From HappyAgent@hotmail.com Sat Nov 01 21:16:24 1997 Received: from linux1.pdq.net (linux1.pdq.net [208.142.200.100]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id VAA14244 for ; Sat, 1 Nov 1997 21:16:23 -0600 (CST) From: HappyAgent@hotmail.com Received: from hotmail.com (iah-ppp0128.iamerica.net [205.173.254.37]) by linux1.pdq.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA31253 for ; Sat, 1 Nov 1997 21:26:14 -0600 Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 21:26:14 -0600 Message-Id: <199711020326.VAA31253@linux1.pdq.net> To: Subject: Web Promotion Spider Priority: First-Class Automate your site registration with 300+ Search Engines!! For only $49.95 you can buy the software that can put you in the top 100!! ************************************************************************************* http://www.marketcom.com/MySpiderSite/welcome.htm From beltrani@hawaii.edu Sun Nov 02 01:55:20 1997 Received: from relay1.Hawaii.Edu (root@relay1.Hawaii.Edu [128.171.3.53]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id BAA17048 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 1997 01:55:18 -0600 (CST) Received: from uhunix4.its.Hawaii.Edu ([128.171.44.54]) by relay1.Hawaii.Edu with SMTP id <587728(1)>; Sat, 1 Nov 1997 21:55:00 -1000 Received: from localhost by uhunix4.its.Hawaii.Edu with SMTP id <216724(5)>; Sat, 1 Nov 1997 21:54:55 -1000 Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 21:54:52 -1000 From: Paul A Beltrani X-Sender: beltrani@uhunix4 Reply-To: Paul A Beltrani To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1788] Web Promotion Spider In-Reply-To: <199711020326.VAA31253@linux1.pdq.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 1 Nov 1997 a spammer wrote: > Automate your site registration with 300+ Search Engines!! > For only $49.95 you can buy the software that can put you in the top 100!! > ... www.marketcom.com ... The upstream provider for Marketcom (marketcom.com) is Anawave Software (anawave.com) Internic lists the toll free number for Anawave Software as : 800 711-6030 Please call them during CA business hours and let them them know that they are providing services for someone who spams net lists. Reputable ISP's do not condone this type of netabuse. Please be polite and do NOT give them your email address. - Paul Beltrani, AH6NU From N8BLK@aol.com Sun Nov 02 11:22:15 1997 Received: from emout39.mail.aol.com (emout39.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.73]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id LAA20911 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 1997 11:22:13 -0600 (CST) From: N8BLK@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by emout39.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id MAA26487 for ss@tapr.org; Sun, 2 Nov 1997 12:21:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 12:21:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971102120951_-1307479865@emout03.mail.aol.com> To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1789] Re: Web Promotion Spider In a message dated 97-11-02 03:37:58 EST, you write: > Please call them during CA business hours and let them > them know that they are providing services for someone > who spams net lists. Reputable ISP's do not condone > this type of netabuse. Please be polite and > do NOT give them your email address. I'ld also suggest calling from a payphone as all calls to an 800 or 888 number are recorded and provided to verify billing. I doubt you want more sales phone calls either. -art clemons- From vk2tds@ozemail.com.au Sun Nov 02 22:57:45 1997 Received: from server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net [203.108.7.41]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA28536 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 1997 22:57:43 -0600 (CST) Received: from oznet02.ozemail.com.au (oznet02.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.124]) by server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA22944 for ; Mon, 3 Nov 1997 15:57:31 +1100 (EST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (slsyd20p29.ozemail.com.au [203.108.24.45]) by oznet02.ozemail.com.au (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA13954 for ; Mon, 3 Nov 1997 15:57:29 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <345C0863.B089417B@ozemail.com.au> Date: Sun, 02 Nov 1997 15:58:11 +1100 From: Darryl Smith X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Wavelan (2.4 GHz) at 100 KM/Hr? References: <199711030327.VAA22567@tapr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi there... Whilst I was in the USA I nuked my Linux HD. When I contacted a friend at work to get some help to fix it, he mentioned that he is working on a solar car project for Uni. He is wanting to use the WAVELAN (or similar) card for telemetry. Is this completelyt stupid at these speeds? Acording to LEE's book on mobile cellular comunications rayleigh fading will occour, and will increase with frequency and speed. Questions... a) If DSSS better under these conditions than FHSS? b) Is it totally stupid to use such a link at such speeds (bit rate and ground speed) c) Is the preformance whilst moving much better for wavelan (or similar) at 900 MHz rather than 2.5 GHz? Many thanks Darryl Smith, VK2TDS From fred@tekdata.com Mon Nov 03 10:18:12 1997 Received: from tekdata.com (poolf4-011.wwa.com [207.241.63.204]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id KAA25982; Mon, 3 Nov 1997 10:18:03 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (fred@localhost) by tekdata.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA16540; Mon, 3 Nov 1997 09:23:23 -0600 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 09:23:23 -0600 (CST) From: "Frederick M. Spinner" To: ss@tapr.org, dsp@tapr.org Subject: Signoff Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sorry to tie up the bandwidth, but I've tried multiple times and ways to unsubscribe to these lists (via e-mail listproc signoff messages, and from the TAPR web site). I'm changing employers, and moving, so I really need these lists turned off. P.S. the signoffs to APRSSIG and MIC-E worked. Thanks. Fred M. Spinner, KA9VAW From N7PWW@aol.com Tue Nov 04 18:41:25 1997 Received: from mb16.mail.aol.com (mb16.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.31]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id SAA28994 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 18:41:23 -0600 (CST) From: N7PWW@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by mb16.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-2.0.0) id TAA22425 for ss@tapr.org; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:40:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:40:47 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971104193753_-1744716128@mrin41.mail.aol.com> To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1792] Signoff I'm having the same problem. How to unsubcribe. N7PWW From nielsen@primenet.com Tue Nov 04 20:44:17 1997 Received: from smtp03.primenet.com (smtp03.primenet.com [206.165.5.84]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id UAA10093 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 20:44:12 -0600 (CST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp03.primenet.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA24507; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:44:07 -0700 (MST) Received: from nielsen.tus.primenet.com(198.68.42.82) via SMTP by smtp03.primenet.com, id smtpd024493; Tue Nov 4 19:44:02 1997 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by nielsen.tus.primenet.com with smtp (ident nielsen using rfc1413) id m0xSvRn-001LqqC (Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:43:59 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:43:59 -0700 (MST) From: Bob Nielsen X-Sender: nielsen@nielsen.tus.primenet.com Reply-To: Bob Nielsen To: N7PWW@aol.com cc: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1793] Re: Signoff In-Reply-To: <971104193753_-1744716128@mrin41.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 4 Nov 1997 N7PWW@aol.com wrote: > I'm having the same problem. How to unsubcribe. Per the help file, send a message to 'listproc@tapr.org' with the following text in the body of the message: unsubscribe -OR- signoff ---- Bob Nielsen Internet: nielsen@primenet.com Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: w6swe@w6swe.ampr.org http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen From wd5ivd@tapr.org Mon Nov 10 14:39:38 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id OAA09584 for ; Mon, 10 Nov 1997 14:39:16 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 14:34:05 -0600 To: " Spread Spectrum " From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: New TAPR Weg Pages On-Line Finally had a chance to get all the various things from the DCC on-line. Two items of specific interest to this group will be: http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/taprfhss.html which is the TAPR FHSS Project Page. Contains the paper presented at the DCC, audio of that paper presentation, audio from the segment during the SS Seminar on Sunday covering the radio, and two quicktime movies with Bob Stricklin showing off the alpha boards and one discussing issues and concepts. The second is http://www.tapr.org/dcc All the audio from the various presentations are on-line as well as photos from the DCC. The entire Sunday SS seminar audio and overheads are up, except Dewayne's which I am expecting today. Have fun. Lots of good information presented. Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From RLANIER@mailb.harris.com Sat Nov 15 19:57:11 1997 Received: from suc1a.harris.com (suc1a.corp.harris.com [137.237.104.13]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id TAA22509 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 1997 19:57:09 -0600 (CST) Received: from mailb.harris.com (eds-email-1.ess.harris.com [130.41.38.127]) by suc1a.harris.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA20648 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 1997 20:57:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by mailb.harris.com (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 46e52060; Sat, 15 Nov 97 20:53:10 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 17:32:23 -0500 Message-ID: <46e52060@mailb.harris.com> Return-receipt-to: RLANIER@mailb.harris.com (RLANIER) From: RLANIER@mailb.harris.com (RLANIER) Subject: FHSS Radio Questions To: ss@tapr.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Hi all, Since this list has been quite lately, I thought I would through out some questions on this new radio from TAPR ... I was reading through the FHSS radio design paper written by Tom McDermott, et al, and have a few questions: 1) Is the 100:1 spreading ratio stated in the paper due to the fact that the dwell time on each slot is 10 ms? 2) Why did the strong narrow-band carriers in Dallas render the part-15 DSSS radios inoperative? 3) Why not utilize a full-duplex system? Tony KE4ATO From davek@komacke.com Sun Nov 16 02:23:33 1997 Received: from komacke.com (mg131-164.ricochet.net [204.179.131.164]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id CAA08548 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 02:23:20 -0600 (CST) Received: from dakota.kobie.komacke.com (dakota.kobie.komacke.com [192.168.2.3]) by komacke.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA02639 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 00:23:13 -0800 Message-Id: <199711160823.AAA02639@komacke.com> X-Header1: Finger for my PGP key X-Sender: davepost@mailhost.komacke.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro 4.0 Beta 6 (build 221) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 00:22:41 -0800 To: ss@tapr.org From: Dave Koberstein Subject: Re: [SS:1796] FHSS Radio Questions In-Reply-To: <46e52060@mailb.harris.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Tony, 1) The spreading ratio in FHSS would be do to the number of frequencies, not the duration of time spent on each frequency. 2) Not familiar with the example. However, I suspect it underscores the difference between FHSS and DSSS. In DSSS, if the narrow band interferor exceeds the processing gain (10*log(number-of-chips)), it fails catastrophically. For FHSS, it fails only for that frequency - excluding adjacent-channel effects in the receiver. 3) Full duplex implies Tx is on a different frequency than Rx. This independent from DSSS/FHSS. Davek At 08:18 PM 11/15/97 -0600, you wrote: >=A0=A0=A0=A0 Hi all, >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 Since this list has been quite lately, I thought I would= through out=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 some questions on this new radio from TAPR ... >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 I was reading through the FHSS radio design paper written by= Tom=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 McDermott, et al, and have a few questions: >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 1) Is the 100:1 spreading ratio stated in the paper due to the= fact=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 that the dwell time on each slot is 10 ms? >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 2) Why did the strong narrow-band carriers in Dallas render= the=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 part-15 DSSS radios inoperative? >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 3) Why not utilize a full-duplex system? >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0=20 >=A0=A0=A0=A0 Tony=A0=A0 KE4ATO > > -------------------- End of Original ----------------------------------= =20 ____________________________________________________________ Dave Koberstein keep in touch: davek@komacke.com / www.komacke.com work: davek@proxim.com / www.proxim.com ham internet: n9dk@n9dk.ampr.org [44.4.12.172] (ax.25/PBBS: n9dk@w6yx.#nocal.ca.usa.noam) From kd4vhg@radio.org Sun Nov 16 11:05:59 1997 Received: from wa4mei.radio.org (wa4mei.radio.org [198.252.175.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id LAA11047 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 11:05:56 -0600 (CST) Received: by wa4mei.radio.org (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.8) id ; Sun, 16 Nov 97 12:05 EST Message-ID: <346F27BD.4AAF@radio.org> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 12:05:01 -0500 From: John Scott Reply-To: kd4vhg@radio.