|
Packet Radio Digest - Volume 91, Number 95
NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain text files and messages contained on this site deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State, and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. The webmasters of this site do not advocate the breaking of any law. Our text files and message bases are for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon any information obtained from this or any other web site. We do not guarantee that any of the information contained on this system is correct, workable, or factual. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of any information on this site.
From wang!elf.wang.com!ucsd.edu!packet-radio-relay Fri Apr 19 14:48:29 1991 remote from tosspot
Received: by tosspot (1.64/waf)
via UUCP; Sat, 20 Apr 91 12:28:15 EST
for lee
Received: from somewhere by elf.wang.com
id aa11776; Fri, 19 Apr 91 14:48:28 GMT
Received: from ucsd.edu by news.UU.NET with SMTP
(5.61/UUNET-shadow-mx) id AA00334; Fri, 19 Apr 91 10:01:33 -0400
Received: by ucsd.edu; id AA23468
sendmail 5.64/UCSD-2.1-sun
Fri, 19 Apr 91 04:30:16 -0700 for hpbbrd!db0sao!dg4scv
Received: by ucsd.edu; id AA23460
sendmail 5.64/UCSD-2.1-sun
Fri, 19 Apr 91 04:30:13 -0700 for /usr/lib/sendmail -oc -odb -oQ/var/spool/lqueue -oi -fpacket-radiay packet-radio-list
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 91 04:30:08 PDT
From: Packet-Radio Mailing List and Newsgroup </dev/[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Packet-Radio Digest V91 #95
To: [email protected]
Packet-Radio Digest Fri, 19 Apr 91 Volume 91 : Issue 95
Today's Topics:
[ANS] Buggy thenet plus 2.06? (Was TheNET 1.16) (2 msgs)
AO-21 QUESTION
Current Listing of Packet PBBS's
FAQ list for packet? (was Re: Packet buzzwords)
NEDA, was: Packet buzzwords
Packet buzzwords (3 msgs)
TheNET 1.16 & 2.06
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[email protected]>
Send subscription requests to: <[email protected]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [email protected].
Archives of past issues of the Packet-Radio Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/packet-radio".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 Apr 91 11:12:01 GMT
From: gatech!bloom-beacon!eru!kth.se!sunic!mcsun!ukc!tcdcs!swift.cs.tcd.ie!phealy@ucsd.edu
Subject: [ANS] Buggy thenet plus 2.06? (Was TheNET 1.16)
To: [email protected]
In article <[email protected].jcs.mil>, [email protected].jcs.mil writes:
> Version 2.06:
> This version works perfectly and I have had no problems with it. I do
The only thing I have to add in regard to the information posted here
already is that the thenet plus 2.06 eprom setup program is excellent.
The original attraction to us of 2.06 was the (simple) mheard command.
I now think that a switch to 2.06 is warranted simply by the setup
program.
Thanks to everyone to took the time to reply to my question (oh3nwq,
wb4wor, wa3jpy).
Does anyone know if there is likely to be anything after 2.08? (or 1.16?)
73, Paul, EI9GL
------------------------------
Date: 16 Apr 91 13:11:11 GMT
From: gatech!bloom-beacon!eru!kth.se!sunic!mcsun!ukc!pyrltd!root44!praxis!praxis!mikec@ucsd.edu
Subject: [ANS] Buggy thenet plus 2.06? (Was TheNET 1.16)
To: [email protected]
>>>>> Regarding [ANS] Buggy thenet plus 2.06? (Was TheNET 1.16); [email protected].jcs.mil adds:
mgb> In article <[email protected]>, WB4WOR%[email protected]
mgb> (CHARLES LAYNO (WB4WOR)) writes:
> user system or closed backbone tunk. TheNET Plus 2.06 isn't configurable as
> much as 1.16, but since it was buggy, went back to 1.0.
mgb> Paul Healy, [email protected] then asks:
>We were about to replace a working thenet v1.1 with thenet plus 2.06 locally
>(ie most of Ireland). Could somebody with experience of v2.06 and v1.0/v1.1
>compare them for reliability in single and dual port configurations?
