[DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
I don't think Nate dislikes D-Star. I certainly don't, but I do wish that the folks who have produced compatible stuff for it, while promising that it would be open source, would follow through on their promises - or at least release documentation so other amateurs can do so. Agree with Nate and Jay; please just call a spade a spade (a bloody shovel). Proprietary D-Star add-ons, to sell to fellow hams to make a few bucks, are welcome, just don't describe them open projects and claim your motivation is to advance the hobby unless you provide the URL to the source (or give the products away for free). And Ed, that such exist do not make D-Star per se an open environment. A more correct descriptor might be a multi-source environment. 73--John
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
Guys, Please be careful with the wording that you are throwing out. Open Development and Open Source are very different things. Closed Development and Closed Source are also very different things. The Apple iPhone is semi-Closed Development, but Closed Source. Windows is Open Development, Closed Source. Programming against the D-STAR serial port is Open Development. Whether it is Open Source or closed Source depends on the application developer. D-STAR is not Open Source. D-STAR isn't a program, therefore it CAN NOT BE OPEN SOURCE. Source means that there is programming. The D-STAR protocol isn't a program. D-STAR is OPEN PROTOCOL. The Icom D-STAR Gateway Software is CLOSED SOURCE. But that's only the Icom G2 Software. DPlus is Closed Source. It's developer thought about making it Open Source, but after consulting with many of the players, decided to keep it Closed Source. D-RATS, I believe, is Open Source Just because step-by-step instructions don't exist for hams who don't know what GMSK is, to make a D-STAR radio, doesn't mean that it is closed. That just means no one has decided to take the time and effort to create it. If you keep propagating the idea that D-STAR is closed, then you deter people from getting into it, and more importantly developing new applications for it. D-STAR Development is open. There are a number of access methods and protocols that are available for creating applications for D-STAR. There basically is only one part of D-STAR that is closed, and most all of it has been reversed engineered, which means development is possible and has been done. Compare this to the iPhone where you have to sign all sorts of agreements and then rely on the manufacturer to distribute your program. From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of john_ke5c Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 10:05 AM To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions . I don't think Nate dislikes D-Star. I certainly don't, but I do wish that the folks who have produced compatible stuff for it, while promising that it would be open source, would follow through on their promises - or at least release documentation so other amateurs can do so. Agree with Nate and Jay; please just call a spade a spade (a bloody shovel). Proprietary D-Star add-ons, to sell to fellow hams to make a few bucks, are welcome, just don't describe them open projects and claim your motivation is to advance the hobby unless you provide the URL to the source (or give the products away for free). And Ed, that such exist do not make D-Star per se an open environment. A more correct descriptor might be a multi-source environment. 73--John
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
Very well put, Ed. I agree with your sentiments about open vs. closed and how it can be applied to different pieces of D-STAR differently, and that was the whole point of my reply and questions. Comparing D-STAR to iPhone is somewhat an Apples-to-Oranges (pun intended? - GRIN!) comparison though. Try comparing D-STAR development to say, development for a P25 repeater or development for MotoTRBO. Let's stick to similar products doing similar things. In that vein, D-STAR Gateway development is about equal in open-ness to paying the fee and becoming a Moto developer. First you have to be a Gateway admin or have access to a Gateway... etc etc etc... the list of must do's are pretty long to develop software for the back end. Also, you're a tiny bit hung up on the On-Air/RF side of things as being open, without realizing that I'm more interested in the server side of things... Yes, the specs are published for the RF protocol (and from what I hear, the specs aren't exactly what Icom implements in their rigs - they add on to it), but *most* folks aren't interested in building radios. What they are interested in is the the things that actually make D-STAR *different*, and those things are handled up at the site in the controller, and in the servers on the Internet... Changes in those are where changes make a significant difference in D-STAR's capabilities. Gateway development is a much more closed environment than the on-air/RF side of things. People are doing it, but it's a gauntlet so to speak of reverse-engineering that everyone's afraid to document for fear of abuse. The reality is... the on-air protocol and rig implementation is so ripe for abuse, that worrying about gateway abuse is closing the gate after the sheep got out. P25: Hard to develop for today, but working on a standardized interface for the linking/site side of things. No community or centralized distribution mechanisms, really yet. Maybe after the off-air/hardware/interop specs are published... someday. MotoTRBO: Pay some money, get your SDK and the full specs of how to interoperate with the boxes. Nothing's free. Tons of developers and product already released. Not sure the quality of most of them, reviews of them are a bit light in the press so far. Can find any registered developer's apps on one manufacturer's website... Moto's. Smells like a well-run 3rd party developer project, to me, with vendors lining up to create applications and competing, but requires $ to play. D-STAR: Reverse-engineer well enough to be accepted