Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 07:14 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default The protocol wars

The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

On Thu, 22 May 2003 15:36:47 GMT, "charlesb"
wrote:


Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.

When I say "actually does something" in this context, I'm not talking about
individual efforts, or small experimental networks, but instead I mean
large-scale, organized networks that make a difference in the real world.
All of the existing ones are AX25 networks.

To see these, go to: http://www.uspacket.net and push the "Network" button.
We have several packet networks in the U.S. that are in the "awesome"
category.

No "IP Only" packet network has even remotely approached the level of
usefulness I'm talking about.

That's a shame, because the benefits in using IP are obvious.

Still - The fact remains. Hams just do not appear to get excited about IP in
large numbers, and large numbers of participants is much more important than
winning or losing another battle in the protocol wars.

The idea is to get something done.

To cut through the obfuscation and nonsense involved in "protocol wars", the
attitude at USPN is that success talks and vapor systems walk. We look
around at what actually flies in the real ham radio world, and what doesn't.

What comes up here in the U.S. are AX25 systems, featuring 1.2kb access with
9.6 and some 19.2kb backbone links. On HF, the PACKET, CLOVER and PACTOR II
systems do more (from a networking standpoint) than the rest combined. The
sucessful networks all pretty much look this way. Take a look for yourself!

As far as experimental systems go, I've run across the same problem with the
multicast software I lean toward. It's use would be a real advance, it does
a lot more, etc. and so on, but the fact is that not very many hams are
excited about using it. No "critical mass".

I have heard numerous "critical mass" predictions related to amateur tcpip
over the years. When a hacked-up version of normal BBS code was patched onto
"NOS", critical mass was supposed to be just around the corner. That
flopped, so next it was the ability to use regular tcpip apps included with
operating systems that was supposed to bring on "critical mass".. That
flopped too. Now it's the wireless networking equipment. That will flop too,
so sorry. "Critical Mass" is not just around the corner.

The reason for it has nothing to do with mythical "killer apps", improved
networking protocol, or inexpensive wireless networking equipment. Fact is,
not many hams warm up to the IP stuff. They just don't go for it in
significant numbers. For whatever reason, that's how it goes.

So... When anybody asks me what is being used for digital amateur radio
networking, what really works and can be done at a reasonable cost, I
recommend AX25 packet with 1.2kb access, 9.6kb (or better) backbone. On HF,
PACKET, CLOVER or PACTOR II do the most work, PACTOR III is the best of the
best if you can afford it.

I am looking forward to being able to point out a significant achievement
from an amateur radio IP group, just as I would like to point out
significant use of multicast protocol. - But I can't do that right now, and
right now is when things need to be done.

It's nice to be able to kick back and put in years of debate over fine
points of the "protocol wars", but at USPN, we honor those who accomplish
things over those who talk about doing them. Networkers who design, build,
and maintain functional networks are our "experts"... The ones who walk the
walk. When it comes time to get things done (Now, for example) we look to
these great Hams to see what tools and methods are most likely to produce
good results.


Charles, N5PVL

http://www.uspacket.net


  #2   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 07:14 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

On Thu, 22 May 2003 15:36:47 GMT, "charlesb"
wrote:


Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.

When I say "actually does something" in this context, I'm not talking about
individual efforts, or small experimental networks, but instead I mean
large-scale, organized networks that make a difference in the real world.
All of the existing ones are AX25 networks.

To see these, go to: http://www.uspacket.net and push the "Network" button.
We have several packet networks in the U.S. that are in the "awesome"
category.

No "IP Only" packet network has even remotely approached the level of
usefulness I'm talking about.

That's a shame, because the benefits in using IP are obvious.

Still - The fact remains. Hams just do not appear to get excited about IP in
large numbers, and large numbers of participants is much more important than
winning or losing another battle in the protocol wars.

The idea is to get something done.

To cut through the obfuscation and nonsense involved in "protocol wars", the
attitude at USPN is that success talks and vapor systems walk. We look
around at what actually flies in the real ham radio world, and what doesn't.

What comes up here in the U.S. are AX25 systems, featuring 1.2kb access with
9.6 and some 19.2kb backbone links. On HF, the PACKET, CLOVER and PACTOR II
systems do more (from a networking standpoint) than the rest combined. The
sucessful networks all pretty much look this way. Take a look for yourself!

As far as experimental systems go, I've run across the same problem with the
multicast software I lean toward. It's use would be a real advance, it does
a lot more, etc. and so on, but the fact is that not very many hams are
excited about using it. No "critical mass".

