After reading what others have written about the topic, I feel that your question wasn't quite given the appropriate response.
Packet is still alive. In places where data rates are expensive (even with broadband), packet networks run strong. While I was in Portland, OR., I found that their entire citywide packet network was mainly setup for EOC's between the counties and city governments would have a means of passing traffic in case the big tower farm overlooking downtown Portland were to be destroyed. And remember kids, we still have ampr.org - many a ISP would love to take over this Class A subnet (no one sells class A subnets anymore.. you're lucky to get a (full) class C let alone a class B). I think the problem with packet is the thinking that goes behind it. Fact: 1200bps packet on 2m is slow. Another Fact: 1200bps works on even the lowest common denomination of radios Yet Another Fact: 1200bps works just fine for APRS. You have to design the application to the hardware limitations. No one should expect to be pulling down a entire NTS feed over 1200bps. Would you pull a USENET binaries feed through a dialup? I guess it depends on how hard up you are. But APRS is a perfect example of an application that expands the use of technology despite the hardware limitations. There is another problem with packet. Since everything has boiled down to "Internet Wormholes" for repeaters and digital communications, we've become reliant on the people who both moderate and manage the technology, and the keys only they possess because it's their little hill they can claim to "possess". Everyone wants to feel important. Absolute power in one man's hand leads to absolutely nothing getting done until you have showered them in a glow of praise they are unworthy of. Plus, people just lose interest despite their roles. Case in point, I wanted to modify my AMPR.ORG information. The chain of command required me to contact my net coordinator. Well, I hadn't talked to him in years so I try to find him on the internet. All the email addresses and contact information I found was outdated. I knew him to be somewhat of a hermit so I tried sending him a NTS message from here. Thanks to the poor routing at my gateway, I'm pretty sure my message either arrived to him and I never received a reply or that it hit the toilet somewhere along the way. (Yet another application that needs to be revamped... hierarchical addressing is great until they split or use non-standard/non-intuitive addressing). Luckily, Brian Kantor straightened out the record after I waited a month on the net coordinator. Then, I ran into another road block with fullers.net who maintains the AXIP gateway list that all internet gateways need for the mesh to work. All his email bounces or drops to a black hole. How nice. And this is where I sit. But who do we have to blame for this? Personally, I blame myself for being too lazy and not writing applications that are more in line with the current state of the hobby. I blame myself for not taking the time to take advantage of the decades of software technology to build a better wheel that can move these walls out of the way. And I blame *all* hams for not demanding the same open standards in protocols (like G-TOR/CLOVER) as they expect in their user manuals (schematics of the equipment). That being said, if someone builds a better application that pulls together functions better than others and wants to charge for it, I think they should get the money. Provided they've looked toward the future of the hobby and made sure that their protocol can be maintained for the stretch of time we share. After all, people still charge for the Bible. Bob Keyes wrote: > Hello all, > I came across a box of old Maxon DM-0515 / 0530 data > radios and am going to donate them to my University > radio club, where they will be recrystalled and we'll > start our local net. While talking to local packeteers > and researching packet on the Internet, I have become > quite dismayed at the state of the art and the state > of the community. There seems to be lots of acrimony. > There seems to be lots of decay and a general > reduction in the site and number of packet networks on > VHF/UHF. Much of the blame for this decline has been > blamed on the rise of the Internet. While the rise of > the Internet has changed the way people might think of > the utility of packet radio, I don't think that this > is the only reason for its decline. > > A survey of web sites and software shows the sorry > state of affairs. The hits that Google returns for > packet radio are so out of date, many have not been > updated since the late 90s. Software is another big > problem. I am a Linux user, and I insist that software > I use be open source. Much of the software out there > has become Microsoft-only or Microsoft-centric, and > closed source. This simply will not do. > > Closed source is 'appliance operator' software. It > does not allow, never mind encourage, and > experimentation or innovation. This results in packet > radio technology being stale, stuck in the last > millenium. > > We need to reinvigorate the digital radio > experimenters community on VHF and UHF, much as the > way PSK31 reinvigorated HF digital radio, and Amateur > Radio as a whole. This is not to say we need a copy of > PSK31 for the higher bands, but some manner of > progress. We need to identify the technical issues > facing packet, and address them. We need open-source > software, inexpensive hardware, and good performance. > Perhaps we need to make a complete break with the > past. I'd like to think we can continue to support > existing protocols while at the same time advancing > the art of radio, but that we would re-examine > everything from modulation schemes and right on up the > stack to address modern needs and abilities. > > I have to admit, I have been out of the packet scene > for some time. I got caught up in WiFi networks, and I > am still heavily involved in that area. Perhaps there > are areas of progress that I have missed. If that's > the case, please inform me, and also attempt to make > these projects more visible. > > 73, > Bob > N1YRK > > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