into a small group of developers. Piss them off, lose access. Basically a morals and talent gauntlet. Finding out who's part of the clan, is rather difficult. Open-source products are about a 1-to-4 ratio right now out of those folks. Nothing resembling a central repository. Smells Amateur-ish to me, which matches what it is. Some of the solutions require $ to play, others are given freely as programs without source, a very small number are open-source. I can't think of any other digital radio systems in wide use to analyze openness. Those are the big three right now for Amateur use, and I'm not pushing any particular one. I just like comparing all of them to each other... they're ultimately all in competition for the hearts and minds of Amateurs. D-STAR drops out when you switch to the Commercial world. (Technically you also pick up the Kenwood/Icom partnership of their TDMA-based systems when you cross over from Amateur to Commercial... I haven't seen any significant up-take of the Kenwood/Icom system(s) in the Amateur world. But they do have a digital product pointed squarely at the commercial folks, marketing-wise. I leave it out of the comparisons, because I'm an Amateur and I'm not interested in making anything about my radio hobby Commercial.) Which is better? I don't know... but none of them are truly open. That's all I was ever saying... And I wasn't trying to piss in anyone's Cheerios. I think we do the world a disservice if we answer it's all open, when it's not. NONE of the existing systems out there are truly open, 100%. I hold out hope for a truly open-source D-STAR Gateway... that would be a real game-changer. Nate WY0X
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
And since you agreed with me, I'll agree back :) My only qualm is when people say that D-STAR is closed. That's when I'm going to jump in with both barrels firing. For you and me who know the details, we each tend to understand what the other is trying to say, the issue is when someone who isn't as familiar to D-STAR hears it and starts quoting it, pretty much out of context. Remember, we have a lot of people reading this forum. And be fair, don't forget that most of the commercially sold repeater controllers for Amateur Radio are closed source and closed development. So from that viewpoint, Icom only followed what has been an acceptable practice within Amateur Radio. Ed WA4YIH From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 4:08 PM To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions . Very well put, Ed. I agree with your sentiments about open vs. closed and how it can be applied to different pieces of D-STAR differently, and that was the whole point of my reply and questions. Comparing D-STAR to iPhone is somewhat an Apples-to-Oranges (pun intended? - GRIN!) comparison though. Try comparing D-STAR development to say, development for a P25 repeater or development for MotoTRBO. Let's stick to similar products doing similar things.
[DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
The one question that I got referred to a mistaken concept that D-STAR was a closed protocol. We explained that the D-STAR protocol is open and defined by the JARL. Sitting right next to us was Internet Labs with the DVDongle and DVAP and David with his non-Icom repeater, great examples of just how open everything is. The only part of D-Star that is open is the on-air protocol. The G2 and DPlus protocols are definitely not open, which isn't in the spirit of amateur radio IMHO. Ed WA4YIH Jonathan G4KLX
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
How many manufacturers have the code for their microprocessors published? Yes it is the same thing. Over the air is published, while a number of off the air items aren't published. I'd really like to get into the source code of some of my radios and change the way it does things, but I can't. Amateur Radio is about technology and experimentation and proprietary issues are definitely a part of that arena today. And while you indicate that the G2 and DPlus protocols aren't open source, they definitely have been reversed engineered and we have third party solutions talking to them now. But the main part with experimentation is that the D-STAR network is a collection of systems that interoperate with each other. If someone gets on and starts experimenting against the live network, this can have DRAMATIC impact to the network's operation. You don't necessarily only impact your own small part of the world. Ed WA4YIH From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Naylor Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 10:44 AM To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions . The one question that I got referred to a mistaken concept that D-STAR was a closed protocol. We explained that the D-STAR protocol is open and defined by the JARL. Sitting right next to us was Internet Labs with the DVDongle and DVAP and David with his non-Icom repeater, great examples of just how open everything is. The only part of D-Star that is open is the on-air protocol. The G2 and DPlus protocols are definitely not open, which isn't in the spirit of amateur radio IMHO. Ed WA4YIH Jonathan G4KLX
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
On 5/17/2010 11:57 AM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: And while you indicate that the G2 and DPlus protocols aren't open source, they definitely have been reversed engineered and we have third party solutions talking to them now. Which ones? Where can one find information on them? Did they publish their reverse-engineering work? Are they recommended for use in the overall network? Anything interesting/useful? Enlighten us Ed. I've seen Zip/Doo-Dah/Nada from the powers that be on any 3rd party applications talking to 2nd party applications that work in the network and are recommended (or even required) to be installed by the Trust Server team. Would love to know what they are and whether they're approved for use in the network. Nate WY0X
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
