KV9U wrote: > When you are using xNOS aren't you also needing to be using TCP/IP > with considerable overhead? From what I have understood, using xNOS > on a 1200 baud system is not really practical although at 9600 baud > it is OK.
It depends on what you've got. I had no telephone then, so 1200 baud was fine. JNOS can use LZW compression on SMTP, so it was fair for text e-mails, say, up to 10 K. And I used TCP/IP on HF. Slow, but FTP worked. It was fine for SMALL files. Sometimes, bad setups with miserable antennas and bad parameters took a bigger toll than the TCPIP overhead... > Having said that, I know that JNOS2 now supports both HF and VHF. > Unfortunately, the HF runs with the usual proprietary boxes since > they are the available ARQ modes that must be used for this to work. > And HF is quite slow compared to 1200 baud packet, so perhaps JNOS > can work or some other xNOS variant? Pactor II on a good link can compare to 1200 baud on VHF. You cannot read the text flying up the screen, perhaps just take a glance at the flying words... > With the IP numbered system, such as the amateur radio 44 IP numbers, > you have to register your specific address with a central authority, > although I have never quite understood how it is used. You would > need to go to your areas AMPRNET Coordinator:) Certainly, or use one of the "high" addresses, say, 44.x.y.250, until you get hold of him. I have used that for people that I did not trust they had a long lasting interest. I am glad to say that sometimes I was wrong, so reassigned him with a "lower", permanent address, and reported it to AMPRNET. > I have also heard that one can set up any kind of local/regional > system using other numbers. At least with the hierarchical system, it > was easy for a human to usually see the routing needed to move the > traffic and it was easy for the user to set up an account with a BBS > since it used your callsign. It is possible, but those numbers should stay in an "isolated island". > If you had JNOS, what speeds were you running it at and why did it > discontinue operation? Wouldn't this be useful in areas where many do > not have internet access? The e-mail server was shut down by the organization that sponsored that ham BBS. New directors, new goals, you know... Yes, it was a GOOD idea. It worked at 1200 baud, a bit slow, but it worked for small mails. Guess about the same you should use with Winlink or PSKMail. JNOS and TCPIP, or Linux, have not become POPULAR because they are not really plug and play to work at low speeds, you have to know what you are doing. The learning curve is steep and it is really not for the faint of heart. 1200 baud works with JNOS, or Linux, but does NOT work with AGWPE and IE, because the timers on the browsers are thought for quicker networks and the timers expire...so, the usefulness is near zero and link goes down. The integrated AX.25 support in Linux can tell the browser to hold the horses and hold the link. On Windows, there is no such thing, and if the link is not up to the browser's expectations, it will screech to halt and disconnect. 73, Jose
