[hfsig] Re: [linux] LinLink

[Walt DuBose]

Yep, brain dead this afternoon.

Join the list and give us your input.

Walt/K5YFW

Jon N8USK wrote:
> 
> It appears to be wetnet.net, Walt.
> 
> I'll lurk on the list and will be available for testing on Debian. This
> sounds exciting.
> 
> 73 de N8USK,
> 
> -j
> 
> dubose at texas.net wrote:
> 
> > No arguement with that...it sure might be something we can bite into.
> >
> > We DO want to make it backward compatible at least in the beginning and then
> > grow it...
> >
> > We do plan to support 802.11 fully and use sendmail/qmail or such and yes POP3
> > will certainly be used where we can both from the Internet and via V/UHF and HF
> > if we can.
> >
> > Of course we're not suggesting the use of 1200 baud when so much 9600 and
> > higher speeds are available, ie. with some of the Kantronics TNC...I think that
> > 19.2 KBPS is really doable to replace 1200 baud.
> >
> > The LinLink list is on the www.wetnet.org web site...check the left hand frame.
> >
> > Thanks for the input.
> >
> > Walt/K5YFW
> >
> >
> >
> >>dubose at texas.net wrote:
> >>
> >>>FYI.
> >>>
> >>>Walt/K5YFW
> >>>
> >>>Name:  LinLink
> >>>
> >>>Purpose:  An Open Source Enhanced Digital Messaging for Amateur Radio
> >
> > Utilizing
> >
> >>>Source Code From Previously Release Amateur Radio Open Source Applications .
> >>>
> >>>Mission:  Provide to Amateur Radio Operators and emergency service and
> >
> > disaster
> >
> >>>relief organizations with a low or no cost system utilizing enabling
> >>>technologies and sound operating practices to provide a full-featured radio
> >>>digital message transfer system with attachments, map & text-based position
> >>>reporting such as Xastric, graphic & text-based weather bulletin services
> >
> > such
> >
> >>>as developed by Texas A&M Univ. Packet based on AX.25 and AX.25 BBS
> >>>applications such as JNOS and Q15X25. An MTA using existing RFC compliant
> >>>standards and an HF mode using current highspeed, robust computer sound
> >
> > card
> >
> >>>applications such as MT63 and Q15X25.
> >>
> >>
> >>umm. why try to inject life into long and deservedly dead technologies?
> >>  packet radio stuff is really pretty bad and if you look back at
> >>computer network history, I think that you will find that something like
> >>UUCP would actually serve us better given the nature of RF links and
> >>transmitters.  as far as I can say,ham radio equipment is not suited to
> >>full duplex packet oriented networks.  the exception being use of
> >>commercial gear (i.e. wifi) on amateur frequencies
> >>
> >>uucp, sendmail and pop-3/imap for the local to computer end-user/nonham
> >>folks.  that would make a better solution that something packet based
> >>and BBSs.  I mean, the last time I use the BBS was when I had 1200 baud
> >>modem.
> >>
> >>packet is dead, let it rest in peace please!
> >>
> >>---eric
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>Speech recognition in use.  It makes mistakes, I correct most
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>linux mailing list
> >>linux at lists.tapr.org
> >>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > hfsig mailing list
> > hfsig at lists.tapr.org
> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hfsig