[ax25-layer2] www.ax25.net Operational

[Glenn Thomas]

At 08:26 PM 9/29/2005, you wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:19:36 -0700, Glenn Thomas wrote:
>
> >FEC is neither fish nor fowl - the ISO standard fails in that it
> >could be done at levels 1 (hardware HDLC or EDAC), 2 or 3 (level 3
> >decides if the info is good and asks for a "fill" if not). To be
> >sure, ISO claims that FEC is a level 2 issue, but in doing so may
> >badly blur the distinction between hardware and firmware/software by
> >insisting that hardware EDAC is level 2!
>
>Doesn't matter. FEC has to be done as close to the "road" as 
>possible because the more mediium data you have, the better job you 
>can do deciding what a bit is supposed to be. If you will, we can 
>call FEC layer "1.5" but it still has to be done underneath AX.25 
>layer two, at least in the present implementation.

Yes! Let's call FEC a level 1 issue and be done with it. ISO doesn't 
really have a "level 1.5". Note that KISS, as a level 1 item, does 
error detection via HDLC. Level 2 sees nothing of it - corrupted 
packets are simply not reported.

73 de Glenn wb6w