[FADCA] Moving Forward With EMCOMMs Messaging

[bud thompson]

NOTE: Subject Changed from Re: [FADCA] Use of ESATCOM for TCP/IP


I've been very busy this week, and, yes, we have a few folks who are
normally active on this list who are out of the state right now.  I'll be
awaiting their return and input to this important topic.

See my comments at the end of this original posting:
bud N0IA


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Christ" <kn4yt at yahoo.com>
To: "Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association"
<fadca at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 13:13
Subject: Re: [FADCA] Use of ESATCOM for TCP/IP


> Well Bud, so far, only you and I have the only comments about this. Maybe
> everyone is on vacation.
>
> >From what I was reading, John wants a plan submitted for utilizing
ESATCOM
> for TCP/IP traffic (forwarding). As far as I see it, we need to determine
> the different locations where a BBS and the ESATCOM digital interface unit
> (DIU) units are co-located. Once we know how many there are, we can
produce
> a simple drawing indicating the different locations and LANs that can be
> serviced from each ESATCOM to BBS gateway. Mine is simple as both
computers
> (ESATCOM and BBS) are part of the same physical LAN. My gateway can
service
> the Southwest coastline from Sarasota down to Naples if need be. I know
that
> the Charlotte County's BBS and ESATCOM systems are co-located in the same
> building. Lee County's system's are co-located and I believe that Collier
> County's use to be but I'm not sure.
>
> My problem, as of right now, is that I'm running MSYS (dos based) on a Win
> 98 machine. I got to see if I can pull in the NIC as a port in MSYS. If I
> was running a fully DOS machine, it would be no problem. MSYS has been
able
> to forward via TCP/IP for as long as I been using it. Even across RF.
> Interesting to watch but way too slow, even at 9600 baud.
>
> Looks like I might better look at another BBS program again that runs
under
> windows instead of in a DOS box in windows.
>
> Anyone else have any thoughts?
>
>
> Doug/KN4YT
>

Deltona

Saturday July 31

For general information on the ARESCOM/WL2K E-mail over Ham Radio system
check here:

http://www.winlink.org/Emergency.htm

BUD'S SPIN - Fact and Opinion hopefully respectively identified!)

1.  Amateur Radio public service as provided primarily by the ARES® and NTS
is undergoing major changes.  As with any major changes, many hams, being
human, will find some reasons for skepticism and not be quick to move to new
systems.  This was the case when radiotelephone was introduced in the 20s
and 30s, SSB in the 60s, etc.  The difference with introducing this new
E-mail over Ham Radio System in the 21st Century is that it does not REPLACE
anything, it is only an additional (modern) tool for ARES groups to add to
their arsenal of tools to serve the public.  There is presently no wide
spread ham radio system for moving large amounts of data/messages for served
agencies from one place to another during an event.  "Record traffic" is
effected using short Western-Union Telegram-like messages in NTS format.
Such messages are best kept under 30 words of text and are normally
transferred by voice, though there have been some digital BBS-to-BBS
transfers in the past.

2. There are very few hams who are presently involved in vhf packet
operations for any reason other than APRS (which is not a system for
exchanging large data/messages.)  There are even fewer who are invovled in
support of ARES/NTS.  The advent of an organized E-mail over Ham Radio
system to support EMCOMMs will bring more hams (back) to packet, and will
attract the attention of the younger (typically under 50) hams and ham
wannabees who are 'into' computers.  This anticipated increase in interest
in local packet operations will be exclusively to support the E-mail EMCOMMs
system for served agencies - hams will still use Internet e-mail as their
primary personal e-mail system, and there would be little reason for hams to
keyboard with each other in chat mode on packet or leave messages for each
other on a BBS.  Certainly there is little value in the 'bulletin' aspect of
the BBS system with the Internet so available.  (Oh, how exciting all that
packet BBS stuff was in the 80's!)