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: FHSS Radio Questions References: <199711160823.AAA02639@komacke.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have two questions about the FHSS radio. 1. Any chance of getting a RS232 serial port? I can think of a couple of applications that I don't have ethernet capibility, but would like to have a high throughput data link ( >19200 ). 2. Any ideas yet of what these units may cost? I understand that it is still early in the development, but I would like to know if I need to sell my car to afford a couple of these radio's. Thanks a lot, it sounds like a great project. -John Scott kd4vhg From wd5ivd@tapr.org Sun Nov 16 11:51:34 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id LAA21529 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 11:51:32 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <346F27BD.4AAF@radio.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 11:49:01 -0600 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1798] FHSS Radio Questions >I have two questions about the FHSS radio. > >1. Any chance of getting a RS232 serial port? I can think of a couple >of applications that I don't have ethernet capibility, but would like to >have a high throughput data link ( >19200 ). On the current project no. >2. Any ideas yet of what these units may cost? I understand that it is >still early in the development, but I would like to know if I need to >sell my car to afford a couple of these radio's. Details as they stand are on http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/fhss.html There will be no cost or delivery details for sometime. > it sounds like a great project. Yes and we have a bunch of good folks working on it. Although just becuase we have one project going, we need to be doing other things as well. We are looking at doing some with a WaveLAN OEM board, but if anyoe else on the list have thoughts about equipment that might be available to people .... let everyone on the list know. We have a lot of people wanting to get on the air with something, but don't have anything yet. The TAPR FHSS Radio Project is many months away from being available to everyone. Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From jeff@mich.com Sun Nov 16 14:32:17 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id OAA05765 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 14:32:15 -0600 (CST) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA25050 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 16:35:05 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971116153210.0373f2c0@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 15:32:10 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1798] FHSS Radio Questions In-Reply-To: <346F27BD.4AAF@radio.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:20 AM 11/16/97 -0600, John Scott wrote: >I have two questions about the FHSS radio. > >1. Any chance of getting a RS232 serial port? I can think of a couple >of applications that I don't have ethernet capibility, but would like to >have a high throughput data link ( >19200 ). Check out the FreeWave radios, they have a RS-232 port which will go up to 230kbps. They are at http://www.freewave.com Regards, ------------------------------------ | Jeff King Aero Data Systems | | jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | | (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | |F(810)471-0279 United States | ------------------------------------ From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Sun Nov 16 17:31:46 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id RAA12167; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 17:31:41 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25174; Sun, 16 Nov 97 17:31:39 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com (c05dialin_26) by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20101; Sun, 16 Nov 97 17:29:46 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 17:30:11 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF2B5.4AA8A560.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'Greg Jones'" , "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1796] FHSS Radio Questions Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 17:30:10 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg: apparently I am not on the TAPR SS list. Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com -----Original Message----- From: ss@tapr.org [SMTP:ss@tapr.org] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 1997 10:15 PM To: Tom McDermott Subject: [SS:1796] FHSS Radio Questions Tom --- are you on the TAPR SS list ? Greg ----- Hi all, Since this list has been quite lately, I thought I would through out some questions on this new radio from TAPR ... I was reading through the FHSS radio design paper written by Tom McDermott, et al, and have a few questions: 1) Is the 100:1 spreading ratio stated in the paper due to the fact that the dwell time on each slot is 10 ms? 2) Why did the strong narrow-band carriers in Dallas render the part-15 DSSS radios inoperative? 3) Why not utilize a full-duplex system? Tony KE4ATO From vk2tds@ozemail.com.au Sun Nov 16 18:54:48 1997 Received: from server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net [203.108.7.41]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id SAA01904 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 18:54:45 -0600 (CST) Received: from oznet07.ozemail.com.au (oznet07.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.122]) by server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA05227 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 11:54:42 +1100 (EST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (slsyd20p30.ozemail.com.au [203.108.24.46]) by oznet07.ozemail.com.au (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA06552 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 11:54:39 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <346F95A4.7BE3763E@ozemail.com.au> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 11:53:56 +1100 From: Darryl Smith X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1796] SS digest 428 References: <199711160225.UAA28008@tapr.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms39CC5383AA0FE1CF1BD68CD0" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms39CC5383AA0FE1CF1BD68CD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > 2) Why did the strong narrow-band carriers in Dallas render the > part-15 DSSS radios inoperative? SS will only give an advantage from narrow band of the spreading gain. Therefore if we get a powerful tranmitter much closer than the SS transmitter it will swamp the signal. Also the narrow band signal will increase the error rate on the channel. > > > 3) Why not utilize a full-duplex system? Full duplex requires either a 30db maximum transmit/recieve signal difference if transmitting on the same frequency at the same time, or operating on two frequencies. The two frequencies really need to be on different bands too. The problem is that this really creates a problem creating a network rather than a collection of links. In a multi-point to central point, or multi-point to multi-point network half duplex is the only way to go (for more reasons look at my thesis on the TAPR www site). Darryl Smith VK2TDS --------------ms39CC5383AA0FE1CF1BD68CD0 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIIQngYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIQjzCCEIsCAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMAsGCSqGSIb3DQEHAaCC DwwwggpWMIIJv6ADAgECAhBNufKq2fQxOKEMhZogsXYtMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMGIxETAP BgNVBAcTCEludGVybmV0MRcwFQYDVQQKEw5WZXJpU2lnbiwgSW5jLjE0MDIGA1UECxMrVmVy aVNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMSBDQSAtIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3Vic2NyaWJlcjAeFw05NzA4MDIwMDAw MDBaFw05ODA4MDIyMzU5NTlaMIIBHjERMA8GA1UEBxMISW50ZXJuZXQxFzAVBgNVBAoTDlZl cmlTaWduLCBJbmMuMTQwMgYDVQQLEytWZXJpU2lnbiBDbGFzcyAxIENBIC0gSW5kaXZpZHVh bCBTdWJzY3JpYmVyMUYwRAYDVQQLEz13d3cudmVyaXNpZ24uY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvQ1BT IEluY29ycC4gYnkgUmVmLixMSUFCLkxURChjKTk2MTMwMQYDVQQLEypEaWdpdGFsIElEIENs YXNzIDEgLSBOZXRzY2FwZSBGdWxsIFNlcnZpY2UxFzAVBgNVBAMTDkRhcnJ5bCBSIFNtaXRo MSQwIgYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhV2azJ0ZHNAb3plbWFpbC5jb20uYXUwXDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEF AANLADBIAkEA5epUXt4wi7NNoSMZh+g9NiY0qzeKimvVAaeVVzkYN6q0nx0NzRVJKaTQ8BQ1 vs7GUCteoAX9QBiDqH4FYDfVXQIDAQABo4IHkTCCB40wCQYDVR0TBAIwADCCAh8GA1UdAwSC AhYwggISMIICDjCCAgoGC2CGSAGG+EUBBwEBMIIB+RaCAadUaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIGlu Y29ycG9yYXRlcyBieSByZWZlcmVuY2UsIGFuZCBpdHMgdXNlIGlzIHN0cmljdGx5IHN1Ympl Y3QgdG8sIHRoZSBWZXJpU2lnbiBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFByYWN0aWNlIFN0YXRlbWVudCAo Q1BTKSwgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0OiBodHRwczovL3d3dy52ZXJpc2lnbi5jb20vQ1BTOyBieSBF LW1haWwgYXQgQ1BTLXJlcXVlc3RzQHZlcmlzaWduLmNvbTsgb3IgYnkgbWFpbCBhdCBWZXJp U2lnbiwgSW5jLiwgMjU5MyBDb2FzdCBBdmUuLCBNb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3LCBDQSA5NDA0MyBV U0EgVGVsLiArMSAoNDE1KSA5NjEtODgzMCBDb3B5cmlnaHQgKGMpIDE5OTYgVmVyaVNpZ24s IEluYy4gIEFsbCBSaWdodHMgUmVzZXJ2ZWQuIENFUlRBSU4gV0FSUkFOVElFUyBESVNDTEFJ TUVEIGFuZCBMSUFCSUxJVFkgTElNSVRFRC6gDgYMYIZIAYb4RQEHAQEBoQ4GDGCGSAGG+EUB BwEBAjAsMCoWKGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnZlcmlzaWduLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5L0NQUyAwEQYJ YIZIAYb4QgEBBAQDAgeAMDYGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQpFidodHRwczovL3d3dy52ZXJpc2lnbi5j b20vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS9DUFMwggSHBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EggR4FoIEdENBVVRJT046IFRoZSBD b21tb24gTmFtZSBpbiB0aGlzIENsYXNzIDEgRGlnaXRhbCAKSUQgaXMgbm90IGF1dGhlbnRp Y2F0ZWQgYnkgVmVyaVNpZ24uIEl0IG1heSBiZSB0aGUKaG9sZGVyJ3MgcmVhbCBuYW1lIG9y IGFuIGFsaWFzLiBWZXJpU2lnbiBkb2VzIGF1dGgtCmVudGljYXRlIHRoZSBlLW1haWwgYWRk cmVzcyBvZiB0aGUgaG9sZGVyLgoKVGhpcyBjZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBpbmNvcnBvcmF0ZXMgYnkg cmVmZXJlbmNlLCBhbmQgCml0cyB1c2UgaXMgc3RyaWN0bHkgc3ViamVjdCB0bywgdGhlIFZl cmlTaWduIApDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFByYWN0aWNlIFN0YXRlbWVudCAoQ1BTKSwgYXZhaWxh YmxlCmluIHRoZSBWZXJpU2lnbiByZXBvc2l0b3J5IGF0OiAKaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudmVyaXNp Z24uY29tOyBieSBFLW1haWwgYXQKQ1BTLXJlcXVlc3RzQHZlcmlzaWduLmNvbTsgb3IgYnkg bWFpbCBhdCBWZXJpU2lnbiwKSW5jLiwgMjU5MyBDb2FzdCBBdmUuLCBNb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3 LCBDQSA5NDA0MyBVU0EKCkNvcHlyaWdodCAoYykxOTk2IFZlcmlTaWduLCBJbmMuICBBbGwg UmlnaHRzIApSZXNlcnZlZC4gQ0VSVEFJTiBXQVJSQU5USUVTIERJU0NMQUlNRUQgQU5EIApM SUFCSUxJVFkgTElNSVRFRC4KCldBUk5JTkc6IFRIRSBVU0UgT0YgVEhJUyBDRVJUSUZJQ0FU RSBJUyBTVFJJQ1RMWQpTVUJKRUNUIFRPIFRIRSBWRVJJU0lHTiBDRVJUSUZJQ0FUSU9OIFBS QUNUSUNFClNUQVRFTUVOVC4gIFRIRSBJU1NVSU5HIEFVVEhPUklUWSBESVNDTEFJTVMgQ0VS VEFJTgpJTVBMSUVEIEFORCBFWFBSRVNTIFdBUlJBTlRJRVMsIElOQ0xVRElORyBXQVJSQU5U SUVTCk9GIE1FUkNIQU5UQUJJTElUWSBPUiBGSVRORVNTIEZPUiBBIFBBUlRJQ1VMQVIKUFVS UE9TRSwgQU5EIFdJTEwgTk9UIEJFIExJQUJMRSBGT1IgQ09OU0VRVUVOVElBTCwKUFVOSVRJ VkUsIEFORCBDRVJUQUlOIE9USEVSIERBTUFHRVMuIFNFRSBUSEUgQ1BTCkZPUiBERVRBSUxT LgoKQ29udGVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFZlcmlTaWduIHJlZ2lzdGVyZWQKbm9udmVyaWZpZWRTdWJq ZWN0QXR0cmlidXRlcyBleHRlbnNpb24gdmFsdWUgc2hhbGwgCm5vdCBiZSBjb25zaWRlcmVk IGFzIGFjY3VyYXRlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIHZhbGlkYXRlZCAKYnkgdGhlIElBLjCBhgYKYIZI AYb4RQEGAwR4FnZkNDY1MmJkNjNmMjA0NzAyOTI5ODc2M2M5ZDJmMjc1MDY5YzczNTliZWQx YjA1OWRhNzViYzRiYzk3MDE3NDdkYTVjN2Y0MTQxYmVhZGIyYmQyZTg5MjA2YWY2ZWY3ZDIx MTQ5OWJhMmJkNDNmNGU0OTY2NTQxMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBACaQJ/F/Ua1uvUoqnGNn +RETaY3OsPW/BYrVi/xwM5N95x1HwN/Vhmz5FsXMXuTHnL61RSoV6VlshTv7+Xkw+hyOC1ne fhbVJj1g93oRPJE2+iJpU6U5MFAB7lzH/fszM4ePZe3VnNl3N2xk0PfHBx76sX+kT32ttOtw om3XDLSBMIICeTCCAeKgAwIBAgIQUh81HfJwfgArvspZhwTVOTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFADBf MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVyaVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNz IDEgUHVibGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcNOTYwNjI3MDAw MDAwWhcNOTkwNjI3MjM1OTU5WjBiMREwDwYDVQQHEwhJbnRlcm5ldDEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVy aVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNDAyBgNVBAsTK1ZlcmlTaWduIENsYXNzIDEgQ0EgLSBJbmRpdmlkdWFs IFN1YnNjcmliZXIwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBALYUps9N0AUN2Moj0G+q tCmSY44s+G+W1y6ddksRsTaNV8nD/RzGuv4eCLozypXqvuNbzQaot3kdRCrtc/KxUoNoEHBk kdc+a/n3XZ0UQ5tul0WYgUfRLcvdu3LXTD9xquJA8lQ5vBbuz3zsuts/bCqzFrGGEp2ukzTV uNXQ9z6pAgMBAAGjMzAxMA8GA1UdEwQIMAYBAf8CAQEwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMBEGCWCGSAGG +EIBAQQEAwIBBjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFAAOBgQDB+vcC51fKEXXGnAz6K3dPh0UXO+PSwdoP WDmOrpWZA6GooTj+eZqTFwuXhjnHymg0ZrvHiEX2yAwF7r6XJe/g1G7kf512XM59uhSirguf +2dbSKVnJa8ZZIj2ctgpJ6o3EmqxKK8ngxhlbI3tQJ5NxHiohuzpLFC/pvkN27CmSjCCAjEw ggGaAgUCpAAAATANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFADBfMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVy aVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNzIDEgUHVibGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcNOTYwMTI5MDAwMDAwWhcNOTkxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjBfMQswCQYD VQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVyaVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNzIDEgUHVi bGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAD gY0AMIGJAoGBAOUZv22jVmEtmUhx9mfeuY3rt56GgAqRDvo4Ja9GiILlc6igmyRdDR/MZW4M sNBWhBiHmgabEKFz37RYOWtuwfYV1aioP6oSBo0xrH+wNNePNGeICc0UEeJORVZpH3gCgNrc R5EpuzbJY1zF4Ncth3uhtzKwezC6Ki8xqu6jZ9rbAgMBAAEwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQECBQADgYEA UnO6mlXc3D+CfbCQmGIqgkx2AG4lPdXCCXBXAQwPdx8YofscYA6gdTtJIUH+p1wtTEJJ0/8o 2Izqnf7JB+J3glMj3lXzzkST+vpMvco281tmsp7I8gxeXtShtCEJM8o7WfySwjj8rdmWJOAt +qMp9TNoeE60vJ9pNeKomJRzO8QxggFaMIIBVgIBATB2MGIxETAPBgNVBAcTCEludGVybmV0 MRcwFQYDVQQKEw5WZXJpU2lnbiwgSW5jLjE0MDIGA1UECxMrVmVyaVNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMSBD QSAtIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3Vic2NyaWJlcgIQTbnyqtn0MTihDIWaILF2LTAJBgUrDgMCGgUA oH0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNOTcxMTE3MDA1 MzU3WjAeBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xETAPMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgEoMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBTT 1Bn25d4/vWgdTHSeOhgp26FocDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAARA0ep2lNYUyUK5NBjx664/SK3p vqGeylxWBSsLLwQ5mQp0A5/f1AOddGVxZjc1drxS9VOfrEjhnTMhWJAa5rsZBw== --------------ms39CC5383AA0FE1CF1BD68CD0-- From lfry@mindspring.com Mon Nov 17 06:15:00 1997 Received: from camel8.mindspring.com (camel8.mindspring.com [207.69.200.58]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id GAA03717 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 06:14:59 -0600 (CST) Received: from glory (user-2k7i199.dialup.mindspring.com [168.121.5.41]) by camel8.mindspring.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA22333 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 06:25:30 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19971117102545.00da9b7c@mindspring.com> X-Sender: lfry@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 05:25:45 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Lee W. Fry" Subject: Ethernet MAC Ran across an interesting "glue" chip while trying to fix up some broken links on my web site. ATMEL MAC 110 Ethernet media access controller: http://www.atmel.com/atmel/acrobat/doc0879.pdf AA0JP From LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Mon Nov 17 12:29:07 1997 Received: from ns1.eds.com (ns1.eds.com [192.85.154.78]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id MAA27981 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:29:02 -0600 (CST) From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Received: from nnsa.eds.com (nnsa.eds.com [130.174.31.78]) by ns1.eds.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA12780 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:29:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from DNET.EDS.COM (dnet.eds.com [130.174.31.77]) by nnsa.eds.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA04276 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:28:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by DNET.EDS.COM (Soft-Switch LMS 2.0) with snapi via DMNCEC id 0095000006169674; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:26:52 -0500 To: ss Subject: Another FHSS radio question Message-ID: <0095000006169674000002L042*@MHS> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 13:26:52 -0500 The article on the TAPR web page indicated that the radio links supported would be point to point only. Am I correct in understanding that a repeater would require 1 tranceiver for each pair of stations that is attempting to use it? The terrain here in middle Tennesee has a lot of hills. I am trying to understand how badly this would affect the amateur stations in the area. When the FHSS kit is available, is it possible that a thinwire eithernet to twisted pair adapter can also be sourced as an option. At the size of my network, thinwire is much more economical than twisted pair, as I do not have the cost of a hub. As far as Scott's request about adapting a serial device to an eithernet port, their are two main options: 1. Use a PC. Ethernet cards for 8088 and above can be had for $15.00 in some of the catalogs that I get. You can probably find an old 386 pc cheap. Use your choice of O.S. 2. Several vendors sell such an adaptor in mulitport and single port units. You can probably find a lot of them on the used market. Some vendor names are EMULEX, XYPLEX, LANTRONICS, ABLE, DIGITAL. Make sure that the unit supports TCP/IP. Beware, some units require a host download when they power up before they can function. In my case the eithernet interface makes it easier for me to connect my host. This brings up another question. Will special drivers be needed to connect to the FHSS radio, or will standard TCP/IP be able to be used? My host system can not run Intel binaries for device drivers. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Mon Nov 17 12:48:14 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id MAA06504 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:47:57 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06532; Mon, 17 Nov 97 12:47:56 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03855; Mon, 17 Nov 97 12:47:54 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:48:27 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF357.19948780.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Cc: "'mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com'" Subject: RE: [1796] FHSS Radio Questions Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:48:26 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg has been kind enough to subscribe me to this list. Tony asks some questions regarding our FHSS design experience. I'll try to answer them as best I can. Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com ----- Hi all, Since this list has been quite lately, I thought I would through out some questions on this new radio from TAPR ... I was reading through the FHSS radio design paper written by Tom McDermott, et al, and have a few questions: 1) Is the 100:1 spreading ratio stated in the paper due to the fact that the dwell time on each slot is 10 ms? 2) Why did the strong narrow-band carriers in Dallas render the part-15 DSSS radios inoperative? 3) Why not utilize a full-duplex system? Tony KE4ATO 1) We do not mention use of 100:1 spreading code for the FHSS design. The FHSS design occupies about 600 Khz of spectrum, when divided into 26 Mhz available in the 915 Mhz Amateur band; that yields about 43 available channels. Spreading gain is usually computed on DSSS systems as the ratio of the chip rate to the data rate. With the slow-hopper design we are using, there is not any really meaningful way to express spreading gain. 2) Since the narrow-band carriers are on the order of 50 dB stronger than the DSSS radios, and the part-15 DSSS radios only have about 11 dB of spreading gain, the strong narrowband signals simply are stronger than the desired signal, even after despreading the desired signal. converting to horizontal polarization helps about 20 dB., but this still leaves DSSS at a 50-(20+11) = 19 dB negative C/I ratio in the baseband when you put the DSSS units a couple miles apart. DSSS can provide good interference rejection but only when the bit rate is drastically reduced (like: 500 bits/sec), when the bandwidth is spread (like: 12 Ghz), when the units are very close together (like: < 2 miles), when adaptive RF notches are designed into the receiver front-end (like: really complicated), or when the strong carriers are avoided (like: luck). 3) Cost. Full-duplex means either that in-band SS is required which needs rediculously difficult filters (since the objective is to spread out into as much of the band as possible). Or different bands are utilized. In either case the cost and difficulty of implementation go up correspondingly. Half duplex is a lot cheaper and easier to make run for the user of the equipment. From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Mon Nov 17 16:07:49 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id QAA15519 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 16:07:47 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23504; Mon, 17 Nov 97 16:07:45 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13215; Mon, 17 Nov 97 16:07:43 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 16:08:16 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF373.03B1BDE0.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1804] Another FHSS radio question Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 16:08:15 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I can give my views on the questions: Bob or Bill may have different opinions... The system is designed so that one transceiver is required for each pair of stations simultaneously occupying the link for a session plus one control channel (needed in multichannel case). Thus, for 3 simultaneously active stations, 4 channels are needed. Simultaneously means having a session alive. It's possible to pack more in there (i.e. reclaiming idle channel space during active sessions), but it gets really complicated... and should be deferred to a later release The hub is designed to support re-use of channel radios based on sharing. When a new session is to be established, the request is made on the control channel, and if an idle channel is available, it is assigned. Then it is busy until that session is over. Trying to share one transceiver pair among a multi-party session results in terrible performance. Commercial part-15 units exhibit this behavior also. You can get equivalent performance at between 1200 and 9600 baud, so it's not worth the trouble. Since the session parameters are in software, nothing in the hardware limits this, but it is intended that the initial release will not support single radio multi-party operation. Heck, I cant even promise multi-channel single party will be in the initial release since I'm not writing the code. Anything else is in the future. As for thinwire Ethernet, adaptors are readily available for conversion. Almost all current NIC adaptors come with 10-base-T. You can purchase cross-over cables (like a null modem) if you just want to tie one computer to one radio without a hub (CompUSA has them). In the initial release, the radio will just be an IP-extension pipe. Anything beyond that should be considered a bonus from the software team. In that case, I show my ignorance in that I do not understand the 'special drivers' question. I think you should be able to run TCP/IP (or UDP/IP) or (anything/IP) as you desire. It is a local configuration option on how to set up IP addressing - static or dynamic. I recommend using a host supporting DHCP, since Win 95 supports it right out of the box, and you don't have to hassle with assigning IP addresses. Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com -----Original Message----- From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com [SMTP:LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 1997 12:40 PM To: ss@tapr.org Subject: [SS:1804] Another FHSS radio question The article on the TAPR web page indicated that the radio links supported would be point to point only. Am I correct in understanding that a repeater would require 1 tranceiver for each pair of stations that is attempting to use it? The terrain here in middle Tennesee has a lot of hills. I am trying to understand how badly this would affect the amateur stations in the area. When the FHSS kit is available, is it possible that a thinwire eithernet to twisted pair adapter can also be sourced as an option. At the size of my network, thinwire is much more economical than twisted pair, as I do not have the cost of a hub. As far as Scott's request about adapting a serial device to an eithernet port, their are two main options: 1. Use a PC. Ethernet cards for 8088 and above can be had for $15.00 in some of the catalogs that I get. You can probably find an old 386 pc cheap. Use your choice of O.S. 2. Several vendors sell such an adaptor in mulitport and single port units. You can probably find a lot of them on the used market. Some vendor names are EMULEX, XYPLEX, LANTRONICS, ABLE, DIGITAL. Make sure that the unit supports TCP/IP. Beware, some units require a host download when they power up before they can function. In my case the eithernet interface makes it easier for me to connect my host. This brings up another question. Will special drivers be needed to connect to the FHSS radio, or will standard TCP/IP be able to be used? My host system can not run Intel binaries for device drivers. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From gregory.beat@mediaone.net Mon Nov 17 22:16:39 1997 Received: from ce.mediaone.net (ce.mediaone.net [24.128.1.97]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA15169 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 22:16:37 -0600 (CST) From: gregory.beat@mediaone.net Received: from discovery.ce.mediaone.net ([24.131.145.153]) by ce.mediaone.net (Netscape Messaging Server 3.01) with ESMTP id AAA20222 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 23:16:33 -0500 Message-ID: <347116A0.1AF199C6@mediaone.net> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 22:16:32 -0600 Reply-To: gregory.beat@mediaone.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en]C-MOECE (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1804] Another FHSS radio question X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <0095000006169674000002L042*@MHS> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com wrote: > When the FHSS kit is available, is it possible that a thinwire > eithernet to > twisted pair adapter can also be sourced as an option. At the > size of my > network, thinwire is much more economical than twisted pair, as > I do not have > the cost of a hub. You will find a large number of media adapters for Ethernet on the open market and surplus. The only expensive one that I ever bought was for FOIRL (Fiber Optic Ethernet - now known as 10-Base-F or FL) and that was around $ 250.00. The 10-Base-2 (Thin net) amd 10-Base-5 (Thick net) to 10 Base-T (Twisted pair) can be found at a good computer/network swapfest --- at hamfests I sometimes find surplus -- but varies alot. > As far as Scott's request about adapting a serial device to an > eithernet port, > their are two main options: > > 1. Use a PC. Ethernet cards for 8088 and above can be had for > $15.00 in some > of the catalogs that I get. You can probably find an old 386 > pc cheap. Use > your choice of O.S. I would hate to tell you how many times I have seen customers and clients throw inthe garbage working Ethernet cards that are 10-BAse-2 (Thin net) or the older 8- bit style network interface cards. > 2. Several vendors sell such an adaptor in mulitport and single > port units. > You can probably find a lot of them on the > used market. Some vendor names are EMULEX, XYPLEX, LANTRONICS, > ABLE, DIGITAL. > Make sure that the unit > supports TCP/IP. Beware, some units require a host download > when they power up > before they can function. Also called "Terminal Servers" and are used to support serial devices (i.e. hospital lab instarments, serial video terminals, serial printers, modems). Most will support TCP/IP protocols (telnet, SLIP, PPP), but earlier versions as earlier pointed out --- will only support the DECnet/LAT protocols or have very little on-board intelligence and require a "bootp" server for operation. I use to see quite a few of them at hamfests a few years ago ---- hospital and university surplus is an excellent scouting area. GB From vk2tds@ozemail.com.au Tue Nov 18 05:38:30 1997 Received: from server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net [203.108.7.41]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id FAA26102 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 05:38:27 -0600 (CST) Received: from oznet07.ozemail.com.au (oznet07.