[FADCA] Protocol Warrior behavior:

Thu Dec 30 14:54:36 EST 2004

Thank You, Dan KA0OXH.
I'm glad there are other people that are figuring this out.
...73's... Joel N4JOA (Sysop @ N4JOA)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Babilla" <dbabilla at earthlink.net>
To: "Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association" 
<fadca at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: December 30, 2004 14:34
Subject: Re: [FADCA] Protocol Warrior behavior:

> All,
>
> I think Chuck nailed it when he states:
>
>> 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.
>
> And:
>
>> 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.
>
> If we build a network to pass traffic across the state it needs to be 
> capable of supporting as many protocols as
> possible. Including "keyboard chatting". Using Linux and layered protocols 
> is the only way to go.
>
> Yes BUD, there are still HAMs that like to connect and chat keyboard to 
> keyboard......at least that is the main complaint I've over heard at 
> hamfests and club meeting about FADCA.....is that the Florida layered 
> network does not support AX.25 connects with keyboard to keyboard, just 
> e-mail........true or not, that is what is perceived.
>
> GO Linux network!!!!!!!
>
> 73's
>
> Dan KA0OXH
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Chuck Hast" <wchast at gmail.com>
> To: "Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association" 
> <fadca at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 5:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [FADCA] Protocol Warrior behavior:
>
>
>> 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."
>> _______________________________________________
>> FADCA mailing list
>> FADCA at mailman.qth.net
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FADCA mailing list
> FADCA at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca
> 