Date: Sun,  3 Jan 93 04:30:08 PST
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@ucsd.edu>
Errors-To: TCP-Group-Errors@UCSD.Edu
Reply-To: TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #3
To: tcp-group-digest


TCP-Group Digest            Sun,  3 Jan 93       Volume 93 : Issue    3

Today's Topics:
                       BBS forwarding from NOS
                      Comments, please (2 msgs)

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.

Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".

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: 2 Jan 93 18:27:42 EET-2EEST
From: "Markus Lamminmaki OH6LSA"  <MARKUS@TECHNIS.vtyh.fi>
Subject: BBS forwarding from NOS
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu

Has anyone encountered anything similar to this. When I forward
messages from my NOS system to the local AX25 BBS system there is an
extra lf/cr added to the Route lines, ie similar to something like
this: (I'm running PA0GRI NOS 2.0m)

Subject: etc

R: From my NOS system

R: From previous BBS
R: From orginating BBS

Actual message


Anyone with good ideas?




---
Vasa Polytechnic                 Email: markus@ygdrasil.vtyh.fi (NeXT Mail)
PB 6, SF-65201, FINLAND                 markus@technis.vtyh.fi  (PMail)
Fax: +358-61-3230 610                   OH6LSA@OH6RBV.FIN.EU    (Packet)
Home:+358-61-3211 194            Work:  +358-61-3230 661

------------------------------

Date: 02 Jan 93 07:51:04 EST
From: "Steve Dworkin, N2MDQ" <70730.220@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Comments, please
To: Advanced Amateur Radio Group <tcp-group@ucsd.edu>

This is being relayed to Internet on behalf of Jay Smoller, kc2ct:

Has anyone evaluated the benefits of compiling NOS using 286/386/486
instruction options within the Borland C compiler in terms of speed, 
code size, and stability of the executable code produced versus the
standard 808x instruction set?  Should 80x86 machines be utilizing the
enhanced instruction set code?

Has there ever been an ax.25 KISS tnc packet driver conforming to the
packet driver specification produced, rather than utilizing the one
built into NOS?  The idea behind this question is the possibility of
running commercial TCP/IP software, ie. Chameleon, etc. on the
amprnet.  I don't see a separate ax.25 KISS driver available within
version 10.x of the Clarkson packet driver collection.  Would it be
very difficult to split the ax.25 KISS tnc code out into a stand-alone
driver?

Any comments greatly appreciated.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 2:11:39 -0500 (EST)
From: MIKEBW@ids.net (Mike Bilow, <MIKEBW@ids.net>)
Subject: Comments, please
To: 70730.220@CompuServe.COM, tcp-group@ucsd.edu

I'll hold off commenting on the proposal to explore compiling NOS for
different CPUs and instruction sets.

There was a Class 9 (AX.25) and a Class 10 (KISS) packet driver defined
in version 1.09 of the spec, and I would have assumed these would be in
the new version 1.10 soon to be out.  (Is it out yet?)

-- Mike Bilow, <mikebw@ids.net>  (Internet)

------------------------------

End of TCP-Group Digest V93 #3
******************************
******************************