Re: [aprsisce] KISS Vs Terminal Mode for APRSIS32
- Wasn't there a port protocol somewhere that used COM1.1 port designations where the "COM1" was the port and ".1" was there stream? That would allow the computer hardware to see the correct port and TNC to know which TNC port (or connection stream) to send it to.This was a long time ago when I dealt with this. I would say WIN3.11 and Win95, working with the KPC9612 (9600 baud side and 1200 baud side. I remember it working in through the hardware part (the right data went through the right "baud" port), but I never really got the 9600 baud working on the air. I am sure that all these things have changed.Also, I don't remeber if there was something I coded to implement or it was within another port standard. Unfortunately, I am pretty sure I wouldn't know where that code is anymore.Maybe the idea will rings some bells or propvide thoughts on an implementation.
--- On Wed, 8/25/10, Lynn W. Deffenbaugh <kj4erj@...> wrote:
From: Lynn W. Deffenbaugh <kj4erj@...>
Subject: Re: [aprsisce] KISS Vs Terminal Mode for APRSIS32
Date: Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 10:33 PMI believe that even in terminal mode I have to indicate which port I
want the KAM to address with outbound traffic. That's the internal
architecture hurdle that I'm struggling with, allowing two APRSISCE/32
ports to access a single communications path to the real hardware. I've
got an idea in mind for AGW, but it only works because I can establish
TWO connections to AGW with each connection addressing a different port
As I suggested before, if you get the KAM appearing as two ports in AGW
(don't ask me how, I'm not an AGW expert), then you'll probably have
both halves of your KAM working sooner as I'm totally expecting to have
multi-port AGW working long before multiport KAM.
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32
Michael A. Kelly wrote:
> Have you considered making a port that instead of using KISS mode for
> interface to the TNC uses terminal mode? I was thinking if you did,
> similar to the vhf port for APRS Messenger, it would be possible to
> have a KAM Plus work on both vhf and hf with standard KAM terminal tnc
> settings, gate, digipete, etc.
> Am I missing something here, or would that essentially give you
> another way to get the second port on my Kam plus working? I know
> there are drawbacks from not running in KISS mode Vs Terminal mode,
> but are they critical in this sense?
> Michael, N4MAK