Date: Sun, 9 Jan 94 04:30:01 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 V94 #5
To: tcp-group-digest
TCP-Group Digest Sun, 9 Jan 94 Volume 94 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
KISS and SLIP (2 msgs)
Kiss me once...
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, 8 Jan 1994 14:10:26 -0600 (CST)
From: ssampson@sabea-oc.af.mil (Steve Sampson)
Subject: KISS and SLIP
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
SLIP and the added command byte of KISS are useful for
most TNC users. Those that have 16 ports on one wire
(BBS bo-jive) are expecting a *little* too much from
these protocols.
KISS is pretty much a single port (maybe dual port multiplex)
protocol for dumb TNC's. Anything more demanding is going
to overload the standard PC serial port.
Any future outboard TNC should have Ethernet or some HDLC
type of protocol running 10Mbps or greater. Sort of like
a Gracilis P-10 with Ethernet. That way we can drop the
AX.25 at the TNC and do IP the rest of the way. Or maybe
some type of HOST mode for non-IP users.
Minimum TNC-4 Design Parameters
1. Ethernet Interface, 10Mbps +
2. AUI, ThinNet, 10BASE-T, Fiber
3. 32-bit CPU with affordable Program Tools
4. ...
--
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 1994 16:40:08 -0800
From: brian@nothing.ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Subject: KISS and SLIP
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
I agree, any future TNC ought to have a more sophisticated interface.
What's wrong with ISA as that interface? I mean, how much more control
can you have over a device than if it's plugged into the bus of your computer?
Naw, hams will never go for it. They'd have to own modern equipment,
like 10-year-old PCs.
Face it guys, out here on the edge, worrying about what 'the majority'
wants or isn't too scared to do is a pitiful waste of your time.
TCP/IP will NEVER be widely accepted by the ham radio community and
you'd better just stop wasting your breath trying. What's the matter?
Feeling lonely because no one else wants to play the game?
Relax. You're doing something elite. There's nothing wrong with that;
although you may lead a horse to the trough, you cannot make it drink.
Be proud of what you're doing, have fun with it, and don't worry about
the guy down the street. If he's interested, and he's capable, he'll
join us.
- Brian
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 1994 09:01:50 -0700 (MST)
From: Klarsen <klarsen@acca.nmsu.edu>
Subject: Kiss me once...
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Hi gang, there has been again a lot of smoke about how poorly kiss
works with nos and bbs and like that. Well here are some facts. I have a
PacComm Tiny-2 with the g3ruh 9600 baud modem connected to my g8bpq switch
with kiss. The tnc has a kiss rom made from the version 4 kiss information
available to anyone that can reach ucsd.edu and ftp from the
/hamradio/packet/kiss directory kissV4.zip and put it on an e-prom.
I have been using this 9600 baud system with nos and the f6fbb bbs
and have had little problems. There HAVE been times when the bbs gets a
checksum error, that is odd but could be due to the kiss connection
dropping a bit or like that. These problems are rare and don't cause much
trouble. So here at least is one happy kiss user. I am fully in agreement
with the basic premis of "keep it simple stupid".
73, de karl k5di@k5di.nm.usa.na
------------------------------
End of TCP-Group Digest V94 #5
******************************
******************************