[FADCA] HAMS using Internet

Mon Oct 22 09:17:25 EDT 2007

I refer to the BBS in probably closed terms,  "I" personally have no
need to use one on the packet side cause if I wanted to go to a BBS to
get information or current LB listings I can telnet in just like anyone
else that has an internet access can.  Take a poll on how many people
actually use a BBS on the VHF side and I don't think you'll see many,
like I said attention span how many people sit for hours to read the
latest bulletins (they have 20secs)if they get a disconnect they won't
log back on. You can listen to This Week In Amateur Radio news for that.
I may be wrong I'm willing to admit it!.

Hardened sites I know of 8 presently in Florida and 2 have PMBO's and I
know that DOD has two nationally, maybe that would be good information
to really know how many do have hardened sites.
Telpac killing BBS's I really doubt, BBS don't send email. Telpac don't
send FS, US, ect. bullet messages. BBS and Telpac send files and
resources.

I think using the internet for our own radio use is great.  "ampr" no I
was born last week on a banana boat out in the gulf stream.  I think the
54 series is a great set of devices to alter to do this sort of thing,
unfortunately they will catch on and stop making them like the Tripmate
and Earthmate GPS.

And the commercial side of internet,  any website you go to has a popup
ad or some sort of advertisement in it's header, doesn't matter what
site you go to if it's an open internet, if that ad is transmitted over
an amateur service and received it, it is a commercial service on
amateur radio.  

Providing internet to the general public, can you just imagine the
traffic going across your "amateur" internet provider, you'll have the
normal person looking at radar and the weather, you'll have the next
person looking at Myspace, facebook, and ebay, and the worse of all
you'll have some perv looking at things that you wouldn't want them
doing on your 2.4 wireless that they use when you don't lock it. Doesn't
matter how much you lock out all that nonsense they still find ways to
use it so why provide them with the opportunity just use it for the
radio service not for general public.

Don't get me wrong there are goods and bads on everything, but to say
that our efforts to advance to newer technology should be squashed
because one or two people don't understand it or don't want to use it is
like saying we as hams didn't want to advance radio from the sparkgap
days to SSB, god if this is the way it is now then most hams will no
longer be on the radio after 2013 when analog starts getting mandated on
all radio services. It will be HF and satellite and UPS and Google can
buy the rest of the spectrum.

73 Phil  

-----Original Message-----
From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jerry DeLong
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 10:14 AM
To: 'David Calder'; 'Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association'
Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet

David,

Your right... I disagree with the statement made by Phil. I think a
combination of both ax25 and SMTP mail are needed. As long as we are
going
to support legacy 1.2K and 9.6K Links and also maintain compatibles with
other radio network not moving forward with technology. 

Best regards, Jerry, KD4YAL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Calder [mailto:n4zkf at n4zkf.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 10:00 AM
> To: kd4yal at tampabay.rr.com; 'Florida Amateur Digital Communication
> Association'
> Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet
> 
> 
> 
> "I do agree that we don't have need for BBS's "
> 
> Is this not what was said in the first email????? I just copied and
pasted
> it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> On Behalf Of Jerry DeLong
> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 8:57 AM
> To: 'Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association'
> Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet
> 
> David,
> 
> I don't think anyone ever said Bbs were not needed.
> 
> Also see:
> 
> http://db0fhn-i.ampr.org/wrt54gs/
> 
> There are much better alternative to using ROSE, telpac and Winlink.
> 
> One just needs to look at what other states are doing remember Florida
is
> really the only place in the using US using ROSE.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards, Jerry, KD4YAL
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> > [mailto:fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> > On Behalf Of David Calder
> > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 7:19 AM
> > To: 'Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association'
> > Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet
> >
> >
> > 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
***-.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

_______________________________________________
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 ***-.