On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
> You just need to move up in frequency a bit. My slowest ham-band link runs at
> 12 Mbps and my fastest at over 100 Mbps.
>
> Good reminder that I should renumber the IPv4 portion of that network to
> somewhere in 44.0.0.0/8 however.
What
Nope, mostly HF (under 30mhz) gear at 300baud. Yes, you read that right.
I've seen a couple shorter hops of fractional T1 on 900mhz or 9600baud AX.25
on 144mhz, but there just aren't enough links to use line of site
frequencies.
Push mad bits,
-Jack Carrozzo
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Chr
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
> Nope, mostly HF (under 30mhz) gear at 300baud. Yes, you read that right.
You are running IP on this? And I though 1200 bauds half duplex was slow.
Me personally? No, but I have used it. IP over 9600baud serial actually
isn't that bad for IRC when you're in the middle of the woods and all.
You want slow... read about winlink2000, the email/messaging system for hams
and emergency response. It's PSK on HF, meant to be reliable but if you get
mo
Used to run IP over AX.25 using KA9Q JNOS back in the day. HF at 300
baud simplex / half-duplex and VHF 144 Mhz at 1200 with similar
characteristics. I bought some 9600 baud gear at one point but never
got it all put together before moving on to the regular internet and
(somewhat unfortunately) n
And I just want to point out that a full /8 (worth $188,911,452.16 at the
benchmark rate as set by Microsoft/NNI) is dedicated to AMPR... :-)
When I was at IANA, we (where by "we" I mean Leo Vegoda :-)) looked at trying
to reclaim this /8 around the same time we were recovering the /8 dedicated
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:54 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> The decentralized nature of administration of 44/8 made this somewhat
> intractable. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out in the future
> address markets.
>
I reckon it'd be about as hard to get back 44/8 as 11/8, but with more
ne
On May 26, 2011, at 5:02 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
> I reckon it'd be about as hard to get back 44/8 as 11/8, but with more
> neckbeards. Anytime the fcc tries to reclaim frequencies all these guys come
> out of the wood work with the magic phrase 'emergency communications' and
> some congressmen g
Yeah, so... the thing is there really are benefits to ham radio for
the community. I 100% believe in that. And yes, there are a lot of
neck beards but, honestly, look at some pictures from a NANOG meeting!
;)
I have been massively inactive in Amateur Radio for some time. I miss
it. However I
Since we are turning the clock backI launched my first AX.25 node in 1985
when I was living at Ft. Belvoir, VA. It was part of the 144 MHz "eastlink"
network that ran from Maine to Miami. Somewhere on a 5-1/2" floppy disk I have
an ASCII map of that network.
You really could hear the p
I still have my TNC here on the shelf... not much use for pushing bits, but
still handy to decode SCADA on 900mhz ;-)
-Jack Carrozzo
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Sachs, Marcus Hans (Marc) <
marcus.sa...@verizon.com> wrote:
>
> Since we are turning the clock backI launched my first AX.25
On May 26, 2011 3:08 PM, "Jaime Magiera" wrote:
>
>
>
>from our cold dead hands.
>
>
> kd8mzn
>
I haven't read the entire thread, but since everyone with a call sign is
checking in...
There are some similarities between bands and ipv4 exhaustion, sure... One
major difference is that th
On May 26, 2011, at 4:50 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
> There are some similarities between bands and ipv4 exhaustion, sure... One
> major difference is that those using ipv4 have the option of using ipv6,
Out of curiosity, is there an IPv6 stack for ham devices?
Regards,
-drc
On May 26, 2011 7:54 PM, "David Conrad" wrote:
>
> On May 26, 2011, at 4:50 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
> > There are some similarities between bands and ipv4 exhaustion, sure...
One
> > major difference is that those using ipv4 have the option of using ipv6,
>
> Out of curiosity, is there an IPv6 stac
On May 26, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
> > Out of curiosity, is there an IPv6 stack for ham devices?
> Well there's a loaded question.
...
> I won't say that there aren't "ham devices" with an IP stack built in, but I
> think we're talking about different layers here.
Sorry, poorly worde
Sorry, poorly worded. What I was wondering is there is an equivalent of
KA9Q for IPv6. I believe one of the comments we got back when we were
trying to reclaim 44/8 was that folks couldn't migrate to IPv6 because
no software was available...
We've come a little way since NOS. Linux has nati
On Thu, May 26, 2011, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> >Sorry, poorly worded. What I was wondering is there is an equivalent of
> >KA9Q for IPv6. I believe one of the comments we got back when we were
> >trying to reclaim 44/8 was that folks couldn't migrate to IPv6 because
> >no software was availab
On May 26, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Carl Rosevear wrote:
> Yeah, so... the thing is there really are benefits to ham radio for
> the community. I 100% believe in that. And yes, there are a lot of
> neck beards but, honestly, look at some pictures from a NANOG meeting!
> ;)
>
Indeed, there is a club
On 5/26/11 11:23 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On May 26, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
Out of curiosity, is there an IPv6 stack for ham devices?
Well there's a loaded question.
...
I won't say that there aren't "ham devices" with an IP stack built in, but I
think we're talking about differ
David Conrad writes:
> Sorry, poorly worded. What I was wondering is there is an equivalent
> of KA9Q for IPv6.
But KA9Q is already certified for IPv6!
http://ipv6.he.net/certification/scoresheet.php?pass_name=ka9q
(found on http://www.ka9q.net/)
SCNR.
--
Simon.
20 matches
Mail list logo
