[FADCA] HAMS using Internet

Mon Oct 22 17:53:20 EDT 2007

Dave,

I don't think anyone wants to help "EMCOMMS" I believe I used the term
"end user" and Phil assume I was talking about PUBLIC access. The term
"end user" should have been more defined in the context of HAM "end users".

Best regards, Jerry, KD4YAL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> On Behalf Of n4zkf
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 5:00 PM
> To: fadca at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet
> 
> I'm starting to think we have two different groups here. Some who want to
> see a better "ham" radio network and some who want to see a better network
> for "EMCOMMS".
> 
> While I'm all for helping out in an emergency and have done so in many
> disasters, I, just as you don't want to spend my weekends "working" as you
> call it on a network for just the "general public". I don't want to help
> build it just from EMCOMMS and Email. I guess we all have our alterior
> motives.
> 
> 
> Dave
> 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:fadca-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> On Behalf Of kd4yal at tampabay.rr.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 11:26 AM
> To: Royce, Philip
> Cc: Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association
> Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet
> 
> Phil,
> 
> I still like to read packet bulletins there is still good information that
> you
> sometimes can't find anywhere else. As a user what would attract you to
> using a  bulletins board again?
> 
> I guess this was Charlie point.
> 
> **sigh**
> 
> When you talk about harden sites I believe this would prove to be very
> difficult  from a security stand point. From what I have seen in there
> area
> there aren't enough Network Professional willing to put forth the time and
> most don't understand the concept.
> 
> Most bbs can send email if they are setup to do so I even had axMail setup
> for Fpac to send email at one point. All flavors of xNos have native
> support
> for SMTP and POP3.
> 
> Actually Linksys has caught on and rather then creating a unhappy customer
> base
> they left the WRT54GL units on the market so people could use them for
> there
> wireless project. Any way there are other platforms out there just as
> cheap and
> easily modified.
> 
> As far as your comment about the Amprnet I am not sure what to say but
> these guys were way a head of there time. Most HAMS even as of today
> can't seem to understand the concept that why we are using protocols like
> Rose to build our networks.
> 
> I think maybe you are a little confuse to what would be consider
> commercial use
> and the use of for a fellow HAMS. For the second time no one would be
> selling or
> paying for a service. **END USERS** would be HAMs not the general public.
> 
> The Amprnet has evolved and matured further then any experimental HAM
> radio
> network in existences today. FACT
> 
> I would really like to where you found the word **PUBLIC** in anything I
> said.
> 
> During a time of emergency I could see helping emergency responder make
> there
> way to the Internet since this is the medium uses for business today but
> **NOT**
> the general public.
> 
> Nice spin...
> 
> 
> Best regards, Jerry, KD4YAL
> 
> 
> ---- "Royce wrote:> A quote from AMPR.
> 
> AMPRNet is not intended to be, and should not be used as, a substitute
> for buying access to the Internet from a local Internet Service
> Provider. It is, at this point in its evolution, an experimental network
> which should not be relied upon to provide consistent or dependable
> communications. As with ham radio itself, it is a hobbyist adventure.
> 
> "quote"( 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.")
> 
> It would be great to do, but there are lots of other ways to provide the
> public with internet, and I'm not spending my weekends working on
> projects for the general public, I'm doing it for the ham community and
> emergency services.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----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 6:24 AM
> To: 'Florida Amateur Digital Communication Association'
> Subject: RE: [FADCA] HAMS using Internet
> 
> 
> 
> Hello, Phil
> 
> Nice comments...
> 
> 
> Firewalls are easy to build and can easily control traffic the entire
> internet is constructed this way.
> 
> Did you forget we are HAMS.
> 
> I have 2 Linksys router converted to Linux that were purchased for 70$
> each
> and could have the range 6-10 mile @ 54-10 mb depending on the site they
> were setup at. They can also be modified for two serial ports for legacy
> TNC. All they need is a weather proof case and antenna.
> 
> This has already been done by other HAMS radio networks.
> 
> One of my Linksys router is already running Xnet...
> 
> If no one is paying for a service how is this consider commercial?
> 
> Perhaps you have not heard of the Amprnet? www.ampr.org
> 
> You are correct IPIP tunneling or VPN connection is a good option for
> site
> to site work as this is the way it is done on the Amprnet.
> 
> Shame on us for forgetting our roots the answer isn't always to go buy
> the
> new Kenwood or in this case Dstar.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards, Jerry, KD4YAL
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> -*** 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