[FADCA] HAMS using Internet

Sun Oct 21 07:18:42 EDT 2007

You might not think BBS's are a need. But the rest of the world outside
Florida does. Mine still runs 500+ bulletins
and personal traffic a day thru it as it has for 16 years. The VHF port I my
as well remove. But the HF side is alive
and well.

Yea, that's what we need proprietary D-Star...I thing your operative word is
"hardened" telpac sites. How many of those
are there? Does every telpac site in Florida have emergency backup?

If there was something other than ROSE, telpac and Winlink you might have
some more interest around here.

David Calder
n4zkf at n4zkf.com
www.n4zkf.com
dxc.n4zkf.com
DX cluster node 

-----Original Message-----
From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Royce, Philip
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 7:15 PM
To: kd4yal at tampabay.rr.com; Florida Amateur Digital Communication
Association
Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet

I agree with the principle of the TCP-IP based RF links because I use them
for Public Safety needs.  But the we as public safety are limited to the
secure IP addresses that are for the equipment they are serving(audio and
video).  

Having an open internet service over an amateur radio service is not only
expensive system but is not allowed in FCC rules, no commecial use of
amateur radio frequencies is allow.  The minute that you allow someone to go
onto a website (IE google, msn, ect.) you have brought in a commercial means
of a non commercial service.  

But if you use the internet as a TCP-IP RF link between hardware and only
are sending non-commercial audio, video, or data from one amateur service to
another one it's is fine.  

People have a 20 sec mentality with anything radio, packet, internet, it's
gonna have to be how you sell it and how you really need to use it and how
much money you have to operate it.

And I'm not sure how it is figured that packet has gone to the wayside we
have promoted and use on a daily basis our telpac and emergency traffic
handling. I do agree that we don't have need for BBS's due to the internet
but I believe that we are in a uphill climb with the  use of packet due to
the Emergency Management in the county's and the State that have finally
shown interest.  There won't be any internet in residence home when a storm
hits but we will still have data capabilities in our hardened telpac sites.

But I don't want to stir up another ant's nest like the last series of
emails, but without having a statewide or regionalwide nonprofit
organization that can take donations and afford to purchase equipment, tower
rents, and personnel to service this type of system a high baudrate wide
bandwidth system will not happen any time soon, we would be better off all
buying a Dstar system for every county and installing it at a mutual aid
tower site under the umbrella of interoperability with the state.

73 Phil

________________________________

From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net on behalf of Jerry DeLong
Sent: Sat 10/20/2007 6:27 PM
To: 'Charles S. Schuman'
Cc: 'Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association'
Subject: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet

Charlie,

First off, I welcome your opinion.

This is entirely my opinion and since you opened the door and I am going to
share with others.

History will show that this isn't entirely true there are a lot of reason
why packet radio has gone to the

way-side. From what I have seen in this area first hand is the politics and
narrow minded thinking have

killed our radio networks time and time again. I believe the internet has
played a small part in this but

very small and slow speeds a close second.

You need to look into the future TCPIP is and always going to be the norm
and works well at all speeds

even on RF. These days all PC have Web Browser and everyone at almost every
age group knows how

to use them. This is a easy way for people to login from the Internet and/or
RF so they **will** become

interested again. We need users in order to grow our network, users need to
see that Packet is cool and

exciting or they will just continue using the Internet and packet will die.

We are at the point now were we could be supplying end users with free
Internet access and free email,

digital voice traffic with just the cost of their own equipment. This type
of technology will bring back

users but these type of network require TCPIP. The equipment needs could be
purchased pretty cheap.

Don't get me wrong I really do believe in RF but a combination of the two
can make for a more robust

network.

Example:

My first Internet connection ever was via 19.2K baud packet link to KD4IDR
in the mid 90's and work

like a champ.

I was using the World Wide Web via Ham Radio downloading software and
sending email the real deal.

We brought this to the attention of the local packet groups and no one could
see the big picture. Infect

only 2 people in the entire SWF area would participate and would finally
lose interest. Actually one lost

interest and the other was pushed toward ROSE/Fpac because he didn't
understand TCPIP.

This was 10 years ago. 

We control the destiny of Packet Radio so if it die it's because we didn't
keep up with technology and

not because HAMS would rather use the internet.

Best regards, Jerry, KD4YAL

  _____ 

From: Charles S. Schuman [mailto:k4gbb1 at earthlink.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 3:29 PM
To: kd4yal at tampabay.rr.com
Subject: RE: Fpac __TCP__

Normally I would applaud your effort, but The idea behind FPAC is to use the
internet to extend HAM radio.  A Web based FPAC node would extend the
internet. Internet e-mail killed radio based BBSes.   Web based interfaces
into radio interfaces would encourage HAMs to use the internet and forget
about the radio end of the  network. Pretty soon the guys and gals that
maintain the radio part move on and the network goes to HELL again.

This is not a condemnation of your work... just a Old Fart's point of view.

<<Charlie>>

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry DeLong
Sent: Oct 20, 2007 1:38 PM
To: "'Charles S. Schuman'"
Subject: RE: Fpac __TCP__

Charlie,

I agree with you but I have anther project I was working on a while back
using

Java base telnet via a secure http connection. This would give Fpac a sudo
web

Interface.

I did have this working for Xnet and wanted to try it with Fpac.

Jerry

_______________________________________________
FADCA mailing list
FADCA at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fadca

.-=== Message Scanned by Alachua County McAfee Webshield Appliance ===-.

.-*** Message Scanned by Alachua County McAfee Webshield Appliance ***-.