[bits about TheNet versions deleted]
mgb> Let me make a few comments on this since Charles and I are friends and we
mgb> were both looking at the same problems from two places in the same state.
mgb> It also did some weird things when connecting to G8BPQ nodes. The 1.16
mgb> would initiate a level 3 connect, and the G8BPQ node would respond. Then
mgb> the 1.16 would show the G8BPQ as a level 2 connect, would send it the list
mgb> of available node commands (like a user that had made an incorrect command)
mgb> and would THEN stop and would leave the user making the connect attempt
mgb> right at the 1.16 node and NOT connect him through to the G8BPQ node.
This may well be to do with the L4 timeout handshake that BPQ nodes send
when making/accepting a circuit connection. If you were to watch a BPQ
node setting up a circuit you would see one character of info (an 'x')
being sent to the remote node. TheNet 1.0 and 1.1 don't seems to care
about the extra data tacked on after the NET/ROM conn ack/conn req frame
but other TheNets might be more fussy. Get someone with a decent monitor
eg WA8DED or TCP/IP NOS or NET to watch the NET/ROM transactions for you.
Hope that helps, 73
Mike
****
.............................................................................
| | Michael Chace |
| e-mail : [email protected] | PraXis Systems |
| | Manvers Street |
| AMPRNET: [email protected] [44.131.20.3] | Bath, Avon |
| AX.25 : G6DHU @ G6DHU-2 or G6DHU @ GB7IMB | BA1 1PX UK |
| Phone : (44) [0]225 444700 | |
.............................................................................
------------------------------
Date: 14 Apr 91 07:20:20 GMT
From: [email protected]
Subject: AO-21 QUESTION
To: [email protected]
Does anyone in netland know what is the story with AO-21? When will the
transponders be put on line? Any information would be appreciated.
Dave Marthouse N2AAM
Unix: [email protected]
Fido: dave marthouse 1:107/323
Packet: n2aam @ w2emu-4.nj.usa.na
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 12:38:49 GMT
From: [email protected]
Subject: Current Listing of Packet PBBS's
To: [email protected]
Does anyone know if there is an ftp site that would have current listings
for packet PBBS's by state. I'd also like to get some current maps
for the PA/WV/OH tri state area.
\paul
WA3TLD
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 02:38:34 GMT
From: casbah.acns.nwu.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!zeus.unomaha.edu!acmnews.edu
Subject: FAQ list for packet? (was Re: Packet buzzwords)
To: [email protected]
In article <1991Apr16.170506.14041@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, [email protected] (William R. Hester) s:
>
> Does anyone know of a good packet handbook that fills in the gap between
> beginner and packet technoid level?
>
> ....and please post your responses to the original questions above to this
> group...I'm sure there are others who have wandered into packet radio and
> want to learn more...but are not up to the 56KBaud stuff yet! :-).
>
> Thanks.
>
This kinda suggests the need for a Frequently Asked Questions list for
rec.radio.amateur.packet similar to the wonderful lists that Diana Syriac
([email protected]) puts together for rec.radio.amateur.misc. Any volunteers?
I would, but I'm not what you would call a packet "expert" and I am busy
maintaining the Elmer's list.
73, Paul Schleck, KD3FU
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 12:48:20 GMT
From: pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!ultnix.enet.dec.com!taber@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: NEDA, was: Packet buzzwords
To: [email protected]
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Tadd,KA2DEW, ,3152621123) writes:
|>
|>New England TCPer - This journal comes out 6 times a month and
|>$12/year
|>NE TCPer 252 Stow Rd. Harvard, MA 01451
|>
Just for the record, you mean 6 times a year, right?
--
>>>==>PStJTT
Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber, KC1TD
"Nerd" is so demeaning, I prefer "fashion-impared."
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 00:15:00 GMT
From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.[email protected]
Subject: Packet buzzwords
To: [email protected]
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] ( Robert Taggart) writ
[What are these buzzwords?]
>1. TheNet
A clone of Netrom written by a group of German hams. Source available.
Distribution free.