3. The system of BBSs developed in the 80s has all but gone to rot since the
availability of cheap Internet E-mail in the early 90s.  Why keep a BBS up
and running when there is no local group using it? Some of us who are more
packet oriented have continued doing so, but the users are not there. There
is not a single BBS software package that we have been using since the early
90s that is updated / improved on a regular basis.  There is no reason to
think that any will be.  Therefore there will be zero compatibility between
the ARESCOM/WK2K system for exchanging e-mail over ham radio and the
existing BBS software.  None. That begs the question:  How much effort
should be spend on keeping the older BBS system or BBSs alive on the
networks?  Here in Florida we have continued maintaining a few BBS which has
assisted in keeping the state-wide network alive and tested.  That may no
longer be a valid reason once there are more people on packet using the
network for EMCOMMs.  Likewise there is no advantage of having conventional
BBSs at the County EOCs if no one will be using them.

4. My focus, and I propose it should also be FADCA's,  is to counsel local
ham radio communities (i.e. ARES groups) to establish a LAN on packet to
cover their respective areas.  For Digital Messaging in Support of EMCOMMs,
each ham radio community must have a way of communicating within their VHF
radio horizon on packet. The first (and cheapest) method of tying a LAN to
the E-mail system is to include one or more TelPac nodes on the LAN.

http://www.winlink.org/Presentations/TELPAC_Overview.pdf

5. Once a LAN is established, there needs to be a method of effectively
digital messaging with immediate neighboring ARES groups. This expands the
total "local" area that can be covered during an event, which is often
referred to as Mutual Aid Communications (MAC.)

6. At the present time in Florida the Layered Packet Network is the only
organized network that can process large amounts of data/messaging on
vhf/uhf packet. Many areas of high population density already have LANs and
communications between neighboring LANS is in place, though there are
certainly holes in the network in some areas.

7.  FADCA should actively promote and support (1) addition of LANS where
needed, and (2) upgrading and expansion of the existing network to cover as
much of the state as possible and increase the overall data throughput rate.

8. Meanwhile, the N3PPC FBBBBS (Orlando LAN) and the N0IA and N4GMU BBS (W.
Volusia LAN) are no longer on the air.  At the present time we are planning
on adding a co-located DOS FBBBBS to the Orlando FPAC switch for those who
want to test, etc.  However, at the two sites now under consideration for
the Orlando LAN there is no Internet access for telnet.

9.  Several of us here in my area are continuing beta testing the new
Paclink AGW for E-mail over Ham Radio.  We have an EMCOMMs PMBO at the
Seminole County EOC, a PMBO packet port on the Orlando LAN, and a TelPac
node on the W. Volusia LAN to use for this testing.  N4ZKF has mentioned
installing a TelPac node on the DAB LAN  so we can continue testing.  As
soon as the St. Augustine UHF antenna is repaired, we'll be able to get from
Orlando to the two TelPac nodes in the JAX area.

For Paclink information:

http://www.winlink.org/Presentations/Paclink%20AGW%20Overview.pdf

Anyone wanting to join in on the beta testing of Paclink AGW can check here:

http://www.winlink.org/Client.htm

Doug:  As for the ESATCOM  for TCP/IP traffic (forwarding), there are not
sufficient BBS at County EOCs on our network to say we have the full state
coverage John Fleming wants.  However, once we have ARES groups invovled in
Digital EMCOMMs and have LANS with their County EOCs on them, we certainly
will.  The question remains:  Once we are there, will John have reviewed his
present stand against WL2K and allow us to add the ESATCOM TCP/IP as yet
another layer on the Florida Layered Packet Network?

Another thing that is not clear to me:  If SEDAN has access to ESATCOM - are
they using BBS-to-BBS forwarding or keyboarding?  On the vhf SEDAN network
BBS to BBS forwarding is not allowed.

My recommendation is that you work with John for some initial testing so you
we will know how to use the ESATCOM TCP/IP for traffic forwarding so that
if, when we have more ARES groups and EOCs involved and John comes around,
we will be ready to use it.

73,
bud N0IA
386 574 4124

ARES® is a Registered Trademark of the ARRL.