Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a messaging

2009-01-31 Thread Jose A. Amador
Based on what I know, for SMTP, JNOS may be an option at less than 300 baud, i.e., 100-110 baud or PAX, using MultiPSK as soundcard modem. I have not tested any of it yet. I have had no time and possibilities to test it so far. JNOS can use FBB compression or LZW compressed SMTP on any of its

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a messaging

2009-01-31 Thread Alan Barrow
John Bradley wrote: ARES has responded with a command unit which has HF data capability. This could include a WIFI router so that laptops could be included from the local EOC. This command unit would work back into an EOC with data and internet connections. ARES would be tasked with passing

RE: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a messaging

2009-01-31 Thread John Bradley
You are right in that the likely solution would be SCS and Pactor3. The only other thing that we have tried is RFSM8000, developed by Dimitri , which has a email gateway built into it, is ARQ and runs on soundcard Nobody in the US is using this on the ham bands at least since it does not

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a messaging

2009-01-31 Thread Jose A. Amador
Alan Barrow wrote: Yes, I understand it works. FBB works OK on HF because once you are logged in, it's not that interactive. But you still have 2-3 turnarounds before you send the initial message, etc. FBB protocol has a feature I find very valuable: the Z-modem style resume. JNOS had not

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a

2009-01-30 Thread Rick W
Hi John, At the time I was listening to the frequency there were RTTY stations on either side and very close, so did not attempt a connection. Were you using ALE400 or FAE400? My understanding is that FAE is faster than the ALE with plain text due to compression which I don't think is

RE: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a

2009-01-30 Thread John Bradley
technically we were using FAE400 mode and FAE2000 modes, in ARQ as opposed to general broadcast (unproto) mode. I agree with you on the 400ARQ mode, and the feature I appreciate most is the ability to send mail to an unattended station, having determined that the unattended station can hear

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a

2009-01-30 Thread José A. Amador
I believe that the simplest is not reinventing the wheel, and using MultiPSK as a modem, using traditional BBS programs as the mail application. Does anyone find this to be wrong? The store and forward part could mean a *LOT* of work to be done, or actually, re-done... For traditional ham

RE: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a

2009-01-30 Thread John Bradley
So how would we go about using FBB or JNOS? JNOS has appeal since it can gateway to the internet, a desirable feature for emergency comms John VE5MU I believe that the simplest is not reinventing the wheel, and using MultiPSK as a modem, using traditional BBS programs as the mail application.

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141a

2009-01-30 Thread Rick W
When I used to be on another digital group (I think it may have been one of the TAPR lists?), Maiko was able to get certain hardware/firmware to work with his development of JNOS2. Although JNOS is very theoretical to me, I wonder if it could it be set up with the mode of your choice (within

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141A

2009-01-19 Thread Rick W
I tried to connect again today (this afternoon) as I saw your request for connecting via FAE400 on 14.111 and 7.103. I tried both stations callsigns as it almost seemed as if the frequencies were reversed from the other day with the regular MIL-STD-188-141A mode, but maybe I misread that, HI.

Re: [digitalradio] ALE400 and 141A

2009-01-19 Thread Alan Barrow
John Bradley wrote: · Have given up on the PCALE and HFlink bunch, since there seems to be no interest in doing anything other than sending 1 line messages to each other , or simply sounding. The MARS version of PCALE might work, but the author is not allowing use of this software