I have heard numerous "critical mass" predictions related to amateur tcpip
over the years. When a hacked-up version of normal BBS code was patched onto
"NOS", critical mass was supposed to be just around the corner. That
flopped, so next it was the ability to use regular tcpip apps included with
operating systems that was supposed to bring on "critical mass".. That
flopped too. Now it's the wireless networking equipment. That will flop too,
so sorry. "Critical Mass" is not just around the corner.

The reason for it has nothing to do with mythical "killer apps", improved
networking protocol, or inexpensive wireless networking equipment. Fact is,
not many hams warm up to the IP stuff. They just don't go for it in
significant numbers. For whatever reason, that's how it goes.

So... When anybody asks me what is being used for digital amateur radio
networking, what really works and can be done at a reasonable cost, I
recommend AX25 packet with 1.2kb access, 9.6kb (or better) backbone. On HF,
PACKET, CLOVER or PACTOR II do the most work, PACTOR III is the best of the
best if you can afford it.

I am looking forward to being able to point out a significant achievement
from an amateur radio IP group, just as I would like to point out
significant use of multicast protocol. - But I can't do that right now, and
right now is when things need to be done.

It's nice to be able to kick back and put in years of debate over fine
points of the "protocol wars", but at USPN, we honor those who accomplish
things over those who talk about doing them. Networkers who design, build,
and maintain functional networks are our "experts"... The ones who walk the
walk. When it comes time to get things done (Now, for example) we look to
these great Hams to see what tools and methods are most likely to produce
good results.


Charles, N5PVL

http://www.uspacket.net


  #3   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 04:26 PM
Hank Oredson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
...
The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

On Thu, 22 May 2003 15:36:47 GMT, "charlesb"
wrote:


Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.



Camp 3: Uses AX.25, NET/ROM, TCP/IP and other protocols as needed.
If you are not in Camp 3 you are way behind the times.

--

... Hank

http://horedson.home.att.net
http://w0rli.home.att.net


  #4   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 04:26 PM
Hank Oredson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
...
The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

On Thu, 22 May 2003 15:36:47 GMT, "charlesb"
wrote:


Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.



Camp 3: Uses AX.25, NET/ROM, TCP/IP and other protocols as needed.
If you are not in Camp 3 you are way behind the times.

--

... Hank

http://horedson.home.att.net
http://w0rli.home.att.net


  #5   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 08:40 PM
D. Strang
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Hank Oredson" wrote
wrote

The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

"charlesb" wrote:

Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.


Camp 3: Uses AX.25, NET/ROM, TCP/IP and other protocols as needed.
If you are not in Camp 3 you are way behind the times.


Camp 4: Doesn't give a **** about the other camps, and enjoys their hobby.




  #6   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 08:40 PM
D. Strang
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Hank Oredson" wrote
wrote

The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

"charlesb" wrote:

Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.


Camp 3: Uses AX.25, NET/ROM, TCP/IP and other protocols as needed.
If you are not in Camp 3 you are way behind the times.


Camp 4: Doesn't give a **** about the other camps, and enjoys their hobby.


  #7   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 11:30 PM
Hank Oredson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"D. Strang" wrote in message
news:qCL1c.10130$m4.2870@okepread03...
"Hank Oredson" wrote
wrote

The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

"charlesb" wrote:

Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two

camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.


Camp 3: Uses AX.25, NET/ROM, TCP/IP and other protocols as needed.
If you are not in Camp 3 you are way behind the times.


Camp 4: Doesn't give a **** about the other camps, and enjoys their hobby.



Yes, that is exactly the same as what I said.
Why do you think otherwise?

--

... Hank

http://horedson.home.att.net
http://w0rli.home.att.net


  #8   Report Post  
Old March 4th 04, 11:30 PM
Hank Oredson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"D. Strang" wrote in message
news:qCL1c.10130$m4.2870@okepread03...
"Hank Oredson" wrote
wrote

The answer for ip to be atractive is old and known.....KISS

"charlesb" wrote:

Ahem! I hate to be the one to point this out, but there are two

camps
involved in packet radio today:

Camp 1: Talks about doing something with IP, at high-speed.

Camp 2: Actually does something with AX25, at low to medium speed.


Camp 3: Uses AX.25, NET/ROM, TCP/IP and other protocols as needed.
If you are not in Camp 3 you are way behind the times.


Camp 4: Doesn't give a **** about the other camps, and enjoys their hobby.



Yes, that is exactly the same as what I said.
Why do you think otherwise?

--

... Hank

http://horedson.home.att.net
http://w0rli.home.att.net


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017