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

[Russell Oder]

Dave, Joel and others. I am not proposing that BBSs are not needed or that
they should not use the network FAR FROM IT.

What I want to do is to prepare for future communications emergencies before
they occur.  What I am trying to do is make the network respond
appropriately to needs as they occur and allow remote control to make
changes as needed without having to drive to the switch to make the changes
or depend on everyone to be in place to make necessary changes.  Many of our
resources were surrounded by water during and immediately after the
hurricanes and could not be reached to make changes or restore resources.
Some of our resources were shut down by the sysops because they were
evacuating or were concerned about loosing their equipment, and some were
not brought back up immediately after the wind velocities decreased.  We
need to have a more robust system that can respond without the individual
intervention of one person who manages a resource on the network.

What I am concerned about is unattended BBSs or BBS Sysops that are absent
or do not keep up with the current events and allow their BBSs to continue
to forward "for sale" and other bulletins while the network is trying to
respond to a communications emergency.  Or, on the other hand shut down
their systems when they go on vacation, evacuate, etc - all reasonable
responses to the type of weather we experienced.

We experienced severe storms and, with the exception of one area, had
advance warnings of the possible dangers and damages we might expect.  What
I am also concerned about are the instantaneous events for which there is no
warning that may require changes in the network that will likely occur when
the sysops are not home, not at their stations, etc.

Like many of the voice repeaters that have a "net" or "emergency" state that
can be implemented remotely to control hang time, shorten time-out timers,
automatically announce the "net" etc. we need to have similar capabilities
in our digital system to protect resources, etc.  We don't have a managed IT
section to do this for us to mitigate damage, ensure system operation, and
manage the traffic that is needed.  We have to depend on volunteers to do
all those things.

The intervention I am discussing I hope we never have to use (I hope we
don't have anything that will require it, and that BBSs Sysops and users
will be aware of what is going on, have local control, and make adjustments
in their operation as needed.)

I am discussing a "how to do it" not a "let's do it."

Right now there is significantly less Packet use than in the past. I hope we
can re-build what we had, and as Chuck put it, upgrade our system to make
the "pipes" big enough to handle whatever we need to handle.

It was not my intention to have anyone think that I don't see a need for or
even a use for BBSs. I use the one in Jacksonville often and see some real
needs for the resource.  But I also am trying to build my corner of the
network to support Email over ham radio as well as all other services by
working to upgrade my links, my LAN, and add additional features and I see
that in a communications emergency there could be a glut of data that must
be sent.

I do see an opportunity to provide a back up support to handle email that
will not require "handling" by a Ham Radio operator at the delivery point
that is not possible using our BBS system which does require a licensed
station to receive the information and pass it on to a third party.  A
system that would be used by the effected area within the last mile where
normal communication resources are not working but the addressee is outside
of the effected area has all of their resources in place.

While we in the NE corner of Florida did not suffer the devastation other
areas experienced this last Hurricane season, we did have some damage to our
system and we need to make our system better, more robust, more secure from
damage, and increase the ability of the system to handle the communications
assignments we may receive.

We did experience some damage to our network and it has taken some time to
get pieces back in place.  KF4MX in St. Augustine has installed commercial
UHF beams to improve his links and through that has allowed me to be able
reestablish my link to him.  The DAB UHF link to St Augustine is still in
the process of repairing damage caused by the storms.  I am working on
getting my link to Jacksonville TO REACH A BBS back on line due to loosing
an antenna in the storms.

I am working to install 9600 bps LANs and Links in and out of my county so
that our packet resources will be improved.

I HOPE this helps anyone concerned that they are not needed or wanted to
understand what I am talking about.   I am also proposing that FADCA study a
coordinated emergency communication plan and overlay to help ensure we can
meet the needs in a disaster.  We did not have that in place for the 2004
hurricane season and we could have provided more and better service if we
had such a system in place.

That LAST thing we need is for systems and resources that have continued to
support packet radio cease to exist.

The FIRST thing we need to do is to not consider efforts to discuss ways we
can revamp and improve our system an attack on the system or it's users but
encourage efforts to consider improvements that appear to be needed in the
system.

Russ, N4KOX

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck Hast" <wchast at gmail.com>
To: "Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association"
<fadca at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [FADCA] Re: [wl2kemcomm] Re: Lets Get Back To Winlink!


> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 08:25:35 -0500, Joel Yates <yate4899 at bellsouth.net>
wrote:
> > I agree with David N4ZKF.
> > What ever happened to Amateur (HAM) Radio?
> > ...Joel N4JOA Sysop at N4JOA bbs.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Calder" <n4zkf at n4zkf.com>
> > To: "'Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association'"
> > <fadca at mailman.qth.net>
> > Sent: December 22, 2004 07:25
> > Subject: RE: [FADCA] Re: [wl2kemcomm] Re: Lets Get Back To Winlink!
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Russ asked:
> > >
> > >> 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 different
> > > call
> > >> on
> > >> the BBS or a nother BBS from being able to handle emergency
forwarding
> > > if
> > >> necessary?
> > >>
> > >
> > > BBS's where the best thing since sliced bread for years. Now something
> > > new comes along and you want to "block them out"?
> > >
> > > Seems like everyone around here wants to play ham/internet radio
> > > anymore.
> > > I guess it's time to hang up the bbs after 14 years and find a new
> > > hobby.
> > >
>
> What Russ was talking about was traffic control during a emergency,
reducing
> the network traffic load to emergency traffic only, but if we build the
network
> deep and wide enough that should not be needed.
>
> What is needed are ways to allow for emergency operations without having
> users come on the channel and slow thngs down, once the emergency is over
> things can go back to normal.
>
> The medium of exchange is still the FPAC network, granted for Winlink at
some
> point it may enter the wired network for transfer to a server or other
> service. But
> most of the network is still radio.
>
> I believe that most if not all BBS ops now days will do whatever they have
to
> do to reduce traffic flow to only that needed for the duration of the
emergency.
> I.e. non-essential bulletins and other non-emergency traffic put on hold.
>
> I do not believe we have to shut off a BBs unless that system insist on
hosing
> the network with non-emergency stuff and that only if the network can not
handle
> it.
>
> The best way is to build the network to handle the traffic and be done
with it.
> Right now I do not think there is enough traffic to even worry about
> it. If there
> is, again I believe that any BBS sysop will as one of the first steps
after a
> emergency happens, take steps to reduce traffic flow to only that needed
for
> the emergency operations.
>
> I think that one of the first steps in the deeper wider concept is to
> start looking
> at moving away from 1k2 data rate as soon as possible. Keep the port
around
> but add a 9k6 port and start getting users to transition to that
> speed. Part of our
> service as amateur radio operators is to attempt to keep up with
technology,
> we are not doing a very good job of it. Still using 50 year old voice
technology
> and 25 year old data modulation technology. At the forfront we are not.
Yet
> there is much we can still do, by extending and modernizing our network we
> can provide services during emergencies that others can not do. Even with
our
> old technology.
>
> E-mail with WinLink and other solutions is part of the updating that
> is constantly
> going on. You have been running a BBS for years now, that was the
precursor
> to the e-mail server of today. What we need is more work  on bringing the
two
> technologies together into one, there will always be a need for these
devices,
> but the technology that is behind them will change, we have to keep up
with
> it.
>
> -- 
> 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."
> _______________________________________________
> FADCA mailing list
> FADCA at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca