[FADCA] Re: Willie and Joe - and WiFi. (Where is the software?)
[email protected]
[email protected]
Mon, 24 Mar 2003 18:06:01 -0500
Gerry, thanks for your information.
Well, folks, roll up your sleeves and let's get our hands "dirty."
Russ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerry Creager N5JXS" <[email protected]>
To: "bud thompson" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; "Pete Hoffswell" <[email protected]>;
"Paul Miller N4WKQ" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 11:39 PM
Subject: [FADCA] Re: Willie and Joe - and WiFi. (Where is the software?)
> 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 mi
ght
> > 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 -- [email protected]
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> FADCA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca