Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
Hi Trevor, Op 29-08-10 11:08, Trevor . schreef: >> I do not understand why -say- the IARU does not does this. I'm not >> say they should endorce any "standard" of any technology. >> > Unfortunately it would require a volunteer willing to put in a lot of hard > work to do. Volunteers are always in short supply. > Well, I don't know. In the internet-world, RFCs are usually written by the people who design the protocol or the technology explained in the RFC. The IETF doesn't do that neither. All the IARU should do is: - encourage people who create new protocols and technologies to document it in a written document. - Do "quality control" (e.g. concerning the exact wording of the RFCs) - Publish them. (which just means "put them on their website"). Now I must say. Thinking about it. Perhaps one of the differences in (say) an internet-protocol and ham digital modes is that the first group is usually created by teams of people, while I have the impression that a lot of the digital modes are created by just one or a very limited number of people. In a team, there usually already is written documentation anyway (as part of the process of coming up with the specification and the discussions inside the team), it's probably much easier to "translate the final version into a RFC-document" and there usually already is somebody of the team assigned to documentation anyway. If you do create something by yourself, most people have "something on paper, but most of it in my head". The task of asking "now write this all into a nice technical spec" is then much more work. Perhaps what Dave (Rowe, creator of codec2) should do is to make a technical presentation on some ham conference (preferable filmed and available on youtube afterwards) so that somebody else can start write a technical specs based on that. And, to be honest. Having to give a technical presentation is not necessairy a bad thing. I noticed myself that, having to make some slides and having to think on how to explain something, quite often leads to some insides into problems you are having. :-) > One existing source of info is > > http://www.arrl.org/technical-characteristics > > But this doesn't provide always provide detailed description of a mode, for > instance you couldn't recreate Pactor-III from the information supplied > there. Also I suspect it's not kept up to date with mode enhancements. Thanks for the link. Very interesting. IIRC, pactor 2 and pactor 3 use patented technology so I doubt it will be freely documented somewhere. :-( > 73 Trevor M5AKA > Cheerio! Kristoff ON5ARF (ex ON1ARF)
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
--- On Sat, 28/8/10, Kristoff Bonne wrote: > I do not understand why -say- the IARU does not does this. I'm not > say they should endorce any "standard" of any technology. Unfortunately it would require a volunteer willing to put in a lot of hard work to do. Volunteers are always in short supply. One existing source of info is http://www.arrl.org/technical-characteristics But this doesn't provide always provide detailed description of a mode, for instance you couldn't recreate Pactor-III from the information supplied there. Also I suspect it's not kept up to date with mode enhancements. 73 Trevor M5AKA
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
Speaking of digital voice I had a nice but short QSO today while driving home from a event I had been to. I was really shocked because out of the clear blue I had been listening to VHF when the HF radio started talking. So I just had to answer his DV CQ. John, W0JAB
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
Hi all,
Talking of documentation and specs.
I am still pretty new to radio-amateurism (just started again after more
then 17 years) one of the first things I noticed when I started
exploring all these digital modes, is that it is pretty difficult to get
specifications and exact documentation of them all.
If I look at the culture of the internet and opensource (which is my
profesional background), I'm still surprised that there is not central
"repository" of all these digital modes.
In the internet-world, there is the IETF (internet Engineering Task
Force) and there are RFCs.
Almost all protocols are published as a RFC, for everybody to read;
usually at the same time when applications and tools using it appear;
and the IETF make sure there is a consistent wording and quality in
these documents.
This means that everbody who is interested in a protocol or some
technology can just download the specs and read them.
Either I have looked good enout, but AFAIK, in the ham-world; that does
not exist at all.
I've been searching all over the web to find information on how all
these digital modes really work and you really need to scrap information
together for all over the web (without any certainty what is now "the
correct way").
I do not understand why -say- the IARU does not does this. I'm not say
they should endorce any "standard" of any technology.
But, the way I see it, it should really help if they would provide a
platform so that everybody who comes up with a new technology or a
protocol can document it (in a way consistent to other "RFCs" and place
it in a central "repostitory" so that everybody can read it.
That would help a lot, clear up inconsistencies between programs and
help developers to write code.
Cheerio!
Kr. Bonne.
