Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[linux] LinLink

Eric S. Johansson esj at harvee.org
Thu Aug 5 01:44:03 UTC 2004

Walt DuBose wrote:

  > Of course LinLink had two thrusts...on is high-speed on HF the other is
> high-speed on V/UHF...and by that I mean 19.2 KBPS as the botton and 54
> to 100 MBPS as the current top end.

thank you for clarifying.

> MFSK16 is more robust than MT63 but the not as fast ans MT63.  I belive
> that improvements can still be made in MT63's modem to make it faster.

cool.  I'm not married to a particular protocol or modulation scheme as 
long as as it gets the job done.  like for instance:


which is probably going to get butchered by the mail client.  google for 
"hamdream" and have it translate the Portuguese to English.  looks very 
promising and in fact looks like it will become the next standard for 
transmitting voice and pictures for hams.

>>in the end however, remember that it will be the e-mail infrastructure
>>that is important not how you get e-mail around.  asking emergency users
>>to use unfamiliar software to communicate in a time of high stress we'll
>>cost us credibility points.  If we can drop in a box and RF link and
>>they can use ordinary laptops with tools like Eudora or Thunderbird to
>>get their job done, then we win big-time credibility.
> The message entry form is important.  I have Web Mail inputs that have
> been used in E-Comms and liked.  Everyone know how to use the web.

cool.  it's good if it works.  But again, use standard, well known by 
any network connected techie infrastructure and it will be a huge 
credibility win.

>>we win bigger credibility if they can keep working over the Internet
>>with minimal interruption when services are restored.
> The idea is to use the Internet to our advantage...however, if it
> becomes a burden then it won't be used.  The system will be designed
> with the idea that the Internet will not be available.

for communications within a disaster region, yes.  It will become its 
own Internet.  However, it's also extremely important to terminate a 
route on the Internet itself for communications with the regions outside 
of the disaster for all the reasons we know and love.  This is why I 
argue for letting the Internet standards try the implementation of the 
infrastructure rather than letting the RF transport drive the 
applications.  Unless of course there is an extremely compelling and 
unique reason for doing so such as the GPS "here I am" tool hams have.


Speech recognition in use.  It makes mistakes, I correct most

More information about the linux mailing list