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.122]) by server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA07928 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:38:25 +1100 (EST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (slsyd22p09.ozemail.com.au [203.108.24.149]) by oznet07.ozemail.com.au (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA05484 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:38:21 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <34717DFC.DA1D09FC@ozemail.com.au> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 22:37:33 +1100 From: Darryl Smith X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Spread Spectrum... Multi-point links References: <199711180251.UAA22758@tapr.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms159C1ED8659F9195CC7E9BE0" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms159C1ED8659F9195CC7E9BE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It seems to me that with a bit of work with software the unit would support multi-point links, as well as allowing a repeater... It would be a bizzare protocol, but i would love to have a go at it :-) It would not be the ideal way to run the protocol, but it would be possible Sydney would need this. We are the world's worst cellular communications city, large physically with few users, hilly, barren, trees etc etc etc... Basically the TAPR SS board with software could be configured as a full interconnectedd network Darryl VK2TDS --------------ms159C1ED8659F9195CC7E9BE0 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIIQngYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIQjzCCEIsCAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMAsGCSqGSIb3DQEHAaCC DwwwggpWMIIJv6ADAgECAhBNufKq2fQxOKEMhZogsXYtMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMGIxETAP BgNVBAcTCEludGVybmV0MRcwFQYDVQQKEw5WZXJpU2lnbiwgSW5jLjE0MDIGA1UECxMrVmVy aVNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMSBDQSAtIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3Vic2NyaWJlcjAeFw05NzA4MDIwMDAw MDBaFw05ODA4MDIyMzU5NTlaMIIBHjERMA8GA1UEBxMISW50ZXJuZXQxFzAVBgNVBAoTDlZl cmlTaWduLCBJbmMuMTQwMgYDVQQLEytWZXJpU2lnbiBDbGFzcyAxIENBIC0gSW5kaXZpZHVh bCBTdWJzY3JpYmVyMUYwRAYDVQQLEz13d3cudmVyaXNpZ24uY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvQ1BT IEluY29ycC4gYnkgUmVmLixMSUFCLkxURChjKTk2MTMwMQYDVQQLEypEaWdpdGFsIElEIENs YXNzIDEgLSBOZXRzY2FwZSBGdWxsIFNlcnZpY2UxFzAVBgNVBAMTDkRhcnJ5bCBSIFNtaXRo MSQwIgYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhV2azJ0ZHNAb3plbWFpbC5jb20uYXUwXDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEF AANLADBIAkEA5epUXt4wi7NNoSMZh+g9NiY0qzeKimvVAaeVVzkYN6q0nx0NzRVJKaTQ8BQ1 vs7GUCteoAX9QBiDqH4FYDfVXQIDAQABo4IHkTCCB40wCQYDVR0TBAIwADCCAh8GA1UdAwSC AhYwggISMIICDjCCAgoGC2CGSAGG+EUBBwEBMIIB+RaCAadUaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIGlu Y29ycG9yYXRlcyBieSByZWZlcmVuY2UsIGFuZCBpdHMgdXNlIGlzIHN0cmljdGx5IHN1Ympl Y3QgdG8sIHRoZSBWZXJpU2lnbiBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFByYWN0aWNlIFN0YXRlbWVudCAo Q1BTKSwgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0OiBodHRwczovL3d3dy52ZXJpc2lnbi5jb20vQ1BTOyBieSBF LW1haWwgYXQgQ1BTLXJlcXVlc3RzQHZlcmlzaWduLmNvbTsgb3IgYnkgbWFpbCBhdCBWZXJp U2lnbiwgSW5jLiwgMjU5MyBDb2FzdCBBdmUuLCBNb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3LCBDQSA5NDA0MyBV U0EgVGVsLiArMSAoNDE1KSA5NjEtODgzMCBDb3B5cmlnaHQgKGMpIDE5OTYgVmVyaVNpZ24s IEluYy4gIEFsbCBSaWdodHMgUmVzZXJ2ZWQuIENFUlRBSU4gV0FSUkFOVElFUyBESVNDTEFJ TUVEIGFuZCBMSUFCSUxJVFkgTElNSVRFRC6gDgYMYIZIAYb4RQEHAQEBoQ4GDGCGSAGG+EUB BwEBAjAsMCoWKGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnZlcmlzaWduLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5L0NQUyAwEQYJ YIZIAYb4QgEBBAQDAgeAMDYGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQpFidodHRwczovL3d3dy52ZXJpc2lnbi5j b20vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS9DUFMwggSHBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EggR4FoIEdENBVVRJT046IFRoZSBD b21tb24gTmFtZSBpbiB0aGlzIENsYXNzIDEgRGlnaXRhbCAKSUQgaXMgbm90IGF1dGhlbnRp Y2F0ZWQgYnkgVmVyaVNpZ24uIEl0IG1heSBiZSB0aGUKaG9sZGVyJ3MgcmVhbCBuYW1lIG9y IGFuIGFsaWFzLiBWZXJpU2lnbiBkb2VzIGF1dGgtCmVudGljYXRlIHRoZSBlLW1haWwgYWRk cmVzcyBvZiB0aGUgaG9sZGVyLgoKVGhpcyBjZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBpbmNvcnBvcmF0ZXMgYnkg cmVmZXJlbmNlLCBhbmQgCml0cyB1c2UgaXMgc3RyaWN0bHkgc3ViamVjdCB0bywgdGhlIFZl cmlTaWduIApDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFByYWN0aWNlIFN0YXRlbWVudCAoQ1BTKSwgYXZhaWxh YmxlCmluIHRoZSBWZXJpU2lnbiByZXBvc2l0b3J5IGF0OiAKaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudmVyaXNp Z24uY29tOyBieSBFLW1haWwgYXQKQ1BTLXJlcXVlc3RzQHZlcmlzaWduLmNvbTsgb3IgYnkg bWFpbCBhdCBWZXJpU2lnbiwKSW5jLiwgMjU5MyBDb2FzdCBBdmUuLCBNb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3 LCBDQSA5NDA0MyBVU0EKCkNvcHlyaWdodCAoYykxOTk2IFZlcmlTaWduLCBJbmMuICBBbGwg UmlnaHRzIApSZXNlcnZlZC4gQ0VSVEFJTiBXQVJSQU5USUVTIERJU0NMQUlNRUQgQU5EIApM SUFCSUxJVFkgTElNSVRFRC4KCldBUk5JTkc6IFRIRSBVU0UgT0YgVEhJUyBDRVJUSUZJQ0FU RSBJUyBTVFJJQ1RMWQpTVUJKRUNUIFRPIFRIRSBWRVJJU0lHTiBDRVJUSUZJQ0FUSU9OIFBS QUNUSUNFClNUQVRFTUVOVC4gIFRIRSBJU1NVSU5HIEFVVEhPUklUWSBESVNDTEFJTVMgQ0VS VEFJTgpJTVBMSUVEIEFORCBFWFBSRVNTIFdBUlJBTlRJRVMsIElOQ0xVRElORyBXQVJSQU5U SUVTCk9GIE1FUkNIQU5UQUJJTElUWSBPUiBGSVRORVNTIEZPUiBBIFBBUlRJQ1VMQVIKUFVS UE9TRSwgQU5EIFdJTEwgTk9UIEJFIExJQUJMRSBGT1IgQ09OU0VRVUVOVElBTCwKUFVOSVRJ VkUsIEFORCBDRVJUQUlOIE9USEVSIERBTUFHRVMuIFNFRSBUSEUgQ1BTCkZPUiBERVRBSUxT LgoKQ29udGVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFZlcmlTaWduIHJlZ2lzdGVyZWQKbm9udmVyaWZpZWRTdWJq ZWN0QXR0cmlidXRlcyBleHRlbnNpb24gdmFsdWUgc2hhbGwgCm5vdCBiZSBjb25zaWRlcmVk IGFzIGFjY3VyYXRlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIHZhbGlkYXRlZCAKYnkgdGhlIElBLjCBhgYKYIZI AYb4RQEGAwR4FnZkNDY1MmJkNjNmMjA0NzAyOTI5ODc2M2M5ZDJmMjc1MDY5YzczNTliZWQx YjA1OWRhNzViYzRiYzk3MDE3NDdkYTVjN2Y0MTQxYmVhZGIyYmQyZTg5MjA2YWY2ZWY3ZDIx MTQ5OWJhMmJkNDNmNGU0OTY2NTQxMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBACaQJ/F/Ua1uvUoqnGNn +RETaY3OsPW/BYrVi/xwM5N95x1HwN/Vhmz5FsXMXuTHnL61RSoV6VlshTv7+Xkw+hyOC1ne fhbVJj1g93oRPJE2+iJpU6U5MFAB7lzH/fszM4ePZe3VnNl3N2xk0PfHBx76sX+kT32ttOtw om3XDLSBMIICeTCCAeKgAwIBAgIQUh81HfJwfgArvspZhwTVOTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFADBf MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVyaVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNz IDEgUHVibGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcNOTYwNjI3MDAw MDAwWhcNOTkwNjI3MjM1OTU5WjBiMREwDwYDVQQHEwhJbnRlcm5ldDEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVy aVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNDAyBgNVBAsTK1ZlcmlTaWduIENsYXNzIDEgQ0EgLSBJbmRpdmlkdWFs IFN1YnNjcmliZXIwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBALYUps9N0AUN2Moj0G+q tCmSY44s+G+W1y6ddksRsTaNV8nD/RzGuv4eCLozypXqvuNbzQaot3kdRCrtc/KxUoNoEHBk kdc+a/n3XZ0UQ5tul0WYgUfRLcvdu3LXTD9xquJA8lQ5vBbuz3zsuts/bCqzFrGGEp2ukzTV uNXQ9z6pAgMBAAGjMzAxMA8GA1UdEwQIMAYBAf8CAQEwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMBEGCWCGSAGG +EIBAQQEAwIBBjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFAAOBgQDB+vcC51fKEXXGnAz6K3dPh0UXO+PSwdoP WDmOrpWZA6GooTj+eZqTFwuXhjnHymg0ZrvHiEX2yAwF7r6XJe/g1G7kf512XM59uhSirguf +2dbSKVnJa8ZZIj2ctgpJ6o3EmqxKK8ngxhlbI3tQJ5NxHiohuzpLFC/pvkN27CmSjCCAjEw ggGaAgUCpAAAATANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFADBfMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVy aVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNzIDEgUHVibGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcNOTYwMTI5MDAwMDAwWhcNOTkxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjBfMQswCQYD VQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVyaVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNzIDEgUHVi bGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAD gY0AMIGJAoGBAOUZv22jVmEtmUhx9mfeuY3rt56GgAqRDvo4Ja9GiILlc6igmyRdDR/MZW4M sNBWhBiHmgabEKFz37RYOWtuwfYV1aioP6oSBo0xrH+wNNePNGeICc0UEeJORVZpH3gCgNrc R5EpuzbJY1zF4Ncth3uhtzKwezC6Ki8xqu6jZ9rbAgMBAAEwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQECBQADgYEA UnO6mlXc3D+CfbCQmGIqgkx2AG4lPdXCCXBXAQwPdx8YofscYA6gdTtJIUH+p1wtTEJJ0/8o 2Izqnf7JB+J3glMj3lXzzkST+vpMvco281tmsp7I8gxeXtShtCEJM8o7WfySwjj8rdmWJOAt +qMp9TNoeE60vJ9pNeKomJRzO8QxggFaMIIBVgIBATB2MGIxETAPBgNVBAcTCEludGVybmV0 MRcwFQYDVQQKEw5WZXJpU2lnbiwgSW5jLjE0MDIGA1UECxMrVmVyaVNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMSBD QSAtIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3Vic2NyaWJlcgIQTbnyqtn0MTihDIWaILF2LTAJBgUrDgMCGgUA oH0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNOTcxMTE4MTEz NzMzWjAeBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xETAPMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgEoMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBTx FESGfsC1iFU0icVB4RL9kGGzbzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAARA0Tz3dHHT37rkZKXQi3M79oV8 uFs5nwhX6nAcjLKkHC4Fv58RAODdlzZJlWn+P/25RcYwtzJwzvA5STaapJJfyA== --------------ms159C1ED8659F9195CC7E9BE0-- From LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Tue Nov 18 10:36:02 1997 Received: from ns2.eds.com (ns2.eds.com [199.228.142.78]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id KAA16092 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 10:35:59 -0600 (CST) From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Received: from nnsp.eds.com (nnsp2.eds.com [199.228.143.130]) by ns2.eds.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA27788 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:35:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from DNET.EDS.COM (dnet.eds.com [130.174.31.77]) by nnsp.eds.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA01983 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:35:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by DNET.EDS.COM (Soft-Switch LMS 2.0) with snapi via DMNCEC id 0095000006223998; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:34:15 -0500 To: ss Subject: Re: [SS:1806] RE: 1804] Another FHSS radio question Message-ID: <0095000006223998000002L082*@MHS> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:34:15 -0500 The twisted pair lan adapter is not available for the host system that I am using. It does not use PC compatable circuit cards. For small LANs that are greater than 2 nodes, such as the 4 node LAN that I have at the Ham shack, thinwire is more economical than buying a twisted pair hub. An SS radio would be the 5th item on the network unless I rig up a router. The lowest price that I can find for a twisted pair to thin-wire adapter is $50.00. It is also a 4 port thinwire hub. Since combo ethernet cards can be obtained for less than that, I was looking for a cheaper alternative. If the majority of stations out there are just single nodes connected to the radio, then it does not make sense to add to the cost and complexity of the unit. Also, does this system relay everything that it sees on the ethernet, or does it only recognize the TCP/IP protocol? I guess my previous assumptions is that it would look like a gateway to the host system, not just a passive repeater. Some ballpark bugeting estimates would also be helpful for us locally to plan our migration to higher speeds. My host also currently does not support DHCP. Since my IP stack is Carnige-Mellon-Univ. IP and it came with source code, I should be able to fix it to be either a client or a server. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Tue Nov 18 11:53:03 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id LAA02951; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:52:51 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA08568; Tue, 18 Nov 97 11:52:50 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04190; Tue, 18 Nov 97 11:52:48 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 23:53:14 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF47D.2234B460.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Cc: "'bbswg4@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 23:53:13 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit john: We had 'gobs' of the little 10-base-2 to 10-base-T adaptors around here when we converted from coax to 10-base-T. Incidentally, our network with 10-base-T works vastly better than before due to the improved fault isolation of 10-base-T. The adaptors should be available surplus from many places (but actually I have not tried to find them). The simple adaptors we used were very inexpensive, and did not have any hub functions associated with them. All you need is one on the radio end, and adapt it to the 10-base-2 coax. You can leave the rest of your network as 10-base-2. It is difficult to justify putting hardware for both 10-base-2 and 10-base-T on every radio when it will only be used by a few. Also, it makes the board layout extremely difficult. We are looking towards the future with this radio, and that I think means 10-base-T. If you do not have DHCP, then just use static IP addressing. However it's just a royal pain when lots of different people can connect to your radio and you have to administer all the addresses. If it's your own private network, then no big deal of course. Release 1 of the radio is just an IP extension cord. Putting a full TCP/IP stack into the radio is a significant software effort, plus a stack has to be licensed, paid for, etc. So, it's not likely to be there unless some miracle happens. Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com -----Original Message----- From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com [SMTP:LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 1997 10:55 AM To: ss@tapr.org Subject: [SS:1809] RE: 1804] Another FHSS radio question The twisted pair lan adapter is not available for the host system that I am using. It does not use PC compatable circuit cards. For small LANs that are greater than 2 nodes, such as the 4 node LAN that I have at the Ham shack, thinwire is more economical than buying a twisted pair hub. An SS radio would be the 5th item on the network unless I rig up a router. The lowest price that I can find for a twisted pair to thin-wire adapter is $50.00. It is also a 4 port thinwire hub. Since combo ethernet cards can be obtained for less than that, I was looking for a cheaper alternative. If the majority of stations out there are just single nodes connected to the radio, then it does not make sense to add to the cost and complexity of the unit. Also, does this system relay everything that it sees on the ethernet, or does it only recognize the TCP/IP protocol? I guess my previous assumptions is that it would look like a gateway to the host system, not just a passive repeater. Some ballpark bugeting estimates would also be helpful for us locally to plan our migration to higher speeds. My host also currently does not support DHCP. Since my IP stack is Carnige-Mellon-Univ. IP and it came with source code, I should be able to fix it to be either a client or a server. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From mdmiller@onramp.net Wed Nov 19 10:01:06 1997 Received: from mailhost.onramp.net (mailhost.onramp.net [199.1.11.3]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id KAA18823 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:01:00 -0600 (CST) From: mdmiller@onramp.net Received: from pentium (ppp10-9.ftwotx.onramp.net [206.50.209.9]) by mailhost.onramp.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA22892 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 07:08:27 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971119070310.00954e40@199.1.11.3> X-Sender: mdmiller@199.1.11.3 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 07:03:10 -0600 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1810] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question In-Reply-To: <01BCF47D.2234B460.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 12:05 PM 11/18/97 -0600, Tom McDermott wrote: >Release 1 of the radio is just an IP extension cord. Putting a full TCP/IP stack into the radio is a significant >software effort, plus a stack has to be licensed, paid for, etc. So, it's not likely to be there unless some >miracle happens. Tom, would you explain IP extension cord? What IP address will be in the radio. 73 Mark Miller N5RFX From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Wed Nov 19 11:09:08 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id LAA04068; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 11:09:06 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA07112; Wed, 19 Nov 97 11:09:05 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26687; Wed, 19 Nov 97 11:09:02 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 23:09:24 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF540.2D25DF20.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Cc: "'bbswg4@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1811] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 23:09:23 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark: in the initial release, the radio will probably not have an IP address. This is the same as your 10-base-T electrical cable not having an IP address. The computers on either end of the cable have addresses, but the cable itself does not. Similarly, in the initial release, the radio does not have to have an address, as it functions like a cable (hence the terminology 'extension-cord'). However, all Ethernet devices have a permanent, global 48-bit address. In this case, the radio must have an Ethernet address, even through it does not have to have an IP address. The Ethernet address is a layer-2, or 'MAC' address, while IP is a layer-3 address. Now, if our software team pulls off a miracle, gets a free stack, etc., well then more options are possible. However, it is most important that the initial software release of the radio be as simple as possible, and descoping features in R1.0 is usually the name of the game (especially in the commercial world). Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com -----Original Message----- From: mdmiller@onramp.net [SMTP:mdmiller@onramp.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 10:14 AM To: ss@tapr.org Subject: [SS:1811] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question At 12:05 PM 11/18/97 -0600, Tom McDermott wrote: >Release 1 of the radio is just an IP extension cord. Putting a full TCP/IP stack into the radio is a significant >software effort, plus a stack has to be licensed, paid for, etc. So, it's not likely to be there unless some >miracle happens. Tom, would you explain IP extension cord? What IP address will be in the radio. 73 Mark Miller N5RFX From N5RG@aol.com Wed Nov 19 11:24:15 1997 Received: from mrin84.mail.aol.com (mrin84.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.194]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id LAA09704 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 11:24:14 -0600 (CST) From: N5RG@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by mrin84.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id MAA24894 for ss@tapr.org; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 12:23:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 12:23:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971119122338_866936458@mrin84.mail.aol.com> To: ss@tapr.org Subject: DTV & SS Fellow Hams: The past several months I have been trying to help a local Christian TV station with it's technical problems. In the process I have met several of the broadcast engineers and technicians in this area who have been telling me about one of their big concerns--HDTV or DTV. The Congressional mandate requiring all TV broadcasting to be in the form of DTV by 2006 (I believe this is the correct date) is causing great concerns to the broadcasting industry since this will require scaping the mode they have been using for the past 50 years and having to redo everything. The cost of new transmitters, transmitting towers and antennas amounts to several millions of dollars for each station, not to mention cameras, recorders, Studio-Transmitter Links, etc. One engineer told me the other day they thought, that to maintain the same coverage area they currently have, they will have to increase their transmitter power by 3 times. If all five of the high power TV transmitters at this site increase their power by three times, there will not be nearly enough primary power coming through the Idaho Power lines feeding the site to supply the power needed. Idaho Power estimates it will cost one million dollars to install the additional power lines needed to supply the increased load. I had the thought that perhaps the way the TV industry has chosen to broadcast DTV is obsolete before they even start. Instead of continuing to broadcast using 6 Mhz channels, perhaps they should use Spread Spectrum spread over the whole UHF band. It seems to me this could result in a reduction in transmitter power of at least 10 db. I am sure there must be some good reasons why this is not a good idea. Perhaps the receivers would be to expensive, etc. This is an academic question since the TV industry is already poised to to use narrow band technology. But I am curious as to what you experts think about the possibilities of using SS to transmit Digital Television. What are your thoughts? Roy W7IDM, ex N5RG From GStory@icomply.com Wed Nov 19 13:11:40 1997 Received: from lew_prods1.icomply.com (lew_prods1.icomply.com [38.223.45.65]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id NAA15202 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:11:35 -0600 (CST) Received: by lew_prods1.icomply.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52) id <01BCF4EC.756F9F40@lew_prods1.icomply.com>; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:10:07 -0600 Message-ID: From: Guy Story To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: FHSS Question Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:10:06 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 Encoding: 19 TEXT Hello Tom. I may have missed something but I have got a question from a nonengineer standpoint. I realize and am not worried about getting a 10-base-T card for my PC, what else am I going to need? My intenion is to use JNOS to act as a gateway in Denton,Tx. This may or may not happen. Either way I wont loose any sleep. I am entering this in a very basic level thus I am new to everything the group has been discussing. That is the main reason I want to participate. I have not had time to check the TAPR site for the DCC papers. Guy Story International Compliance Corporation 802 N. Kealy Lewisville, TX 75057-3136 voice: 972.436.9600 fax: 972.436.2667 email: gstory@icomply.com webpage: http://www.icomply.com "These are my views not necessarily my employer's views." From jmorton@cmi.csc.com Wed Nov 19 13:18:42 1997 Received: from mercury.csc.com (mercury.csc.com [20.1.107.100]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id NAA17230 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:18:37 -0600 (CST) Received: from vortex.cmi.csc.com [20.12.1.8] by mercury.csc.com with esmtp (Exim 1.73 #4) id 0xYFdV-0004cR-00; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 14:18:05 -0500 Received: by vortex.cmi.csc.com (1.40.112.8/16.2) id AA241147084; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:18:04 -0600 From: Jeff Morton Subject: Re: [SS:1813] DTV & SS To: ss@tapr.org Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:18:04 CST In-Reply-To: <971119122338_866936458@mrin84.mail.aol.com>; from "N5RG@aol.com" at Nov 19, 97 11:34 am X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 112.8] Message-Id: > One engineer told me the other day they thought, that to maintain > the same coverage area they currently have, they will have to increase > their transmitter power by 3 times. If all five of the high power TV > transmitters > at this site increase their power by three times, there will not be nearly > enough primary power coming through the Idaho Power lines feeding the > site to supply the power needed. Idaho Power estimates it will cost one > million dollars to install the additional power lines needed to supply the > increased load. I'm not seeing why they think they'll need that power increase. If they were to broadcast an analog image, the increase in image size would probably make the increase in power necessary just to keep the data stable, but as far as I am aware, HDTV is a digital standard which uses compression techniques to greatly reduce the data needed for transmission, allowing transmission over a smaller spectrum for the same quantity of data. Am I mistaken as to the HDTV you're referring to? > I had the thought that perhaps the way the TV industry has chosen to > broadcast > DTV is obsolete before they even start. Instead of continuing to broadcast > using 6 Mhz channels, perhaps they should use Spread Spectrum spread > over the whole UHF band. It seems to me this could result in a reduction > in transmitter power of at least 10 db. I am sure there must be some good > reasons why this is not a good idea. Perhaps the receivers would be to > expensive, etc. The receivers, being the TV set in your house, will already be fairly expensive, since they will have a special chipset (actually several), used to decode the 7 or so standards embedded within the larger standard. As I've been told, they couldn't make up their minds and just go with a good MPEG version, but instead different studios forced other propreitary formats into the standard, meaning each receiver will require about 7 chipsets (each proprietary format is on its own chipset) in the receiver. Therefore, the cost for a new television will be several hundreds of dollars above what it currently is, and a converter receiver box for old TV's, if they'll even release them, will be in the hundreds as well. I don't see SS being a significant addition to the cost of a reciever, when you consider the cost increases already incurred. (Then again, I'm not sure how much it would cost to outfit one with just the reciever.) > This is an academic question since the TV industry is already poised to > to use narrow band technology. But I am curious as to what you experts > think about the possibilities of using SS to transmit Digital Television. This is also an academic question because the TV industry wouldn't go with something simple yet powerful. The latest MPEG format would've let them do what they want to, and would have given studios control over the quality of the output. The advantage to MPEG is that the encoding is as good as you want it to be. If you can afford the top of the line MPEG encoders, like a large studio can, the final picture will look just like the original to the naked eye at 5 feet, and the compression will be outstanding. If you're a basement studio, you can compress it on most computers with similar compression ratios, but the picture quality will be noticeably degraded. From kd4vhg@radio.org Wed Nov 19 14:15:19 1997 Received: from wa4mei.radio.org (wa4mei.radio.org [198.252.175.