[FADCA] Re: Internet/FBB/LINUX/FPAC

27 Feb 2002 17:24:36 -0800

Thanks, Bud. Good information.

In response to your questions:::

The LINUX work is to make sure we know how to integrate them where the exist or might be developed. The operation should be seamless to the user.

Just trying to do several things at once:

Identify  the problems and develop solutions.

Identify the Players

Solidify the "network".

Develop the instructions.

Make sure the devices in the network will actually work together.

Share information.

Can you provide a list of known existing Winlink 2000 (WL2K) stations so thier geographical locations can be mapped to see what may currently exist and where the "gaps" are?

I had asked Bill to do  that regarding the systems he knows of.

For tactical communications, I am trying to develop the method to use to make device to device connections and communications links.

One of the things that would help is a "DNS" server so the operator in the field would only have to put in the distination and be on the correct local input frequency. The "local" device(s) supporting the would handle all of the routing automatically. Just as the routing tables in the BBS handles the delivery of messagess to  the bbs that serves the destination area, the integration of the infrastructure would support the routing (by whatever means works at that time) and be transparent to the users on either end.

We need solutions to a common problem.

Russ

N4KOX

On Tue, 26 February 2002, "bud Thompson" wrote:

> 
> Deltona, FL
> Tuesday Feb 26 1800EST
> 
> I've waited for a while to respond ....
> 
> A system already exists...
> 
> See my response to this note from Russ:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[email protected]>
> TO: <snip>
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 10:15 PM
> Subject: Internet/FBB/LINUX/FPAC
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >What is this all about?
> 
> >It is research to build a radio to internet emergency communication system
> >I had proposed last week. What will that do?
> >It will allow portable packet stations entering a disaster area without
> >telephone and internet service, to connect to the
> >nearest internet equipped FBB site or FPA switch to reach the state EOC or
> >>County EOC over a wire line that can
> >handle any amount of file traffic and tactical keyboard traffic needed to
> >respond to the disaster. This is the "radio for
> >the 'last mile' and wire line connection over existing circuits" concept.
> 
> >What will that do?
> 
> >It will enable packet stations to suppor ALL of the communications needs
> >from a disaster area to an EOC or State
> >EOC without trying to use the vagarities of HF or the slow, low bandwidth
> >of a single frequency vhf packet system.
> 
> Russell
> N4KOX
> 
> Russ:
> 
> Yes, we need to make the connection between radio and wires just outside the
> Last Mile (the disaster area where there are no conventional wire line
> connections... dial up, cable modem, DSL, cell phone, "wireless", etc.)  The
> Last Mile may be 1sq. mile to 500sq miles in area.
> 
> Several considerations - LINUX and KEYBOARDING (w/o a direct connection to
> the wired world.)
> 
> I have no problem with LINUX - except it is not very universal.  Unless a
> WinDoz (universal mess) to LINUX connection is made, LINUX may not be the
> best answer.  We have precious few hams who can operate a portable packet
> station, much less use LINUX in the process.
> 
> "Keyboarding" as we have known it may be a thing of the past.. How
> many  tactical digital hams really know how to keyboard through the maze of
> nodes, links, etc, to get to the land line connection, much less use LINUX?
> 
> The most appropriate way of transferring messages over digital radio links
> is as message files
> under BBS-to-BBS protocol/transfers.  Prepare off line- then SEND.
> 
> Tactical opns must be simple - the mobile/portable digital radio station to
> the EOC/incident
> command server (which may make the Last Mile link via HF or a wire line) may
> actually be
> "operated" by persons w/o radio experience. In digital opns -more typists
> are needed than
> radio operators.
> 
> If the route includes LINUX that part must be transparent/hidden to the
> tactical (WinDoz) user.
> 
> Why LINUX?
> 
> There is presently a WinDoz-based system in place  to accomplish this -.
> 
> It is Winlink 2000 (WL2K) http://winlink.org/ which is a radio-to-internet
> e-mail scheme between hams and third parties.  The local ham user employs
> an e-mail client terminal program Airmail
> http://www.airmail2000.com/down.htm.
> 
> Airmail runs HF ARQ modes with many data controllers, and packet with some.
> It also  has telnet capability.  After routing configuration, Airmail looks
> much like any e-mail program - including address book, speller, and
> click-and-send capability. Messages in e-mail form go out the radio or
> telnet ports as set up in the routing/address book.  Such "e-mail" may be
> addressed to a BBS or Internet e-mail target.
> 
> Airmail will run on a laptop in tactical opns with radio ports, and can run
> at the EOC/incident command with radio and telnet ports - the connection
>  between the Last Mile and the Internet/World.
> 
> Here in Central Florida I'm (slowly) developing the application of this
> system to support the Last Mile for tactical ops as well as the magic
> connection to the Internet.  While Airmail would support BBS-to-BBS
> forwarding via the Telnet port, it is far more appropriate to make virtually
> all tactical-to-EOC-to-anywhere messages as pseudo e-mail so that once the
> "connection" is made - internet e-mail addressing protocols/routing take
> over.  They are far
> more efficient than BBS protocols once on wires.
> 
> It may be several months before I have time to provide a
> proof-of-principle -
> and I still need to convince  the AirMail author to make some (minor?)
> changes
> to provide the emergency support we need at the tactical level...
> 
> A tip of the Penguin's Red Hat to you for your LINIX investigations... but
> WinDoz will do the job - and
> there are a lot more folks out there doing it with WinDoz and by e-mail than
> using LINUX and BBS protocol.
> 
> Just thought you would want to know.
> 
> 73,
> bud N0IA