>2. NetRom
Proprietary code for the TNC2 that establishes a low level network capablity
for level 2 users. Sold by Software 2000. It allows a user to "uplink"
to it via AX25 connected mode and issue commands to establish a connection
to another Netrom node then do a "downlink" to another level 2 user. The
internal network protocol uses UI frame datagrams. Features semi-automatic
routing.
>3. Net.Exe
A version of TCP/IP written by Phil Karn KA9Q for the IBM PC. It has been
ported to the Mac and Amiga. Allows peer level connections with other
stations using the IP protocol suite. Available commands include telnet,
ftp (get and put files), and smtp, a mail delivery agent. The package will
also do level 2 AX25 connections to users running ordinary TNCs. Requires
a KISS TNC or a DRSI board or one of several other hardware cards to
interface with a radio. Includes ethernet support. Supports multiple
ports. Each peer station is capable of IP routing.
>4. NOS
Network Operating System, a version of TCP/IP written by Phil Karn that
uses "lightweight multitasking". This is the current version of Net on the
IBM PC. Many enhanced functions over the older Net.Exe.
>5. KISS
Keep It Simple Stupid, operational software for the TNC2, and others,
that removes the AX25L2 protocol from the TNC and passes all packets
to your computer for further processing.
>6. What's the difference between a TNC-1 and a TNC-2
The TNC-1 is the original TAPR designed TNC. The TNC-2 is TAPR's second
generation TNC. They use different processor families with the TNC-1
using the Motorola family and the TNC-2 using the Zilog family. The
TNC-2 design is the most widely licensed and used design today.
Gary KE4ZV
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 15:29:22 GMT
From: agate!bionet!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!mojo.ots.utexas.edu!jah@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Subject: Packet buzzwords
To: [email protected]
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] ( Robert Taggart) wri>>
>[What are these buzzwords?]
>
>>1. TheNet
>
>A clone of Netrom written by a group of German hams. Source available.
>Distribution free.
Wrong.
Folks should be aware that THEnet(sm) is a registered service mark of
the Board of Regents of the University of Texas, and may not be used
without permission.
It also happens that TEXnet (tm) is a trade mark of the Texas Business
Network, Inc. I don't know who they are; I'm only affiliated with UT.
--
Jeff Hayward
The University of Texas System +1 512 471 2444
Office of Telecommunication Services [email protected].net
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 18:23:40 GMT
From: deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!delni.enet.dec.com!goldstein@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: Packet buzzwords
To: [email protected]
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Jeff Hayward) writes...
>>>1. TheNet
>>A clone of Netrom written by a group of German hams. Source available.
>>Distribution free.
>Wrong.
>
>Folks should be aware that THEnet(sm) is a registered service mark of
>the Board of Regents of the University of Texas, and may not be used
>without permission.
I think that's a non-sequitur.
THEnet (presumably) is Texas Higher Education network, perhaps? note
the three uppercase letters.
TheNet is a German freeware implementation of the same protocols as
NETROM. Note the lower case "he".
See? Different name. Not that I'm a lawyer. And I don't see how
the two can be confused. Heck, Digital goes to great lengths to
protect its ALL-IN-1 trademark, but you can buy All-in-One Steak Sauce.
(I prefer Texas Best, myself.)
---
Fred R. Goldstein k1io Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA
[email protected] voice: +1 508 952 3274
Do you think anyone else on the planet would share my opinions, let
alone a multi-billion dollar corporation?
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 09:45:25 GMT
From: [email protected]
Subject: TheNET 1.16 & 2.06
To: [email protected]
Hello friends !
Maybe I can help to clarify a little TheNET confusion.
NORD><LINK made theNets (VERY strongly influenced by WA8DED work)
available in source and binary forms a long time ago.
A month or two ago I received a floppy with all compilers and
tools needed to make own version.
I got sources for TheNET 1.1 normal,interlink, user-access;
as well as COVERSE and TF21d. So, this are official versions
from NORD><LINK.
There are two versions widely circulated, both based on TheNET 1.1.
TheNET 1.16 is an intermin version toward 1.20 (I hope !) made by
HAMs close to NORD><LINK (but not DF2AU himself); while 2.06 is
made in USA. I saw several other versions which are definitely pached
EPROM images... Just count number of characters !
Most versions just play with user commands processor - but
nobody tried to make faster interrupt routines and better level 3
routing.
2.06 has very nice documentation, so it is worth FTPing from TOMCAT;
but I do not beleive it is worth climbing to the mountains to
replace EPROMs. Single usable function, not found at
1.1, is HEARD list of last few calls. This is not usable on our
busy 2m channells - because node hears much more stations
as can be connected. Routes list use IDENT instead of CALLS, what
just add confusion. Another nice feature is NOT FOUND message answer
to "N UNKNOWN" command. At least in our region 2.06 is used mainly
by SysOps who collect versions (must get TheNET 3.13 for them !).
1.16 is really next step. They throw away useless code for
user terminal, so RS-232 port is NET/ROM ASYNC protocol only.
They got space in EPROM for few nice changes.
Reasons, why we put 1.16 to work in YU3 network:
- T 60 command puts TX to transmit 60 seconds of test signal.
This was badly needed for antenna tuning on 23cm.
- Remote adjustable TXDELAY
- "N UNKNOWN" command is replayed by "Not found"
- Several flags to set mode of level 3 beacons
- RESTART commands clears links, but keeps routes and nodes
Another features, liked by users
- CTEXT message (QRM, as all CTEXTes - but HAMLETs like them !)
- QUIT command, which RECONNECTS back
- NODE ? gives nice sorted list of known nodes.
- LED 0,1,2,3 instead of HI/LOW
Now... BUGS:
We run several TheNET nodes on 38400 bd radio speed/ 9600 bd RS-232.
They are connected to other nodes via diode matrix or FKROM (EPROM
with logic for 4 TNCs, using TTL level ASYNC TNC lines. I hate
diodes ...). All tested versions have a bug in LEV3 or LEV4:
With nodes going up/down memory become corrupted and node blocks.
But, after I enforced stable network (NO nodes with 0 quality),
keeping maximum number of nodes at 20, they are quite stable.
Users know: To go to OE, call 4N3P. To go to Italy, call 4N3K. To south,
call 4N2Z.
1.16 bugs
User interface on RS-232 is out. SIO pin 22 is no more needed.
But - take care with single node - it attemps to send routing
beacons to RS-232, and they eat memory, waiting for port to be ready.
So, FLAGS 5 1 is MUST for single nodes (AND remote reset). It works
fine in company.
1.16 sends CTEXT for EVERY lev.2 link - and if you block CTEXT,
blank INFO frame with PID F0 is send on any connection, G8BPQ hates
this, and they like to exchange several QRM lev.2 frames with PID F0.
There are also some minor bugs in output messages for SYSOPs, like
entering INFO and reading it in same QSO.
1.1y is yu3fk version - I try to get better results on 38400 bd by
lowering link number (25 is too much for interlink nodes) etc. Only
few mods to 1.1 - I do not want to make big changes on old version !
Best 73 and happy networking !
Iztok, [email protected]
[email protected]
------------------------------
Date: 18 Apr 91 17:42:25 GMT
From: deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!ryn.mro4.dec.com!ultnix.enet.dec.com!taber@decwrl.dm
To: [email protected]
References <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>ws.crl.d
Reply-To : [email protected] (Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber)
Subject : Re: Packet buzzwords
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Jeff Hayward) writes:
|>
|>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Gary Coffman) writes:
|>>In article <[email protected]>
|>[email protected] ( Robert Taggart) writes:
|>>>
|>>[What are these buzzwords?]
|>>
|>>>1. TheNet
|>>
|>>A clone of Netrom written by a group of German hams. Source
|>available.
|>>Distribution free.
|>
|>Wrong.
|>
|>Folks should be aware that THEnet(sm) is a registered service mark of
|>the Board of Regents of the University of Texas, and may not be used
|>without permission.
Good luck. I assume that you can prove "THEnet" predates "TheNet" and
have figured out whom to charge with infringement. I think your best
course is to give permission (if you can find someone to accept it.)
--
>>>==>PStJTT
Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber, KC1TD
"Nerd" is so demeaning, I prefer "fashion-impared."
------------------------------
End of Packet-Radio Digest
******************************
|
|