Op 28-08-10 11:17, Patrick Lindecker schreef:
Hello Andy,
I think it would be an interesting subject. However, if such mode was
created I think it might be rather be conceived in some public way, so
that the _detailed _specifications be public and written by
specialists of this specific matter (I don't belong to these specialists).
Then, it would be (relatively) easy to carry these detailed
specifications to multimode programs, which would be compatible on
this particular mode.
Now, I think the Cesco program (FDMDV) exists and it worked well (at
least with the first Codec), so...
73
Patrick
- Original Message -
*From:* Andy obrien <mailto:k3uka...@gmail.com>
*To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com>
*Sent:* Saturday, August 28, 2010 9:34 AM
*Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 -
programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
I wonder if Patrick would be interested ???
Andy K3UK
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Tony mailto:d...@optonline.net>> wrote:
All,
I received an email from Peter Martinez today regarding the
new codec
developed by Dave Rowe. I had asked him if it was possible to
use it in
one of the digital voice applications and he explained that
the modem,
which was originally designed by Peter for a different voice
codec,
would have to be modified for it to work with Dave's codec.
He said that he would not be able to take this on at the
moment because
of other obligations, but he did mention that he would pass
along the
know-how to anyone who would like to try writing a modem for
Dave's
codec based on Peter's own FDM design. This is how Cesco, HB9TLK
re-engineered Peter's modem to work with a slower 1400 bps
codec for the
digital voice program FDMDV and how Erik, VK4RS developed EasyPal
Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get in touch with Cesco
for some
time now so it may be necessary to have someone come up with a
new
digital voice application - something along the lines of
WinDRM / FDMDV.
If anyone is interested in taking on these projects, please
contact me
direct and I will put you in touch with Peter.
Thanks,
Tony -K2MO
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
Hello Andy, I think it would be an interesting subject. However, if such mode was created I think it might be rather be conceived in some public way, so that the detailed specifications be public and written by specialists of this specific matter (I don't belong to these specialists). Then, it would be (relatively) easy to carry these detailed specifications to multimode programs, which would be compatible on this particular mode. Now, I think the Cesco program (FDMDV) exists and it worked well (at least with the first Codec), so... 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Andy obrien To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2010 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem I wonder if Patrick would be interested ??? Andy K3UK On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Tony wrote: All, I received an email from Peter Martinez today regarding the new codec developed by Dave Rowe. I had asked him if it was possible to use it in one of the digital voice applications and he explained that the modem, which was originally designed by Peter for a different voice codec, would have to be modified for it to work with Dave's codec. He said that he would not be able to take this on at the moment because of other obligations, but he did mention that he would pass along the know-how to anyone who would like to try writing a modem for Dave's codec based on Peter's own FDM design. This is how Cesco, HB9TLK re-engineered Peter's modem to work with a slower 1400 bps codec for the digital voice program FDMDV and how Erik, VK4RS developed EasyPal Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get in touch with Cesco for some time now so it may be necessary to have someone come up with a new digital voice application - something along the lines of WinDRM / FDMDV. If anyone is interested in taking on these projects, please contact me direct and I will put you in touch with Peter. Thanks, Tony -K2MO
Re: [digitalradio] Digital Voice update #2 - programmers wanted - codec2 and the G3PLX modem
I wonder if Patrick would be interested ??? Andy K3UK On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Tony wrote: > > > All, > > I received an email from Peter Martinez today regarding the new codec > developed by Dave Rowe. I had asked him if it was possible to use it in > one of the digital voice applications and he explained that the modem, > which was originally designed by Peter for a different voice codec, > would have to be modified for it to work with Dave's codec. > > He said that he would not be able to take this on at the moment because > of other obligations, but he did mention that he would pass along the > know-how to anyone who would like to try writing a modem for Dave's > codec based on Peter's own FDM design. This is how Cesco, HB9TLK > re-engineered Peter's modem to work with a slower 1400 bps codec for the > digital voice program FDMDV and how Erik, VK4RS developed EasyPal > > Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get in touch with Cesco for some > time now so it may be necessary to have someone come up with a new > digital voice application - something along the lines of WinDRM / FDMDV. > > If anyone is interested in taking on these projects, please contact me > direct and I will put you in touch with Peter. > > Thanks, > > Tony -K2MO > > >
