A couple comments on KV9U's notes... (one > is Jose)
> 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. The beauty of xNOS is that you can choose. You can use the TCP/IP with it's more overhead and better routing or you can use the more efficient legacy FBB/W0RLI BBS forwarding technology. You can route the messages any way you want. 1200 works ok as long as you have a good RF path and keep the messages from getting too big. > Sometimes, bad setups with miserable antennas and bad parameters took a > bigger toll than the TCPIP overhead... Yup. - given good RF, like a regenerating repeater, you can move lots of traffic even at 1200 baud. > > 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:) Totally not needed for any *nos work. It's been a big distraction from the important stuff of passing messages on the air. Just treat the RF like you do a home LAN and use the 192.168 numbers. When you have a real Internet presence, use no-ip.com or other dynamic dns service to publish it. > > If you had JNOS, what speeds were you running it at and why did it > > discontinue operation? Discontinue? Just looking for time to get it ported to a WRT54G or NSLU2 > 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. That is the truth. Not worth the effort for most folks in this era of web portals and you-tubes. 73 Bill