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id OAA02600 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 14:15:17 -0600 (CST) Received: by wa4mei.radio.org (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.8) id ; Wed, 19 Nov 97 15:15 EST Message-ID: <3473491A.BDF5BDEC@radio.org> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 15:16:26 -0500 From: John Scott X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1815] Re: DTV & SS References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff Morton wrote: > > One engineer told me the other day they thought, that to maintain > > the same coverage area they currently have, they will have to increase > > their transmitter power by 3 times. If all five of the high power TV > > transmitters > > at this site increase their power by three times, there will not be nearly > > enough primary power coming through the Idaho Power lines feeding the > > site to supply the power needed. Idaho Power estimates it will cost one > > million dollars to install the additional power lines needed to supply the > > increased load. > > I'm not seeing why they think they'll need that power increase. If they > were to broadcast an analog image, the increase in image size would > probably make the increase in power necessary just to keep the data > stable, but as far as I am aware, HDTV is a digital standard which uses > compression techniques to greatly reduce the data needed for transmission, > allowing transmission over a smaller spectrum for the same quantity of > data. Am I mistaken as to the HDTV you're referring to? The need for increased transmitter power to cover the same geographical area is probably related to the fact that most of the DTV permits granted by the FCC are in the UHF band and not the VHF band. To cover the same area in UHF that you covered in VHF requires more power and/or higher towers. Stations that were already in UHF don't need to make big power or tower changes with the move to DTV, but stations that were down in the VHF range ( 2 - 13 ), will need to make changes. -John Scott, KD4VHG Currently working at WAGA-TV in Atlanta. From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Wed Nov 19 14:17:48 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id OAA03817 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 14:17:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22711; Wed, 19 Nov 97 14:17:41 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05396; Wed, 19 Nov 97 14:17:38 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 02:18:01 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF55A.8694ED20.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1814] FHSS Question Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 02:18:00 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Guy: there's too much to this question to adequately address here. However, the new operating systems like Win 95 have a whole lot of the networking built right in, vastly simplifying the whole process. The best way to learn is to attend the Texas Packet Radio Society (TPRS) Fall digital Symposium, in Austin, Texas, on December 6th. These topics will be well presented by some knowledgeable folks. Check out the TPRS web site: http://www.tprs.org which has maps, directions, agenda, etc. Best of all, it's free. Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com -----Original Message----- From: Guy Story [SMTP:GStory@icomply.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 1:21 PM To: ss@tapr.org Subject: [SS:1814] FHSS Question Hello Tom. I may have missed something but I have got a question from a nonengineer standpoint. I realize and am not worried about getting a 10-base-T card for my PC, what else am I going to need? My intenion is to use JNOS to act as a gateway in Denton,Tx. This may or may not happen. Either way I wont loose any sleep. I am entering this in a very basic level thus I am new to everything the group has been discussing. That is the main reason I want to participate. I have not had time to check the TAPR site for the DCC papers. Guy Story International Compliance Corporation 802 N. Kealy Lewisville, TX 75057-3136 voice: 972.436.9600 fax: 972.436.2667 email: gstory@icomply.com webpage: http://www.icomply.com "These are my views not necessarily my employer's views." From GStory@icomply.com Wed Nov 19 16:20:57 1997 Received: from lew_prods1.icomply.com (lew_prods1.icomply.com [38.223.45.65]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id QAA05379 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:20:55 -0600 (CST) Received: by lew_prods1.icomply.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52) id <01BCF506.E65D89F0@lew_prods1.icomply.com>; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:19:24 -0600 Message-ID: From: Guy Story To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1817] RE: 1814] FHSS Question Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:19:23 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 Encoding: 70 TEXT Tom, I looked at the site and I got an error when I clicked on the link to the Fall Symposium. I will check it out again when I get home from work, Unless something happens I will see you and Greg there. Guy Story International Compliance Corporation 802 N. Kealy Lewisville, TX 75057-3136 voice: 972.436.9600 fax: 972.436.2667 email: gstory@icomply.com webpage: http://www.icomply.com "These are my views not necessarily my employer's views." >---------- >From: Tom McDermott[SMTP:mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com] >Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 2:32 PM >To: ss@tapr.org >Subject: [SS:1817] RE: 1814] FHSS Question > >Guy: there's too much to this question to adequately address here. However, >the new operating >systems like Win 95 have a whole lot of the networking built right in, vastly >simplifying >the whole process. > >The best way to learn is to attend the Texas Packet Radio Society (TPRS) Fall >digital >Symposium, in Austin, Texas, on December 6th. These topics will be well >presented >by some knowledgeable folks. > >Check out the TPRS web site: http://www.tprs.org >which has maps, directions, agenda, etc. > >Best of all, it's free. > >Tom McDermott >mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Guy Story [SMTP:GStory@icomply.com] >Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 1997 1:21 PM >To: ss@tapr.org >Subject: [SS:1814] FHSS Question > >Hello Tom. I may have missed something but I have got a question from a >nonengineer standpoint. I realize and am not worried about getting a >10-base-T card for my PC, what else am I going to need? My intenion is >to use JNOS to act as a gateway in Denton,Tx. This may or may not >happen. Either way I wont loose any sleep. I am entering this in a >very basic level thus I am new to everything the group has been >discussing. That is the main reason I want to participate. I have not >had time to check the TAPR site for the DCC papers. >Guy Story >International Compliance Corporation >802 N. Kealy >Lewisville, TX 75057-3136 >voice: 972.436.9600 >fax: 972.436.2667 >email: gstory@icomply.com >webpage: http://www.icomply.com >"These are my views not necessarily my employer's views." > > > > From jeff@mich.com Wed Nov 19 17:09:23 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id RAA18874 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 17:09:21 -0600 (CST) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA11252 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:13:39 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971119180912.0376c100@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:09:12 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1813] DTV & SS In-Reply-To: <971119122338_866936458@mrin84.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:34 AM 11/19/97 -0600, N5RG@aol.com wrote: > The Congressional >mandate requiring all TV broadcasting to be in the form of DTV by 2006 >(I believe this is the correct date) is causing great concerns to the >broadcasting industry since this will require scaping the mode they have >been using for the past 50 years and having to redo everything. The cost >of new transmitters, transmitting towers and antennas amounts to several >millions of dollars for each station, not to mention cameras, recorders, >Studio-Transmitter Links, etc. Scary huh? Upgrading from early 1950's technology to present day standards can be expensive. The NAB should be commended for holding out so long. >Instead of continuing to broadcast >using 6 Mhz channels, perhaps they should use Spread Spectrum spread >over the whole UHF band. It seems to me this could result in a reduction >in transmitter power of at least 10 db. I am sure there must be some good >reasons why this is not a good idea. Actually, it is quite a good idea, but for a different reason then you suggest. SS itself is no free ride with regards to power levels. The physics still apply. Granted, with FEC techniques you can do better, but they can just (almost) as easily apply to standard narrowband techniques. While the average power over a given portion of the band might go down, the average power over the entire band would stay about the same as the previous narrowband signal. Where SS would really shine in the broadcast arena would be in frequency reuse of a specific geographic area. Then we could pry some frequencies out of the NAB's warehouse for more useful things. > >What are your thoughts? > >Roy W7IDM, ex N5RG > > Jeff WB8WKA ex Broadcast Engineer WKBD-TV50 From jeff@mich.com Wed Nov 19 17:13:29 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id RAA20436 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 17:13:27 -0600 (CST) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA11276; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:17:51 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971119181324.03748970@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:13:24 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org, mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1812] Another FHSS radio question In-Reply-To: <01BCF540.2D25DF20.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:27 AM 11/19/97 -0600, Tom McDermott wrote: >Mark: > >Now, if our software team pulls off a miracle, gets a free stack, etc., well then more options >are possible. However, it is most important that the initial software release of the radio be >as simple as possible, and descoping features in R1.0 is usually the name of the game >(especially in the commercial world). > >Tom McDermott >mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Tom: Will the radio be a open standard (i.e. documented I/O and available source code) for those that want to experiment? -Jeff King wb8wka Regards, ------------------------------------ | Jeff King Aero Data Systems | | jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | | (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | |F(810)471-0279 United States | ------------------------------------ From wd5ivd@tapr.org Wed Nov 19 18:14:18 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id SAA05354 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:14:16 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971119181324.03748970@mail.mich.com> References: <01BCF540.2D25DF20.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:01:22 -0600 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1820] Re: Another FHSS radio question Hi Jeff. I tis our goal at this time to make as much of the radi oavailable as we can -- just as in the DSP-93. Cheers - Greg >At 11:27 AM 11/19/97 -0600, Tom McDermott wrote: >>Mark: > >> >>Now, if our software team pulls off a miracle, gets a free stack, etc., >well then more options >>are possible. However, it is most important that the initial software >release of the radio be >>as simple as possible, and descoping features in R1.0 is usually the name >of the game >>(especially in the commercial world). >> >>Tom McDermott >>mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com > > >Tom: > >Will the radio be a open standard (i.e. documented I/O and available source >code) for those that want to experiment? > >-Jeff King wb8wka > >Regards, > >------------------------------------ >| Jeff King Aero Data Systems | >| jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | >| (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | >|F(810)471-0279 United States | >------------------------------------ ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From jeff@mich.com Wed Nov 19 20:49:04 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id UAA00639 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 20:49:02 -0600 (CST) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA12221 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 1997 22:53:31 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971119214859.0086a640@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 21:48:59 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1821] Re: Another FHSS radio question In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.3.32.19971119181324.03748970@mail.mich.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 06:30 PM 11/19/97 -0600, you wrote: >Hi Jeff. > >I tis our goal at this time to make as much of the radi oavailable as we >can -- just as in the DSP-93. > >Cheers - Greg > Thats cool. Let me know if you need any help with the PIC stuff, as I understand you'll have one onboard. I've done alot of PIC programming around here for the auto companies and OEM's. I also have a emulator. -Jeff From wa4dsy@wa4dsy.radio.org Thu Nov 20 08:40:10 1997 Received: from wa4mei.radio.org (wa4mei.radio.org [198.252.175.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id IAA04942 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 08:40:08 -0600 (CST) Received: by wa4mei.radio.org (/\==/\ Smail3.1.28.1 #28.8) id ; Thu, 20 Nov 97 09:40 EST Message-Id: From: "Dale Heatherington" To: "ss@tapr.org" Date: Thu, 20 Nov 97 09:40:02 Reply-To: "Dale Heatherington" Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Dale Heatherington's Registered PMMail 1.53 For OS/2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [SS:1811] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question On Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:14:20 -0600 (CST), mdmiller@onramp.net wrote: >At 12:05 PM 11/18/97 -0600, Tom McDermott > wrote: >>Release 1 of the radio is just an IP extension cord. Putting a full >TCP/IP stack into the radio is a significant >>software effort, plus a stack has to be licensed, paid for, etc. So, it's >not likely to be there unless some >>miracle happens. Are you going to convert the ethernet header to ax25 format ? If not, how will the radio ID the packets? CW? ;-) -------------------------------------------------- Dale Heatherington, WA4DSY e-mail - daheath@ibm.net Web page - http://www.wa4dsy.radio.org OS/2 Warp 4.0 The worlds finest desktop OS. From N5RG@aol.com Thu Nov 20 11:07:46 1997 Received: from mrin58.mail.aol.com (mrin58.