Date: Wed, 1 Dec 93 04:30:16 PST From: Ham-Digital Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Ham-Digital-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Ham-Digital@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Ham-Digital Digest V93 #129 To: Ham-Digital Ham-Digital Digest Wed, 1 Dec 93 Volume 93 : Issue 129 Today's Topics: ATM on Amateur Radio? HAM-server index file (2 msgs) MICOR on 9.6kbaud packet? NEED PBBS SOURCE for K5JB PK-88 vs KPC-3 vs DPK-2 - Comments? Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Ham-Digital Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1 Dec 93 00:38:43 GMT From: ogicse!emory!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!peterson@network.ucsd.edu Subject: ATM on Amateur Radio? To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu It was my understanding that since ATM does not include any frame sequencing information, using it on a radio link raw would be non-advantageous at best, since if a packet was lost it could not be recovered. Do I understand this right? I was under the impression that ATM's main purpose is a standard for encapsulating information inside other error-correcting frames such as X.25 etc. davidk@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (David Kirkpatrick) writes: >Dialups are available on ATM now. Just about >everyting will be available shortly. >Cells currently are about 50-60 bytes depending >on the implementation. Most implementations >are faulted for sending 50 bytes cells when >only say 3 bytes of data are being sent. >All implementations do not work this way, >some can truncate the cell and still deal >with a shortie saving bandwith for someone >else. > Dial-ups can connect to ATM along >with just about anything else. -- We're just two lost souls swimming in a | If the University saw things my fish bowl, year after year. Running over | way, they wouldn't raise tuition! The same old ground, what have we found? | Andy Peterson, N9NTI /--/--/ The same old fears.. wish you were here.. | "I only do code in C." | ------------------------------ Date: 30 Nov 1993 03:15:47 GMT From: munnari.oz.au!uniwa!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!gilbaronw0mn@network.ucsd.edu Subject: HAM-server index file To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu >ARRLINDX.TXT 17591 3-02-93 >ARRLINFO.TXT 3321 2-02-93 >ARRLJOB.TXT 18455 2-02-93 Why do we WASTE bandwidth with long garbage like this list of files? The place for that is in a data base somewhere. If you want this list you should ftp it or have it emailed to you. IT DOES NOT BELONG on the newsgroup taking up an obscene amount of space. Gil Baron, El Baron Rojo, W0MN Rochester,MN "Bailar es Vivir" PGP2.X key at key servers or upon request ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 05:36:47 GMT From: news.Hawaii.Edu!uhunix3.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu!jherman@ames.arpa Subject: HAM-server index file To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu In article <9311292209591.gilbaronw0mn.DLITE@delphi.com> gilbaronw0mn@delphi.com (Gilbert Baron) writes: >>ARRLINDX.TXT 17591 3-02-93 >>ARRLINFO.TXT 3321 2-02-93 >>ARRLJOB.TXT 18455 2-02-93 > >Why do we WASTE bandwidth with long garbage like this list of files? The >place for that is in a data base somewhere. If you want this list you should >ftp it or have it emailed to you. IT DOES NOT BELONG on the newsgroup taking >up an obscene amount of space. > > Gil Baron, El Baron Rojo, W0MN Rochester,MN Phooey on you Gil! I for one am glad to see the list of files. This ham-server is a gold mine of info - I've gotten so many goodies off that list - I would have never known what they had to offer unless they had posted on here. Jeff NH6IL ------------------------------ Date: 1 Dec 93 00:41:19 GMT From: ogicse!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!peterson@network.ucsd.edu Subject: MICOR on 9.6kbaud packet? To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu I'm trying to get a 9600 baud packet station on the air, and want to know if I can modify/use a Motorola MICOR UHF (460 band) radio on 9.6k packet. Is there anyone out there who has had a good/bad experience in trying to do so? I have a Micor service manual on the way, but would like some 'real-world' input. Thanks in advance and 73 Andy N9NTI -- We're just two lost souls swimming in a | If the University saw things my fish bowl, year after year. Running over | way, they wouldn't raise tuition! The same old ground, what have we found? | Andy Peterson, N9NTI /--/--/ The same old fears.. wish you were here.. | "I only do code in C." | ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 21:19:23 EST From: qualcomm.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!news.Brown.EDU!noc.