Date: Sun, 4 Apr 93 04:30:09 PDT
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 #87
To: tcp-group-digest
TCP-Group Digest Sun, 4 Apr 93 Volume 93 : Issue 87
Today's Topics:
Buglet in GRI 2.0p
PacComm Tiny-2 KISS Bug
Whither tcp-group
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: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 10:24:25 -0600 (CST)
From: Steve Sampson <ssampson@sabea-oc.af.mil>
Subject: Buglet in GRI 2.0p
To: TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu
The last packet sent time in multiport kiss doesn't work in GRI 2.0p,
I fixed this in 2.0m but maybe forgot to mention it:
In kiss_raw() and kiss_ioctl() of kiss.c change this:
if(iface->port){
iface->rawsndcnt++;
iface->lastsent = Clock;
}
to this:
if(iface->port){
iface->rawsndcnt++;
iface->lastsent = secclock();
}
This changes the variable from ticks to seconds.
---
Steve, N5OWK
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 15:14:20 -0600 (CST)
From: gerry@cs.tamu.edu (Gerald J Creager)
Subject: PacComm Tiny-2 KISS Bug
To: CROSSJR@eagle.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Charlie Ross Jr.)
Charlie Ross Jr. sez:
>
> > > >PacComm Tiny-2 with "node" (higher speed) parts, port speed 9600 baud, radio
> > > >speed 1200 baud, ROM rev. 1.1.6b (PacComm)
> > > ^^^^^^
> > > One of the firmware releases around this time was broken. It ignored the DCD
> > > I think. The problem was fixed after I changed the EPROM.
> >
> > I had trouble with 1.1.6d4. In KISS mode it would only operate in FULL DUPLEX
> > (or ignored DCD its the same thing).
For the record, the recommendation to use the (*undocumented*) kissui/kissi
construct in Phil's new-code attach asy statement successfully fixed the
problems. 1.1.6b APPEARS to work here. At the higher speeds. With NO
problems.
73, gerry n5jxs
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1993 16:18:45 -0600 (CST)
From: gerry@cs.tamu.edu (Gerald J Creager)
Subject: Whither tcp-group
To: brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
I've said it before in private mail, and will say it again:
I think there's a definate place for TCP-GROUP, as I've know it in the past.
What I've seen developing here is:
NOS-hacks (nos-of-the-day producers, some good, some bad)
Techies (TCP/IP for the sake of tcp/ip, and a few other protocols)
Users (New, old, in between [I fall in here sometimes])
New Frontiers (Interested in puhsing an envelope. Some know the envelope they
want to push, some can spell envelope...)
Complainers (more interested in flame wars than discussion)
Betatesters (a particularly necessary and sick breed of duck: They LIKE
breaking someone else's code!)
Somewhere in there, we lost the ability to discuss the various protocols,
layers and implementations of the code as it exists. This is something I miss,
and unfortunately, something I don't see in Brian's proposed breakout of
tcp-group. What I do see is that we've lost focus, degenerated to various
groups that most of the really interested folks all subscribe to, and bicker.
Maybe what we need, rather than to dissolve a known asset group, is to review
the charter of tcp-group, and try to use it for what it was intended. [as an
aside, I've tried to post questions/comments to the appropriate list as they've
arisen...]
Please, no flames. That wasn't the intent of the post. Just some thoughts on
the issue.
73, gerry
------------------------------
End of TCP-Group Digest V93 #87
******************************
******************************