Nate, Nope, they aren't readily available for you to read. Did you see that written anywhere in what I said? Did you see me publish a URL to it? But if you would do a little legwork and reading, you'll find that indeed, the hotspots access the DPlus network and that the G4ULF repeater is accessing the G2 network. If you look back in the DSTARInfo newsletter, you'll see the announcement where the G4ULF repeater was connected to and approved by the Trust Server Team. And just because you haven't see it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. You should have made it to Dayton where you could have sat down with everyone and actually seen it. And there were others, besides me, at Dayton, that DID see the solutions and DID see that they exist. And a lot of this is changing on a daily basis, so what I say today, might change tomorrow. Ed WA4YIH From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 3:09 PM To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions . On 5/17/2010 11:57 AM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: And while you indicate that the G2 and DPlus protocols aren't open source, they definitely have been reversed engineered and we have third party solutions talking to them now. Which ones? Where can one find information on them? Did they publish their reverse-engineering work? Are they recommended for use in the overall network? Anything interesting/useful? Enlighten us Ed. I've seen Zip/Doo-Dah/Nada from the powers that be on any 3rd party applications talking to 2nd party applications that work in the network and are recommended (or even required) to be installed by the Trust Server team. Would love to know what they are and whether they're approved for use in the network. Nate WY0X
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
On May 17, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Nate Duehr wrote: On 5/17/2010 11:57 AM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: And while you indicate that the G2 and DPlus protocols aren’t open source, they definitely have been reversed engineered and we have third party solutions talking to them now. Which ones? Where can one find information on them? There are several projects, the most promising right now is G4ULF's working D-STAR repeater and G2 protocol compliant software. Runs on Linux, uses Satoshi (and hopefully soon Fred's) firmware, and a very modest CPU/Memory footprint (the actual repeater and gateway are only about 80k compiled). David is very careful about QA of his code and has worked extensively with K5TIT trust team in a test and production environment. G4ULF code based repeater/gateways can connect to K5TIT trust, but generally availability is probably at least a couple of months out. Did they publish their reverse-engineering work? Some has been published, but everyone seems to be afraid it will be misused. Are they recommended for use in the overall network? By whom? K5TIT sort of took a neutrality position last year, though they only approve gateways that have software they are familiar with (e.g. Icom and G4ULF) through cooperation and testing. Anything interesting/useful? Enlighten us Ed. I've seen Zip/Doo-Dah/Nada from the powers that be on any 3rd party applications talking to 2nd party applications that work in the network and are recommended (or even required) to be installed by the Trust Server team. What powers that be --- the K5TIT Trust Team approves what can be supported by their team. Other Trust Servers may have different requirements. Would love to know what they are and whether they're approved for use in the network. Nate WY0X John D. Hays Amateur Radio Station K7VE PO Box 1223 Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 VOIP/SIP: j...@hays.org Phone: 206-801-0820 801-790-0950 Email: j...@hays.org
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
At 03:57 AM 5/18/2010, Woodrick, Ed wrote: And while you indicate that the G2 and DPlus protocols aren't open source, they definitely have been reversed engineered and we have third party solutions talking to them now. This also has precedent. The exact same thing happened with Echolink, where alternative clients exist only because the protocol was reverse engineered. But the main part with experimentation is that the D-STAR network is a collection of systems that interoperate with each other. If someone gets on and starts experimenting against the live network, this can have DRAMATIC impact to the network's operation. You don't necessarily only impact your own small part of the world. That's just an argument for test networks, so serious experimentation can take place without taking the rest of the world off air due to buggy code or wrong assumptions. :) 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
At 05:22 AM 5/18/2010, you wrote: But if you would do a little legwork and reading, you'll find that indeed, the hotspots access the DPlus network and that the G4ULF repeater is accessing the G2 network. I think Nate is asking for the results of the reverse engineering, not (closed) reimplementations of the reverse engineered specs. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
On 5/17/2010 1:22 PM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: Nope, they aren't readily available for you to read. Did you see that written anywhere in what I said? Did you see me publish a URL to it? That's all I asked. Thank you for confirming that the answer is no, and that D-STAR development is as closed as any other proprietary product out there. You added a lot of other information and ad-hominem attacks again, that had nothing to do with the question being posed, as usual, Ed. They're not even worthy of a reply. Your assumptions that I didn't know about the other products, was wrong, as usual. Nate WY0X
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