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet@network.ucsd.edu Subject: NEED PBBS SOURCE for K5JB To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu I am looking for a C Source PBBS for inclusion in the K5JB Net Package I am running on my ATT 3B2 Computer in UNIX SYS V TGOODIN @ DELPHI. COM ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 01:22:06 GMT From: netcomsv!netcom.com!fmitch@decwrl.dec.com Subject: PK-88 vs KPC-3 vs DPK-2 - Comments? To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu Dave Jenkins (djenkins@wang.com) wrote: : The BayPac (BayCom) modem was fun, but, it is time to upgrade to a REAL TNC. : Most of my packet operation is in TCP/IP but some is still AX-25. All of it : is in VHF/UHF (HF privs yes, radios no). The option of operating "portable" : is attractive for coolness and/or emergencies, but, is not essential. : I am trying to decide between asking for a PK-88, KPC-3 or DPK-2. Some of : the relative merits that I know of include: : PK-88: Y Y N Y ? ? $139.95 : KPC-3: L 1 Y Y Y Y $119.95 : DPK-2: L Y N Y 2 3 $109.95 : ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ : | | | | | | | : | | | | | | +------- HRO Price : | | | | | | : | | | | | +--------- Open squelch operation : | | | | +------------ TNC-2 Compatible : | | | +--------------- PBBS : | | +------------------ WEFAX : | +--------------------- Kiss Mode : +------------------------ 12 Operation (L = Low power consumption) : 1) The guy at HRO said it does KISS Mode but it didn't say in the catalog. : 2) "100% firmware compatability with TAPR TNC-2" : "* TNC-2 Compatible * Runs all TNC-2proms" : 3) $31.95 optional board : Oddly enough, the guy from HRO didn't talk up the DPK-2 at all. He said the : other two would work fine but that if I wanted to do HF packet some day then : I should not get the KPC-3. : Any comments/suggestions/recommendations/opinions are welcome/appreciated. : -- : David E. Jenkins Home: (508) 632-4164 Wang Labs, Inc. : 52 Norman Street Work: (508) 967-7284 M/S 014-690 : Gardner, MA 01440-1916 Fax: (508) 967-2212 1 Industrial Ave. : Packet: n1mxv@wa1phy.ma e-mail: djenkins@wang.com Lowell, MA 01851 hi david... mitch wa4osr here in mobile, alabama... i have had all of the tnc's you mention (including the bay-pac)... i still have the dpk-2! it is a semi-clone of the tnc-2, and it does run KISS mode with the standard rom that comes with it... any software that runs in a tnc-2 will run in/with the dpk-2... the changes/improvements over the tnc-2 is much smaller size, has a 9.+ mhz clock and a real baud rate generator... it will go up to 38.4 kbaud to your terminal... it has the standard tnc-2 modem disconnect header in case u want to run an external 9600 baud modem with it... my dpk-2 is from the first production run that drsi made... i have had absolutely no problems with it... mitch -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- fmitch@netcom.com Felton "Mitch" Mitchell, WA4OSR in Mobile, Alabama USA 205-342-7259 home, 205-476-4100 work, 205-476-0465 FAX co-sysop for W4IAX bbs running fbb ... sysop for WA4OSR DXCluster in Mobile.. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 29 Nov 1993 22:18:55 -0800 From: swrinde!sgiblab!sgigate.sgi.com!olivea!apple.com!apple.com!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu References , <2crlmkINNoh8@network.ucsd.edu>, <2ctpu1$h25@wvhpadm1.mentorg.com> Subject : "ampr.org" for AX.25 PBBSs??? (was Re: wb7tpy gateway) In article <2ctpu1$h25@wvhpadm1.mentorg.com>, Hank Oredson wrote: >In article <2crlmkINNoh8@network.ucsd.edu>, >brian@nothing.ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor) writes: >|> I would grit my teeth heavily and loudly, but >|> >|> wb6cyt@wb6cyt.#soca.ca.usa.na.ampr.org >|> >|> would be acceptable and would work when addresses were gatewayed from >|> the BBS 'world' to the real internet. > >And in fact is what the FQDN actually is in the bbs network, we just don't >usually add the top domain because it is only required at the gates ... Do I understand correctly that the AX.25 PBBS network folks decided to append "ampr.org" to their node names? That's ludicrous! "ampr.org" is an Internet domain (assigned by the NIC at SRI a decade ago), and should only be used in conjunction with TCP/IP stations. Patty -- ============================== Patty Winter ============================== Apple contractor Internet: winter@apple.com Sunnyvale, California AMPRNet: 44.4.4.50 "What about truth? What about reality?" "What about the way the old ending tested in Canoga Park?" ================================== N6BIS ================================= ------------------------------ Date: 30 Nov 1993 06:52:53 GMT From: juniper.almaden.ibm.com!enge.almaden.ibm.com!enge@uunet.uu.net To: ham-digital@ucsd.edu References <2crlmkINNoh8@network.ucsd.edu>, <2ctpu1$h25@wvhpadm1.mentorg.com>, <2deokf$i3p@apple.com>bm.co Subject : Re: "ampr.org" for AX.25 PBBSs??? (was Re: wb7tpy gateway) In article <2deokf$i3p@apple.com>, Patty Winter wrote: > ... > >Do I understand correctly that the AX.25 PBBS network folks decided >to append "ampr.org" to their node names? That's ludicrous! "ampr.org" >is an Internet domain (assigned by the NIC at SRI a decade ago), and >should only be used in conjunction with TCP/IP stations. > > This idea was proposed to make the use of the Internet <-> AX.25 transition easier and to eliminate confusion over the naming conventions. Its being discussed and constructive ideas, comments, and counter proposals are welcome. As far as Internet domains restricted to TCP/IP, I guess the UUCP people might take umbrage to that statement. In fact, there are a lot similarities between the dial up UUCP world and the AX.25 world. Roy Engehausen, AA4RE enge@almaden.ibm.com ------------------------------ End of Ham-Digital Digest V93 #129 ****************************** ******************************