Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[ax25-layer2] ax25 backward compatibility

w0ep w0ep at frii.com
Thu Aug 3 21:46:05 UTC 2006


Which all means that if someone goes and works on v3.0,
we won't be hearing about it here!

(And I think that's what I said.)

Chris



On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 12:15 -0500, Pete Loveall AE5PL wrote:
> This list was created to focus on using AX.25 as the layer 2 protocol
> for which it was designed, not to create a new protocol.  Whether you
> have personally invested any money in AX.25 equipment (which you
> apparently have with your D700) or not is immaterial to consideration of
> maintaining certain levels of compatibility with prior versions of the
> protocol.
> 
> AX.25 is a standard established over 25 years ago.  A significant amount
> of development has occurred since that time making use of the protocol
> and should not be ignored.  What has been discussed to this point and
> what will need to be determined is how much the current specification
> needs to change to fully support layer 3 and above protocols.
> 
> Let's keep the focus on what we have today, what we need to _modify_ in
> the specification to better perform _layer 2_ functions, and how do we
> accommodate extensions necessary to support things like 7 character
> callsigns.  A fact of life is our frequencies are shared and everybody
> doesn't upgrade (or throw away) out-dated equipment.  With that in mind
> and with the knowledge that standards committees over the years
> understand that a new version of a specification is built upon previous
> versions, let's move forward keeping the focus on the current AX.25 2.2
> specification and how it needs to be revised to support the other issues
> brought up to be a more effective layer 2 protocol.  As a reminder,
> applications such as OpenTRAC and APRS are not using AX.25 as a layer 2
> protocol but rather are written to the protocol (tightly coupled).  This
> list's intent is to _not_ add any special support for those or any other
> applications written specifically for AX.25 but to concentrate on
> returning AX.25 to its original intent as a layer 2 protocol.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Pete Loveall AE5PL
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w0ep
> > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 11:43 AM
> > To: Discussion of Link Layer use of AX.25
> > Subject: [ax25-layer2] ax25 backward compatibility
> > 
> > 
> > For me, not having a large investment in TNC's D700's etc. 
> > etc, backward compatibility isn't really a very persuasive feature.
> > (What ax25 I do use is for APRS, and there the backward 
> > compatibility thing is pretty poor
> > anyway.)
> > 
> > In my experience the thing that finally shakes loose from 
> > backward compatibility is if there is a new application or new system.
> > 
> > So, maybe someone can work on ax25 3.0  for a backbone or 
> > something?  (And in the great ham tradition, the proper way 
> > to do it is to build the thing then worry later about documentation!)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ax25-layer2 mailing list
> ax25-layer2 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ax25-layer2





More information about the ax25-layer2 mailing list