Nate, Take a deep breath, climb down off your high horse and find something else to do! You critical, repetitive comments add nothing to the group. If you dislike D-Star, or wish it was something else, why don't you go and create that something else? It is what it is, and it will always be what it is. No criticism by you will ever change anything about it. Why waste your time and ours with this diatribe? Please stop 73 Ted W1GRI _ From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 17:01 To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions . On 5/17/2010 1:22 PM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: Nope, they aren't readily available for you to read. Did you see that written anywhere in what I said? Did you see me publish a URL to it? That's all I asked. Thank you for confirming that the answer is no, and that D-STAR development is as closed as any other proprietary product out there. You added a lot of other information and ad-hominem attacks again, that had nothing to do with the question being posed, as usual, Ed. They're not even worthy of a reply. Your assumptions that I didn't know about the other products, was wrong, as usual. Nate WY0X
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
On 5/17/2010 1:51 PM, John Hays wrote: On 5/17/2010 11:57 AM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: And while you indicate that the G2 and DPlus protocols aren’t open source, they definitely have been reversed engineered and we have third party solutions talking to them now. Which ones? Where can one find information on them? There are several projects, the most promising right now is G4ULF's working D-STAR repeater and G2 protocol compliant software. Runs on Linux, uses Satoshi (and hopefully soon Fred's) firmware, and a very modest CPU/Memory footprint (the actual repeater and gateway are only about 80k compiled). David is very careful about QA of his code and has worked extensively with K5TIT trust team in a test and production environment. G4ULF code based repeater/gateways can connect to K5TIT trust, but generally availability is probably at least a couple of months out. That wasn't an answer to my question, John. Forgive me for being a hard-ass about it, but the point of the original poster's sincere query was whether or not D-STAR is too closed. Dropping the too and just answering whether it's closed or open, the answer is, and has always been: Yes, it is closed to mere mortals. Naming things open is just a head-fake. Lots of people fall for it, too. Icom Gateway - Closed. D-PLUS - Closed. Add-Ons that are talking to D-PLUS - Closed. I am making no judgment about it, I'm simply answering the original poster's question, which was avoided. When we all grow up and learn to just say it: Yes, Virginia. There is a Santa Claus. And D-STAR is closed/proprietary. Life is easier. If you want a value/judgment statement; or a scoreboard -- I can also provide that: The data/off-air interfaces in D-STAR are as closed as MotoTRBO, and eventually more closed than P25 once they publish their interop interface. Right now, they're all tied for closed-ness. And... The on-air interfaces, D-STAR and P25 are tied for openness, MotoTRBO is closed. Nate WY0X
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 05:31:49PM -0400, Ted Wrobel wrote: Take a deep breath, climb down off your high horse and find something else to do! You critical, repetitive comments add nothing to the group. If you dislike D-Star, or wish it was something else, why don't you go and create that something else? I don't think Nate dislikes D-Star. I certainly don't, but I do wish that the folks who have produced compatible stuff for it, while promising that it would be open source, would follow through on their promises - or at least release documentation so other amateurs can do so. -- Jay Maynard, K5ZC at K6ZC port Bhttp://www.conmicro.com http://www.k6zc.org http://www.tronguy.net http://jmaynard.livejournal.com (Yes, that's me!) http://www.hercules-390.org
RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions .....
Nate, D-STAR Development is NOT CLOSED! The D-STAR air protocol is published. The network that Icom created is proprietary, but there's nothing that says that it is the only network that can be used. Go look at the stuff that Scott and the X-Trust server team has created. I believe that most all of that is supposed to be open source. (At least that's what Open Source Scott keeps saying). So if you know about the other products, then I would expect that you know about Scott's Open Source projects. There are a number of successful development activities around D-STAR that are using either readily available or reversed engineered information. D-RATS, D*Chat, DSTARMon, DPlus, DSTARUsers Last Heard List, D-STAR TV, DPRS, HotSpots, Satoshi board, and many more are all D-STAR development projects. The list of products developed in what you call a closed, proprietary environment is pretty long. If you indeed want to be nit-picky and look at the network between a few little places, then indeed, there are non-documented areas. But PLEASE DO NOT keep saying that D-STAR development is closed. It is not. As well as I can remember, the ID-1 was the first time that Icom published any of their protocols, does that make it more open than FM and SSB? There are many areas in and around D-STAR where development activities can exist, either in fully or minimally document form. Heck, probably one of the most power interfaces in the D-STAR stable is the Ethernet adapter on the ID-1, it's fully documented and capable of millions of applications. From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 5:01 PM To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions . On 5/17/2010 1:22 PM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: Nope, they aren't readily available for you to read. Did you see that written anywhere in what I said? Did you see me publish a URL to it? That's all I asked. Thank you for confirming that the answer is no, and that D-STAR development is as closed as any other proprietary product out there. You added a lot of other information and ad-hominem attacks again, that had nothing to do with the question being posed, as usual, Ed. They're not even worthy of a reply. Your assumptions that I didn't know about the other products, was wrong, as usual. Nate WY0X
