[FADCA] Re: Willie and Joe - and WiFi. (Where is the software?)

[Gerry Creager N5JXS]

Inline (sparse) comments below...  You make some good observations...

bud thompson wrote:
> Hi, Florida Amateur Digital Communications Association e-mailers - and a few
> others who may be helpful.
> 
> Deltona FL  3/23/2003 10:13:43.8766
> 
> (The topic is Wireless Fidelity - WiFi - I'll get there in a couple of
> paragraphs.)
> 
...
> Over the past month I've subscribed to the ARRL-sponsored  HSMM-related
> WiFi e-mail reflector. I've read most, and scanned the rest, of the notes.
> (Geeezee, is it a HAMTHING to flame, or a general male trait? After only two
> weeks the flames were gaining in numbers.  After working my way through the
> 10 to 15 e-mails a day I have come to the following conclusions:
> 
> 1.  Most of the 802.11(b) folks are interested in the RLAN (i.e. local area
> net) aspects of a nationwide system that would allow ANYONE with a laptop
> and wireless network card and a short stub of an antenna INTERNET access
> anywhere in CONUS. - A nationwide wireless dream.

I tend to think linearly when faced with a problem of this sort.  From 
my perspective, we have to first handle the local area problems of (1) 
authentication, (2) identification (to a security geek, they're NOT the 
same) and, (3) capabilities management.

Then, I believe we can handle the metro area a bit easier than most 
think.  Recall that few of us have bought gear, pointed antennas at each 
other and tried!

The rather strident call for full-mesh networking is something I'll be 
testing over the next month... I'm privileged to have a lab and grad 
students I can get working on this, and we'll all learn.  However, mesh 
networking isn't easy, and yes, Houston, it does approach rocket 
science.  Given a choice of Layer 2 protocols to try to build a mesh 
with, it'd be Asynchronous Telecommunications Mode, not some form of 
Ethernet.

Finally, I'm hard over that, if we WANT to make this a connect-anywhere 
system, we're going to have to leverage all the potential benefits and 
gegaws available in the IPv6 protocol, and not ever look back.

> 2.  Many of the hams involved are SHF RF geeks who want to prove they can
> extend RLAN to RLAN backbones with either (a) less or (b) more power output
> than anyone else.

Been around AMSAT lately?  And that's not really a slam at AMSAT, but 
said as one who's played with them as a member for years.

> 3.  Some (as usual) are ham barroom lawyer wannabees who challenge
> everything, reciting part and parcel from Part 97, offering little else.
> 
> 4.  Not many are promoting specific applications (i.e. uses by end users)
>  - just Internet access sans telephone lines or CATV cable.
> 
> Here I come with ideas for applications OTHER THAN just wireless Internet
> access, but without sufficient COMPUTER applications experience. (I've been
> 'in' personal computers since 1981 but only got my first sound card in
> October last year.  Echo Link is the only sound card application I've used.
> The only computer game I've played since PONG is Hearts.  There MUST be a
> breadth of computer applications out there that can help with integrating
> WiFi RF networking to ham applications (i.e. EMCOMMs) that do not use the
> wired Internet.
> 
> ARRL has coined this Ham Internet the HINTERNET.
> 
> REFERENCE  Page 28 April 2003 QST - . Figure 2. The Access Points (AP)
> represent LAN/Switches just as with FPAC/ROSE on our layered network. The
> HAM1, HAM2, HAM3 represent EOCs, Served Agency offices, tactical stations,
> (a.k.a. users). (See http:www.fadca.org for the existing packet network.)
> 
> Now - get out of that box and stop thinking radios. No vhf/uhf/HF radios or
> antennas anymore.  Only WiFi cards and sufficient antenna to reach an AP. No
> TNCs any more. No telegraph keys, semaphore, or smoke signals any more.
> 
> What USER computer software/applications are presently available to do the
> following (all of which is described as possible applications on page 29)?
> 
> 1.  End-to-end digital messaging (e-mail) between "users".

Netscape/Mozilla mail.  Heaven help me, but, IE/Micro$oft Lookout. 
Evolution.  GAIM.  Jabber.

> 2.  Voice over IP (actually full duplex telephone) between/among users.

NetMeeting.  OpenH323/Gnomemeeting.  A slew of Polycomm and other 
commercial h.323 apps.


> 3.  Video and video conference between/among users' computers.

Same.  Voice and video properly fall, today, under H323.  Maybe 
tomorrow, it'll be SIP.

> 4.  Web Cam applications.

Plethora. Too many to enumerate.  Recall, however, that a lot of 
streaming webcams want 12 Mb/sec (USB 1.1) and will have to have size 
and framerate dropped to not be bandwidth hogs on a fixed 11 Mb link...


> 5.  Remote Control by HAM1 of radios, etc at HAM3 location.

Does it currently work over a wired network?  Next question?


> Microsoft Netmeeting is referenced in the article. How much of this will it
> handle?

All you want, but not necessarily well.  NetMeeting is not exactly H.323 
compliant, but, in general, it's close enough.


> I know there are 'chat' and 'instant' messaging schemes that probably look
> like ham digital stuff (upper screen receive text, lower screen transmit
> text), but the controlling interface between two users is on the internet.
> E-mail, per se, requires servers, presently though the internet.  How is
> such handled on our emerging Hinternet w/o an internet connection? (Rick
> KN6KB: For e-mail messaging can Airmail-to-Airmail be the answer if both use
> Telnet terminal? I'll bet there needs to be a Telnet server someplace (e.g.
> WL2K PMBO).)

Er, let's use something like AIM/GAIM/Jabber for instant messaging, and 
something that speaks SMTP for mail.


