I would be hesitant to completely accept certain facts as absolutely
true, but even if Greg Jones wanted to destroy packet, he really would
not have been able to do so when up against the tremendous numbers of us
who used it daily. The truth is that there just was not enough interest
by a
My point is that the packet radio cannot prosper if all of our
_amateur radio_ applications are closed source.
Closed source or open source is a non-issue. What matters is if the
software is well supported with good engineering principles.An
open source package with no support is far
Which radio?
...and ampr.org is impossible to deal with. If IP addressing became useful
going to an IPv6 subnet where every ham could have a 100 addresses would be
a better approach.
Rud Merriam K5RUD
ARES AEC Montgomery County, TX
http://TheHamNetwork.net
-Original Message-
From:
Bill,
I also would be interested in a 9600 BAUD/BPS radio/TNC or 9600 TNC.
As you, I ran a bunch of TCP/IP at 1200 baud after I ran 1200 baud packet and
even a Packet BBS for several years. When I went to 19.2 KBPS, I forgot 1200
baud packet and have not returned. Since then the 19.2 KBPS
I am certainly not the first to think of this, but wouldn't it be nice
if we had a .ham top level domain? If we have such things as .museum,
.info, and .coop, .ham seems reasonable by comparison. In fact it
makes more sense than many other TLDs.
I would suggest that it be tightly controlled, in
Personally, I think this is a terrible idea. There are alternate TLD
lookup services out there but no one cares.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root
If anything, ampr.org need to be expanded to start including IPv6 and
other technologies. I almost wish for Dynamic DNS for
It's my understanding that 19.2k just isn't possible with a soundcard.
Wrong.
The main question is how much BW your radio provides.
Having 10khz of BW 19.2k should be doable. Have a look at the DREAM
software http://drm.sourceforge.net/ . It should get pretty close to 19.2
on 10khz BW, and
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Walt DuBose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill,
I also would be interested in a 9600 BAUD/BPS radio/TNC or 9600 TNC.
As you, I ran a bunch of TCP/IP at 1200 baud after I ran 1200 baud
packet and
even a Packet BBS for several years. When I went to 19.2
