[FADCA] Re: Fw: [wl2kemcomm] Re: Lets Get Back To Winlink!

[Chuck Hast]

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:46:01 -0500, Russell Oder <oderr at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Chuck it was great to see you yesterday and thanks for the "tour" to the
> "top of the world" (well the local Tampa World.) That visit alone was worth
> the trip to Tampa!
> 

Always happy to show off the "buzzards roost viewing stand".


> Here are my questions:
> 
> Background.   The messge below includes a comment made several days ago. I
> remember discussing with Bob Grant when we first implemented ROSE how we
> could control the transmissions into an area by loading a different set if
> .tbls into the nehboring switches and LAN switch to change the address of
> the local LAN switch, and, or, in addition, load new a new .tbl into the
> neghboring switches to keep them from trying to send connections into the
> area addressed to the old address and allowing only connections to the new
> "emergency" addresses.
With either DOS or Linux you would just have the files on the machine,
change names
and under DOS, reboot, under Linux stop the FPAC process and restart it again.
It will come up reading the renamed file.


> 
> I implemented a set of addresses in my LAN switches that included some
> special "tactical" addresses that were intended to be used by portable,
> mobile and temporary switches.
> 
> While we never actually implemented this in a emergency, that can still be
> done using ROSE .tbls and the "emergency" .tbl files can be loaded remotely
> over the radio.
> 

Same thing see above, just either have them in place but not used or change the
.conf file and restart the process.


> Q1.  What can be done in FPAC to effect the same control?  I see we can
> change the configuration file and I believe John and others load these files
> remotely.

Unless you have a reason to upload a new file just keep various files
for whatever
you need to do, remotelly change the name and restart the process.

> 
> There is the use of a program to develop the files to configure the FPAC
> switches.

For ROSE and DOS FPAC, Linux uses a different routing table structure, I
think Bill has a friend looking at either a converter or a new tool to
do the same
thing for Linux.

> 
> Q2.  Can this be done remotely using individual files sent the the FPAC
> switches?

Yes


> 
> Q3.  Can "new" temporary FPAC switches to handle emergencies be added to the
> network remotely?

Yes
> 
> Q4.  With Winlink, the use of BBS forwarding may no longer be necessary with
> regard to supporting emergency communications. Is there a way to Block
> connections into the network by selected calls?  Is there a way to remotely
> prevent a BBS from doing it normal forwarding but allow a diferent call on
> the BBS or a nother BBS from being able to handle emergency forwarding if
> necessary?
> 
With regards to the switches yes, you can route a call to sort of a
/dev/nul type of
thing. Or you can use the AX25 setup files in Linux to block stations
that are either
illegal or should for some reason not be on the network.

You can also set up FPAC to only accept level 3 connects on certain ports.


> Q5.  Are there radios that can be used for established switches that will
> support remote frequency change or is the only way to implement an
> "emergency LAN" at a high site to  have preinstalled radios on other
> frequencies?  (Used to change the LAN frequency of a switch to avoide local
> un controlled use of the frequency.

This is a application issue the apps exist, and some can be talked to
remotely itis
a question of integration.


> 
> Q5.  Has anyone developed a plan to include network management in a disaster
> that includes remote impromptu network recofiguration?
> 

We need some emergency managers to step up to bat here.


> Q6.  We have been coordinating LAN frequencies and link frequencies but
> there has been no work put into "alternative" UNPUBLISHED LAN and Link
> frequencies (an overlay to the Layered Network that could be implemented in
> a disaster.)  Do we need to do that as part of the FADCA service?

This is probably a ARES RACES question.

> 
> Q7.   Do we need to add the feature in Q6 to the coordination request forms?
> 
> Q8.   Do we need to publish a Florida Emergency Digital Communications plan
> on our web site to be used as a guide by sysops and sponsoring groups to
> include the above as well as the development of Telpac Nodes and PMBOs?
> 
> Russ
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerry Reimer" <jerryreimer at charter.net>
> To: <wl2kemcomm at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 3:47 PM
> Subject: [wl2kemcomm] Re: Lets Get Back To Winlink!
> 
> >
> >
> > Support for the Winlink system concept is now coming from packet
> > network architects.  Here is a key excerpt from the January 2005
> > Public Service column, Part 2 about building a state-wide packet
> > network.
> >
> >   "We are constantly vigilant to keep routine automated mail
> > forwarding off the network.  We believe this activity
> > cannot be reliably stopped duiring a disaster and clogs
> > the network with traffic (and retries) that belong on packet
> > forwarding frequencies OR THE INTERNET."  (Emphasis added)
> >

I do not quite agree with this, this is sort of a SEDAN atttitude we need
to build the network to handle the traffic, the BBS sysops should exersize
proper operational protocol in handling traffic during a emergency. For that
much a out of control WinLink could do much the same, if there was a
very verbose operation going on. Besides, if you have a shelter that as a
large number of people in it, you are going to have a high load anyhow, so
better we try to build the network to handle the load in my view.



-- 
Chuck Hast 
To paraphrase my flight instructor;
"the only dumb question is the one you DID NOT ask resulting in my going
out and having to identify your bits and pieces in the midst of torn
and twisted metal."