[FADCA] Protocol Warrior behavior:

[Chuck Hast]

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 09:59:32 -0500, Rick Muething <rmuething at cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> Dave,
> 
> I feel strongly that if our hobby is to survive and hopefully advance we
> have to be open to developing and using new technologies. Years ago I had an
> AM transmitter and a Model 15 Teletype and while I wish I still had those
> antiques I am glad they have fallen out of favor.


Alright!!! Rick, did you have a KSR or a ASR? I used to have both, I also had
a great collection of M28's and a M35ASR.... Those were the days when oil
and electricity mixed, would I go back? yes as museum piece just to show
them working, but on a day to day operation, no WAY!! Those old machines
were fun to watch, the Teletypes, Klienschmidts, Mites and other mechanical
machines. But their time has passed. The same holds for a lot of other stuff.
This is why I want to see the network move to Linux, we have all kinds of
protocols to work with and all we have to do is add them to the stack, then
we can test them on a more or less level basis and find out what works best
for a particular application, what works best for say hf which should use short
frames a lot of FEC and other techniques to recover from a noisy fading link
would be too much overhead for a nice clean VHF/UHF/Microwave link. There
you want long frames, selective reject, less FEC (still good to have for all but
the best links).

Your protocols also need to be as short and lowest overhead as possible,
also encaping one protocol inside of another to take advantage what that
particular one offers. The mix and mingle is a challenge, so we can not set
down with anyone and use it with a sink or swim attitude. That is my problem
with the fellow who wrote the article, if you are paddling his way you are just
fine, but if you are going down a different path you find that he is a firey
protocol warriour as he calls them.

We need to try to be as blind as possible to "personal preferences" as there
is no "universal protocol" as these guys would want us to think.

You fellows have done a wonderful job with WinLink, I am sure that things will
evolve and there will be something else come down the road, but like the M15
it worked and did a yeomans job for years until it was finally removed from
service for obvious reasons. Many of us cried to see them go, but looking back
they opened the door for doing data in its most basic form just as the protocols
we have used in amateur radio have done the same thing. Some of them will
stay around either because the are quite flexible and have very low overhead
others will be kept around just because "it is mine and nothing can replace it"
Those that are flexible will mutate into things better those that fall
into the second
category will find that sooner or later like the mule, they have no progeny and
go away with the hardheaded owners.


Also some tend to mix protocols, there are those that are link layer,
ax25, either-
net, 802.11 for higher speed links are some examples, PacTor, Amtor, and the
other HF link layer protocols are some that come to mind
The there are network layer, X.25,ROSE/FPAC as a family are one, IP as a
family is another, NetRom and it's derivatives are another.

The trick is to match the network protocol to the link layer so that you get the
most efficient transfer of data, on a personal note I have liked the
protocol used
by ROSE/FPAC because it only adds 3-5 chars of overhead to each packet,
also if you are sending 256 byte packets of data at a switch, it will extend the
length of the network layer packets to take into account the additional network
overhead. I am sure that there are other protocols that can work just as well at
the network layer, or there will be others developed, that again is why I want
to have a network device that we can add protocols to as we get them rather
than have to change out the whole box.

Anyhow so much for that one.
Y'all enjoy now!!



-- 
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."