> I know there is software for all of these applications, but since I've not
> used it, I don't know how much of it supports computer-to-computer w/o some
> interface.  I suppose that "connections" could be made based on IP addresses
> if the software doesn't need an intermediate controlling interface. We
> certainly need more than a ping test from the Orange County EOC in Orlando
> to the Daytona Beach Red Cross office!

If it runs on a wired connection, it'll run on a wireless connection, as 
long as you don't overwhelm the bandwidth/headroom.  We're all talking 
about 802.11b here; by the time this goes into the Ham Mainstream, we're 
really gonna be talking about 802.11g, which, although not yet ratified, 
is showing up on the market.  Overlaying the 802.11b stuff.


> Are we going to have to supply local or regional "servers" on our Hinternet?
> Presently, my ISP has a server that gets me to the internet, another that
> gets my incoming e-mail, and another that takes my outgoing e-mail.

Some ham or club should step up to provide the server(s) as needed.  for 
the ham population in my hometown, we're looking at a surplus AMD K2/450 
with 256 MB RAM and an interface to HSMM and one to an ISP.  It can do 
mail, DHCP (which I do NOT support for this; earlier comments about 
IPv6); DNS and routing.


> My concept is that at user end points (EOC, Served Agency, ham QTH, mobile,
> or fixed tactical station), a ham would sit in front of a computer with
> headphones/microphone along with keyboard/mouse. Each user must have a way
> to connect to a single or to multiple user(s).  A connect would also include
> media/mode type (e-mail, telephone, video, etc) I imagine this could look
> like the Echo Link menu (point, click, connect) - but without the Internet,
> where is
> this software to support end user to end user applications?

It's not nice to read my mind...  But if it looks like Echolink, I'm not 
too sure I'll like it. Personal bias. There are apps that do this 
without Echolink, which ALMOST but not quite employs H.323.

I'm a standards sort of guy.  If you're gonna write the code using a 
piece of a standard, find the minimum spec and get to that point, at 
least.  Microsoft has proven we can do otherwise, or can attempt to 
redefine the spec regardless of international (or national) groups 
working together.  But, tell me: Is that the right way to do it?


> I'm guessing we would need UMBRELLA "menu software" of some sort to tie the
> user addressing to media/modes.  It would be a hassle to have to run a
> separate program for each mode (e-mail, telephone, video, etc.) each of
> which had its own point and click connect scheme. The menu should be in
> user-supplied English, not IP addresses.

No, I disagree.  We need a suite of apps laid out logically on the 
desktop. They need to look like, if not be, the apps folks use 
regularly.  Some of the apps, specifically the H.323 stuff comes to 
mind, will require a _little_ training, but not too much.  The 
overwhelming umbrella menu restricts what people can do.  Often to bad 
ends, because it doesn't get fully debugged until you're in the midst of 
an operation.


> How much of this can Microsoft Netmeeting handle?

Voice and video over IP.  Probably satisfactorily.  Instant messaging, 
to a MUCH lesser degree, and not well.


> There are other applications questions - Say at an EOC - We presently have
> three hams each with a radio.  One is vhf, one uhf, and one HF. There might
> even be another radio for packet with a TNC and computer.  How do all of
> these guys use the Hinternet?  Does each have to have a separate
> computer/WiFi card, or can we use something like WinXP or Windows 2000 and
> have multiple users on a single computer via wired LAN? Each ham would only
> have a keyboard, mouse, headset/mic and monitor.

*LINUX* said the Linux bigot.  XP and 2k approach the stability we need, 
but neither does networking well, and neither do it right.  Microsoft 
has screwed up almost as many networks as Cisco support.

That said, XP is better than any previous MS offering.  Active directory 
should be banned from all these networks, and MS network filesharing 
should similarly be banned.  Novell is right out.  These are for 
technical reasons.  I can expand if I need to.

For those of you who haven't figured it out, I'm not a Microsoft fan. 
However, pragmatically, we need to plan around its limited use.  It's 
possible to incorporate a local area wired LAN that allows MS 
"networking" and the wireless side that doesn't.  That's a good approach 
if we are stuck with someone who can't think outside the MS box.

Being able to identify the necessary apps is a start.  Assembling them 
on a platform is another one.  However, most of what I'm doing in HSMM 
hardware and software deals with a bit of the networking implementation, 
not the apps side.  I'm trying to concentrate at layers 1-4 of the ISO 
model; you're generally talking 5-7.  We both have things to do that 
will impact each other.  For instance, if you want a webcam app and 
won't or can't throttle your camera, I'll do it for you with Quality of 
Service/traffic shaping.  I'll ramp its priority down to a low enough 
level that we can ignore it 'til the bandwidth's available.  Same thing 
with using Microsoft network file sharing.  I will throttle it down on 
my networks to prevent gridlock.  Microsoft's backwards method of 
handling contention ("Gee, if I take over and get the file moved, it'll 
be better for everyone, and I'll be happier, too") instead of being a 
good citizen and sharing the link, is just the far side of intolerable.

So.  Brand me as uncooperative, if you must, because I don't like (or 
use, willingly) M$ products.  We don't have to use 'em, and if we can 
identify a stable implementation of Linux, with applications, and lock 
it down, we're good to go.

73, gerry n5jxs
  > How much of this can Microsoft Netmeeting handle?
> 
> If not MS Netmeeting, where's the software to do the job?
> 
> Thanks for any help you can supply in my continuing education.
> 
> bud N0IA
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Are you still wasting your time with spam?...
> There is a solution!"
> 
> Protected by GIANT Company's Spam Inspector
> The most powerful anti-spam software available.
> http://www.giantcompany.com
> 


-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu
Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578
Page: 979.228.0173
Office: 903A Eller Bldg, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843