in hospice care at best.

      Presently, very little of the original packet radio network remains, and what does remain is fragmented, adulterated and with no particular sense of purpose and direction.

      Some of what remains is nostalgic, the enfeebled efforts of rapidly-aging die-hards, while other surviving parts of the network are zombie-like, still moving data but very seldom via amateur radio, instead being parasitic afflictions upon the internet.

      As amateur radio network, this internet-driven activity is the shuffling stumble of the living dead. - A hideous, pathetic simulacrum of what once lived and thrived. - But amateur radio it most definitely is not.

      Many of the old packet networks' functions have been superseded by the internet, and so one has to wonder exactly what kind or type of data a modern amateur radio network could or should transport, that the internet cannot do a better job with. This is perhaps the most difficult and yet the most vital question that we must answer with second-generation amateur radio networking.

      We must ask ourselves what an amateur radio network can do, in the long run, that the internet cannot.

      I have put some thought into this, and have a few ideas about that – but I would like to hear some other ideas on this subject from my fellow amateurs.

      (1) What kind or type of data can a second generation amateur radio network transport, and under what circumstances, that the internet cannot do a better job with – and why.

      (2) What a second generation amateur radio network may be capable of, in the long run, that the internet cannot do.

      I know that there will be a lot of sarcastic and witlessly witty answers, and answers that originate from minds that cannot shift gears and think afresh – but optimist that I am, I hope to hear from some serious thinkers as well, from amateurs who are ready, willing and able to look ahead and see a way to innovate, and not merely emulate.

      73 DE Charles, N5PVL

      K.O. Higgs 

    • Mike Nettles
      Hi Dave, glad I could help. 73 Mike kb5wbh From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Webb Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 4:34
      Message 89 of 89 , Jul 15, 2013

        Hi Dave, glad I could help.


        Mike kb5wbh



        From: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BPQ32@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave Webb
        Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 4:34 PM
        To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Re: TNC Reset



        Mike ,
        I found your package in the mail when I got home today and I just installed it.
        Powered up and it worked. I didn't even have to reset the BBS or node.
        Thank you very much

        On 7/6/2013 2:04 PM, Mike Nettles wrote:



        Hi Ron, yes that is it, JKISS. I bought a TNC-MB96 (A Tiny2 with 9600baud) off Ebay a few years ago just because it had a 9600 baud modem. It had a push button switch on the back to switch between DED and Paccomm firmware. I ended up putting JKISS and the Paccomm software on the same eprom and using it that way. The Paccomm firmware had GPS support and I thought I might need that one day.


        Mike kb5wbh



        ----- Original Message -----

        Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 10:31 AM

        Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Re: TNC Reset



        Mike / Dave


        I assume you meant 'JKISS' eprom.  I have been using these in MFJ1720C's forever.  No resetting needed.  My 'coin' (lithium) batteries are likely dead, but it doesn't matter.  Just replace the TNC2 eprom with JKISS and never have any reset issues.


        Ron, AE5E


        From: Mike Nettles <Mike_Nettles@...>
        To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2013 10:04 AM
        Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Re: TNC Reset



        Dave, I can burn you a KISS Eprom if you want. I use one in one of my MFJ's and it works fine with BPQ32. Let me know and I'll get it in the mail on Monday.


        Mike kb5wbh

        ----- Original Message -----

        From: Dave Webb

        Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 9:34 AM

        Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Re: TNC Reset



        Thanks for all the replies.
        I have found that sometimes when I unplug or turn off the TNC which happens to be an MFJ 1270C, it drops out of kiss mode but retains all the other parms, so it appears the BU Batt is still good.
        I have started by getting an extension cord and hooking the TNC power up to the UPS that I use for the computer. If that doesn't work, I'll start going through each of all your suggestions until I get this fixed.
        I use Hyperterm in XP to bring it into KISS mode using KISS ON then RESTART.
        I have Outpost and use it's tools for working with BPQ over my LAN using my Laptop which has Win8.

        The HTML access it a wonderful tool when I am traveling. It's almost like being at the console. The only thing missing is the ability to restart everything in the event the BBS locks up. This has happened twice to me in the past where the node continued to work and the BBS locked up. I haven't seen it happen since the latest upgrade though, which is good.

        On 7/6/2013 7:38 AM, KU4GW Cliff wrote:


        When my MFJ 1270B TNC 2 drops out of KISS mode like it has a couple times, just the other day when I called my daughter and had her to unhook coaxes on my HF station because of a approaching thunderstorm, she also unplugged the TNC power cord from the wall and when I restarted everything when I got home it was out of KISS mode and wouldn't connect to anything on my RF port 1. KF4LLF Seth showed me this a while back. You can download Outpost Packet Message Manager and go to the start menu in Windows under All Programs and click on Outpost, Ipserial, and then just type KISS ON in the window and hit the enter key and it puts the TNC back in KISS mode. You don't actually see what your typing when you type KISS ON, but after you do and hit enter it displays KISS mode on in the Outpost Ipserial window. Then just close Outpost and restart the BPQ software. Works like a charm!

        Very 73,
        Cliff KU4GW
        Sysop: BRTMTN:KU4GW-7

        --- In BPQ32@yahoogroups.com, Dave Webb <druliefw@...> wrote:
        > My TNC 2 which is on the VHF port, keeps dropping out of KISS mode.
        > Is there any way to reset the TNC without taking down the whole BBS?
        > 73
        > Dave
        > WB2HVF




      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.