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.168]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id LAA19915 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:07:44 -0600 (CST) From: N5RG@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by mrin58.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id MAA04905 for ss@tapr.org; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:07:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:07:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971120120713_541561942@mrin58.mail.aol.com> To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1815] Re: DTV & SS > > One engineer told me the other day they thought, that to maintain > > the same coverage area they currently have, they will have to increase > > their transmitter power by 3 times. > > I'm not seeing why they think they'll need that power increase. If they > were to broadcast an analog image, the increase in image size would > probably make the increase in power necessary just to keep the data > stable, but as far as I am aware, HDTV is a digital standard which uses > compression techniques to greatly reduce the data needed for transmission, > allowing transmission over a smaller spectrum for the same quantity of > data. Am I mistaken as to the HDTV you're referring to? I am speaking of High Definition TV (HDTV). You are correct in that it does use compression to reduce the data rate. According to the article "MPEG: the surprise TV standard" in the September 1997 issue of IEEE SPECTRUM, MPEG-2 has become the world wide TV compression standard and has been adopted by the Grand Alliance as the standard for HDTV. Articles in the Oct 1997 issue of Broadcast Engineering magazine indicate that the on the air broadcast will be at a maximum bit rate of 19.39 Mb/s using an 8 level Vestigial SB signal (8-VSB) broadcast in the standard 6 MHz TV channel. Packetized data transport will be used, based upon MPEG-2, which will provide for the flexible transmission of virtually any combination of video, audio, and data. There is a "cliff effect", meaning that you either get a perfect picture or you don't get anything. There is no deep fringe area. The signal has to be received well enough that there are no data errors, or else the signal cannot be decoded. This is why more power is needed to provide the same coverage area as is currently provided by the analog system. > > I had the thought that perhaps the way the TV industry has chosen to > > broadcast > > DTV is obsolete before they even start. Instead of continuing to > broadcast > > using 6 Mhz channels, perhaps they should use Spread Spectrum spread > > over the whole UHF band. It seems to me this could result in a reduction > > in transmitter power of at least 10 db. I am sure there must be some good > > reasons why this is not a good idea. Perhaps the receivers would be to > > expensive, etc. > > The receivers, being the TV set in your house, will already be fairly > expensive, since they will have a special chipset (actually several), > used to decode the 7 or so standards embedded within the larger standard. > As I've been told, they couldn't make up their minds and just go with > a good MPEG version, but instead different studios forced other propreitary > formats into the standard, meaning each receiver will require about 7 > chipsets (each proprietary format is on its own chipset) in the receiver. > Therefore, the cost for a new television will be several hundreds of dollars > above what it currently is, and a converter receiver box for old TV's, if > they'll even release them, will be in the hundreds as well. This does not seem to be true based upon what I read in the articles in the IEEE Spectrum and BROADCAST engineering. The Grand Aliance has chosen MPEG-2 as the standard for HDTV. At least some of the direct broadcast satellites (DBS) also use MPEG-2. I know DishNet does. From wd5ivd@tapr.org Thu Nov 20 13:11:48 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id NAA06274 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:11:46 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:08:42 -0600 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1823] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question One of the things we have been discussing is why use AX.25 anymore in the software design. While CW is a satirical comment, there are better ways of doing this I think then using AX.25. There is no need to convert the header to AX.25. Cheers - Greg >On Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:14:20 -0600 (CST), mdmiller@onramp.net wrote: > >>At 12:05 PM 11/18/97 -0600, Tom McDermott >> wrote: >>>Release 1 of the radio is just an IP extension cord. Putting a full >>TCP/IP stack into the radio is a significant >>>software effort, plus a stack has to be licensed, paid for, etc. So, it's >>not likely to be there unless some >>>miracle happens. > >Are you going to convert the ethernet header to ax25 format ? If not, how >will the >radio ID the packets? CW? ;-) > > >-------------------------------------------------- >Dale Heatherington, WA4DSY >e-mail - daheath@ibm.net >Web page - http://www.wa4dsy.radio.org > OS/2 Warp 4.0 The worlds finest desktop OS. ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From GStory@icomply.com Thu Nov 20 15:21:24 1997 Received: from lew_prods1.icomply.com (lew_prods1.icomply.com [38.223.45.65]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id PAA13668 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:21:16 -0600 (CST) Received: by lew_prods1.icomply.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52) id <01BCF5C7.A3E25F30@lew_prods1.icomply.com>; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:19:05 -0600 Message-ID: From: Guy Story To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1825] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:19:04 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 Encoding: 56 TEXT What kind of format has been discussed Greg? Guy Story International Compliance Corporation 802 N. Kealy Lewisville, TX 75057-3136 voice: 972.436.9600 fax: 972.436.2667 email: gstory@icomply.com webpage: http://www.icomply.com "These are my views not necessarily my employer's views." >---------- >From: Greg Jones, WD5IVD[SMTP:wd5ivd@tapr.org] >Sent: Thursday, November 20, 1997 1:21 PM >To: ss@tapr.org >Subject: [SS:1825] RE: [1809] Another FHSS radio question > >One of the things we have been discussing is why use AX.25 anymore in the >software design. While CW is a satirical comment, there are better ways of >doing this I think then using AX.25. >There is no need to convert the header to AX.25. > >Cheers - Greg > >>On Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:14:20 -0600 (CST), mdmiller@onramp.net wrote: >> >>>At 12:05 PM 11/18/97 -0600, Tom McDermott >>> wrote: >>>>Release 1 of the radio is just an IP extension cord. Putting a full >>>TCP/IP stack into the radio is a significant >>>>software effort, plus a stack has to be licensed, paid for, etc. So, it's >>>not likely to be there unless some >>>>miracle happens. >> >>Are you going to convert the ethernet header to ax25 format ? If not, how >>will the >>radio ID the packets? CW? ;-) >> >> >>-------------------------------------------------- >>Dale Heatherington, WA4DSY >>e-mail - daheath@ibm.net >>Web page - http://www.wa4dsy.radio.org >> OS/2 Warp 4.0 The worlds finest desktop OS. > > >----- >Greg Jones, WD5IVD >Austin, Texas >wd5ivd@tapr.org >http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd > > > From bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Thu Nov 20 22:20:36 1997 Received: from lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (bm@pc-18446.on.rogers.wave.ca [24.112.93.218]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA27122 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:20:34 -0600 (CST) From: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Received: (from bm@localhost) by lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA26902 for ss@tapr.org; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 04:20:31 GMT Message-Id: <199711210420.EAA26902@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 04:20:30 +0000 (GMT) To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1824] Re: DTV & SS In-Reply-To: <971120120713_541561942@mrin58.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Ishmail 1.3.1-961106-linux MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain N5RG@aol.com wrote: > > There is a "cliff effect", meaning that you either get a perfect picture or > you > don't get anything. There is no deep fringe area. The signal has to be > received well enough that there are no data errors, or else the signal cannot > be decoded. This is why more power is needed to provide the same > coverage area as is currently provided by the analog system. Only if you have a very warped definition of "coverage". It's true that, like any digital system, the DTV system will have a sharp threshold in terms of quality vs C/N... but it doesn't follow that more power is needed than for an analog system. The 8VSB DTV system needs a C/N of about 15 dB to deliver an unimpaired service. At 15 dB C/N, the analog NTSC system would be virtually unusable. See http://nebo.cs.byu.edu/~scoville/luigi/ga_transtest.html for details about the field trials, which concluded, among other things: "The ATV system was shown to perform better than NTSC at all distances from the transmitter." and "It is especially noteworthy that the VSB signal showed significant remaining operating margin above the BER threshold at many locations where NTSC reception was unsatisfactory." The transmitter power used for the digital system during these tests was actually 12 dB lower than for the NTSC system. Barry -- Barry McLarnon VE3JF/VA3TCP | Internet: bm@hydra.carleton.ca Ottawa Amateur Radio Club | AMPRnet: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Packet Working Group | Web: http://hydra.carleton.ca From N5RG@aol.com Thu Nov 20 22:54:09 1997 Received: from mrin47.mail.aol.com (mrin47.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.157]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA05513 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:54:07 -0600 (CST) From: N5RG@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by mrin47.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id XAA00585 for ss@tapr.org; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 23:53:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 23:53:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971120235335_-803730253@mrin47> To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1816] Re: DTV & SS > Jeff Morton wrote: > > > > One engineer told me the other day they thought, that to maintain > > > the same coverage area they currently have, they will have to increase > > > their transmitter power by 3 times. If all five of the high power TV > > > transmitters > > > at this site increase their power by three times, there will not be > nearly > > > enough primary power coming through the Idaho Power lines feeding the > > > site to supply the power needed. Idaho Power estimates it will cost one > > > million dollars to install the additional power lines needed to supply > the > > > increased load. > > > > I'm not seeing why they think they'll need that power increase. If they > > were to broadcast an analog image, the increase in image size would > > probably make the increase in power necessary just to keep the data > > stable, but as far as I am aware, HDTV is a digital standard which uses > > compression techniques to greatly reduce the data needed for transmission, > > allowing transmission over a smaller spectrum for the same quantity of > > data. Am I mistaken as to the HDTV you're referring to? > > The need for increased transmitter power to cover the same geographical area > is > probably related to the fact that most of the DTV permits granted by the FCC > are > in the UHF band and not the VHF band. To cover the same area in UHF that > you > covered in VHF requires more power and/or higher towers. > > Stations that were already in UHF don't need to make big power or tower > changes > with the move to DTV, but stations that were down in the VHF range ( 2 - 13 ) > , > will need to make changes. > > -John Scott, KD4VHG > Currently working at WAGA-TV in Atlanta. > I think you are correct. The reason for an increase in power is the move to UHF. All five of the stations are currently in the VHF band and will be moving to UHF. Roy W7IDM, ex N5RG From N5RG@aol.com Thu Nov 20 22:54:15 1997 Received: from mrin38.mail.aol.com (mrin38.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.148]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA05566 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:54:13 -0600 (CST) From: N5RG@aol.com Received: (from root@localhost) by mrin38.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id XAA07532 for ss@tapr.org; Thu, 20 Nov 1997 23:53:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 23:53:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <971120235341_1305557178@mrin38> To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1819] Re: DTV & SS > >Instead of continuing to broadcast > >using 6 Mhz channels, perhaps they should use Spread Spectrum spread > >over the whole UHF band. It seems to me this could result in a reduction > >in transmitter power of at least 10 db. I am sure there must be some good > >reasons why this is not a good idea. > > Actually, it is quite a good idea, but for a different reason then you > suggest. SS itself is no free ride with regards to power levels. The > physics still apply. Granted, with FEC techniques you can do better, > but they can just (almost) as easily apply to standard narrowband > techniques. While the average power over a given portion of the band > might go down, the average power over the entire band would stay about > the same as the previous narrowband signal. SS is still mysterious to me. I hear about processing gains of 10 to 20 db. I thought that if the signal were spread enough to achieve a processing gain of 10 db then the transmitter power could be reduced by 10 db. What is that equation for processing gain? Roy W7IDM, ex N5RG From LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Fri Nov 21 10:51:13 1997 Received: from ns2.eds.com (ns2.eds.com [199.228.142.78]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id KAA23898 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 10:51:11 -0600 (CST) From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Received: from nnsp.eds.com (nnsp2.eds.com [199.228.143.130]) by ns2.eds.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA07829 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:51:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from DNET.EDS.COM (dnet.eds.com [130.174.31.77]) by nnsp.eds.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA32755 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:51:05 -0500 (EST) Received: by DNET.EDS.COM (Soft-Switch LMS 2.0) with snapi via DMNCEC id 0095000006414152; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:49:44 -0500 To: ss Subject: Re: [SS:1826] Identification packets Message-ID: <0095000006414152000002L022*@MHS> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:49:44 -0500 If it is not yet set in stone, I would recomend basing the ID on the RFC1001/1002 nameserver specification. It is implemented native on OS/2, LINUX and the various MS- networking packages. For operating systems not in that list, "see http://samba.canbarra.edu.au/pub/samba/". An application on the host system (not the radio) could send out the ID packets. There may be other IP based methods that could be used for Identification. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Fri Nov 21 18:14:08 1997 Received: from ns2.eds.com (ns2.eds.com [199.228.142.78]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id SAA08713 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 18:14:07 -0600 (CST) From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com Received: from nnsp.eds.com (nnsp2.eds.com [199.228.143.130]) by ns2.eds.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA02596 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 19:14:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from DNET.EDS.COM (dnet.eds.com [130.174.31.77]) by nnsp.eds.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA12777 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 19:14:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by DNET.EDS.COM (Soft-Switch LMS 2.0) with snapi via DMNCEC id 0095000006436382; Fri, 21 Nov 1997 19:12:43 -0500 To: ss Subject: Re: [SS:1806] RE: 1804] Another FHSS radio question Message-ID: <0095000006436382000002L022*@MHS> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 19:12:43 -0500 Tom wrote: >In the initial release, the radio will just be an IP-extension pipe. ... This is fine for any host system, once the link is established. The issue is how to control the radio from the host and establish the link. There has to be some way to select the channel to be used, and that does not map into any of the TCP/IP functions that I know of. One method some of the TCP/IP devices that I work with is to have them answer to a TELNET connection for doing this maintenance. Any access to the radio using the MAC address for Control and Status will need a special driver written on the host. It appears that in some areas, a linked configuration could work better than a hub. This seems to require the about the same amount of transceivers, two per station, but allow the operation to be completely transparent to web browsers and other connectionless services, or multiple simultaneous connections. I am of course assuming that the hams that invested in this technology would not want to get a busy signal. I know that I would not be. Because the links would just be IP or Ethernet extension cords of the previous link, special programming would not be needed. I realize that it is spectrally less efficient than a hub, as packets would be sent to all stations, not just where they were needed. The links could be converted to a collection of linked hubs when the number of stations in the area merrited it. For a hub configuration, I would probably want all the routing intelligence to be in an external host system, not the radios. Off the shelf equipment is readily available for this. I am assuming that the 20 mile range is with a directional antenna. A set of links can cover a larger area than a hub in this case. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com Sat Nov 22 19:43:31 1997 Received: from aud.alcatel.com (rockdal.aud.alcatel.com [128.251.30.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id TAA18572 for ; Sat, 22 Nov 1997 19:43:30 -0600 (CST) Received: from rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM by aud.alcatel.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22608; Sat, 22 Nov 97 19:43:30 CST Received: from mcdermott_lt.aud.alcatel.com (c05dialin_30) by rdxsunhost.Aud.Alcatel.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23897; Sat, 22 Nov 97 19:43:26 CST Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sat, 22 Nov 1997 19:43:21 -0600 Message-Id: <01BCF77E.E39712C0.mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com> From: Tom McDermott To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1831] RE: 1804] Another FHSS radio question Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 19:43:20 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Generally, the radio can perform as an Ethernet Bridge. Or, even better as a filtering, self-learning, or intelligent bridge. In this case, packets are not forwarded unless in fact they should traverse the link. The bridge 'learns' which addresses are on which end of the link, and builds a simple yes/no forwarding table. This is pretty old technology in the Ethernet world, but we have to write the whole thing from scratch for the radio. The bridge function must be sure to handle broadcast packets properly (such as ARP packets). I envision this as the initial configuration because it requires no LAN administration (precisely the reason our I.S. guys at work like it). You are correct about the radio having to establish the initial link, and we will be working on either a telnet or MAC-level package to do that. The software guys have been trying to find MAC-level drivers (I think they are called NDIS) with not much luck. MAC-level would be the most elegant. Tom McDermott mcdermot@aud.alcatel.com -----Original Message----- From: LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com [SMTP:LNUSSAT.JMALMBER@eds.com] Sent: Friday, November 21, 1997 6:20 PM To: ss@tapr.org Subject: [SS:1831] RE: 1804] Another FHSS radio question Tom wrote: >In the initial release, the radio will just be an IP-extension pipe. ... This is fine for any host system, once the link is established. The issue is how to control the radio from the host and establish the link. There has to be some way to select the channel to be used, and that does not map into any of the TCP/IP functions that I know of. One method some of the TCP/IP devices that I work with is to have them answer to a TELNET connection for doing this maintenance. Any access to the radio using the MAC address for Control and Status will need a special driver written on the host. It appears that in some areas, a linked configuration could work better than a hub. This seems to require the about the same amount of transceivers, two per station, but allow the operation to be completely transparent to web browsers and other connectionless services, or multiple simultaneous connections. I am of course assuming that the hams that invested in this technology would not want to get a busy signal. I know that I would not be. Because the links would just be IP or Ethernet extension cords of the previous link, special programming would not be needed. I realize that it is spectrally less efficient than a hub, as packets would be sent to all stations, not just where they were needed. The links could be converted to a collection of linked hubs when the number of stations in the area merrited it. For a hub configuration, I would probably want all the routing intelligence to be in an external host system, not the radios. Off the shelf equipment is readily available for this. I am assuming that the 20 mile range is with a directional antenna. A set of links can cover a larger area than a hub in this case. Regards, John Malmberg WB8TYW @K4HRY.#MIDTN.TN.USA E-Mail: lnussat.jmalmber@gmeds.com From /OU1=BLU0005_@mhs-merlin.attmail.com Sun Nov 23 11:16:00 1997 Received: from gaau.ga.mt.np.els-gms.att.net (gaau.ga.mt.np.els-gms.att.net [199.191.144.70]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id LAA19675 for ; Sun, 23 Nov 1997 11:15:58 -0600 (CST) From: /OU1=BLU0005_@mhs-merlin.attmail.com Received: from mhs!merlin by /C=CA/AD=ATTMAIL;Sun Nov 23 17:14:07 -0000 1997 Received: by /C=US/AD=ATTMAIL/PD=MERLIN;Sun Nov 23 12:13:30 -0500 1997 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 12:13:30 -0500 Transport-Options: /URGENT/REPORT Original-Encoding-Types: ASCII Disclose-Recipients: yes Subject: SIGNOFF SS mhs!merlin/ou=blu0005@attmail.com P2-Originator: mhs!merlin/OU1=BLU0005_ To: ss@tapr.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: (INTERNET:tapr.orgss) FROM: mhs!merlin/ou=blu0005@attmail.com SUBJECT: SIGNOFF SS Thank you for the information but at this time I would like to withdraw from the mailing list. Maintainer of the SIG is Barry McLarnon, VE3JF. Please direct comment s and suggestions to bm@hydra.carleton.ca or ve3jf@tapr.org. --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Tucson Amateur Packet Radio 8987-309 E Tanque Verde Rd #337 * Tucson, Az * 85749-9399 * 817-383-0 000 ********************************************************************* ***** To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a message to 'listserv@tap r.org' with the following line in the body of the message: signoff ss From lisabnkrft@worldnet.att.net Fri Nov 28 22:29:38 1997 Received: from sdn-ts-001pakpru05.dialsprint.net (250.philadelphia-05.pa.dial-access.att.net [12.68.111.250]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id WAA26962 for ; Fri, 28 Nov 1997 22:29:34 -0600 (CST) Received: (qmail 2549 invoked by uid 0); 28 Nov 1997 17:39:03 -0000 Date: 28 Nov 1997 17:39:03 -0000 Message-ID: <19971128173903.2548.qmail@sdn-ts-001pakpru05.dialsprint.net> Cc: recipient list not shown: ; Subject: "Re: Mars site to add to XMAS list" From: "Lisa B." Please forward to friends and bookmark for Christmas shopping... http://www.martianconsulate.com Use my code "18310SST" for online discounts when ordering. - Lisa >> On Wednesday, November 26, 1997, lisabnkrft@worldnet.att.net wrote: >> >> Joan, >> >> ... here's that site doing the Mars "Land Claims": >> >> http://www.martianconsulate.com >> >> I bought one for Bill's birthday last month. He was thrilled it > Thanks! Cool site -- I sent it around the office :) Never too > many Martians around -- keeps the UFO abduction rate to a minumum!!! > See you on Tuesday at the bookstore. Tell Mary that she needs To remove your name from our mailing list, please send a message with no lines with the subject 'REMOVE' to the address above. From wd5ivd@tapr.org Sun Nov 30 18:27:01 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id SAA13551 for ; Sun, 30 Nov 1997 18:26:59 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 18:03:15 -0600 To: " Spread Spectrum " From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: MC68EN360 Several asked about the processor that is used on TAPR 900 Mhz FHSS radio during the FHSS project discussion on Sunday at the DCC. Darryl Smith asked about making mods to the current project for some other applications. I pointed out that there was already a board available that does what he wants, since the goal of the current project was not to generate a generci processor which was already available. I said I would send the ref along as soon as I was able to get it from Bill. Bill Reed, WD0ETZ, who uncovered it sent this along today: Atlas Computer Equipment, Inc 3700 State Street Santa Barbara, CA 93105 805-898-2450 Model: ACE360/QM Price in qty 1: $450.00 Plus shipping Features: MC68EN360, 10 Base T port, serial port, serial EEPROM, flash, dram. I did find a link to them: http://interop.sbforums.com/ltbdir/company/200194/ Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From jh0mrp@dl.hlb.casio.co.jp Sun Nov 30 19:57:14 1997 Received: from sj1.casio.co.jp (sj1.casio.co.jp [202.248.149.130]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id TAA28089 for ; Sun, 30 Nov 1997 19:57:12 -0600 (CST) Received: from lime.casio.co.jp ([192.168.50.5]) by sj1.casio.co.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.6Wbeta7-magical-Mau Ver.2) with ESMTP id KAA16409 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 10:57:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from dlgw.dl.hlb.casio.co.jp (dlgw.dl.hlb.casio.co.jp [134.1.23.192]) by lime.casio.co.jp (8.7.6+2.6Wbeta7/3.5Wbeta-Saver Marionette J Ver. lime 1.0) with ESMTP id KAA03088 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 10:57:09 +0900 (JST) Received: from illusion.dl.hlb.casio.co.jp (illusion.dl.hlb.casio.co.jp [134.1.23.66]) by dlgw.dl.hlb.casio.co.jp (8.8.5/3.5Wpl7-CASIO Device Lab.) with SMTP id KAA14575 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 1997 10:57:06 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 1 Dec 1997 10:57:06 +0900 (JST) From: Katsuhiko MOROSAWA To: ss@tapr.org Subject: SS in JA Message-Id: <348219721F4.0C42.jh0mrp@dl.hlb.casio.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver 1.23 Some Japanese amateur radio stations were licensed Spreaded Spectrum, by MPT (Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications), recently. Most stations, however, can't QSO each other, since they use different SS method. Mr. Mano (JJ1CEI) and I (7K1NCP), on the other hand, applied for SS license, using compleatly same system, which was developed by Mr. Mano, and recieved licenses late in October. The first SS QSO in Japan was performed on November 2. I've reported it on my webpage. Please take a look at following location. http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/~jh0mrp/ss/1stQSO.html In addition, we are planning some outdoor experiments. I'll inform you of the results of these comming experiments too. -- Katsuhiko "Kay" MOROSAWA (JHMRP, 7K1NCP)