?

It looks like to me, when my radio arrives and I begin the fun with it, it might be a good idea to keep a "library" of versions. That way I can fall back to what still works if? issues arise.

?

Hi Gordon,

If later on anyone wants to put up a ham radio uucp HF gateway, As uucp setup is not that easy, I can help with all the uucp setup for remote and gateway stations (I have bash scripts and templates ready) and provide server access to our *.hermes.radio (just choose a subdomain) for initial testing, if needed. This is what we call "central" server, with real IP in the VPS. The "gateway" station just relays emails to "central" email server, and connects (or receive connection) to the "remote" stations over HF. This is the topology I put in place. With VARA and/or Ardop (this is what my uucp bridge supports [1]).

for example, to triger the connection to the gateway (and consequently synchronize the uucp jobs, aka. emais), from a remote station, I just do:
uucico -S gw

where gw is a uucp alias to the uucp gateway nodename, and remember to put the radio in the same frequency of the other station.

the uucp bridge automatically calls the nodename to be connected, which in the case is the callsign of the station, for example, PU2UIT (the nodenames must be valid callsigns for vara and ardop be happy).

[1]

Cheers,
Rafael

On 2/2/24 14:22, Gordon Gibby wrote:

Rafael, that is very upstanding of you! ?I had no idea that uucp is still moving such traffic over HF radio? (I'm not counting Internet).
Thank you for the education -- I'm benefitting from your knowledge and experience!

The Winlink folks have both a centralized and a decentralized model, so it can gett tricky to count, but the data piles up month over month here:
(click the "traffic" tab):
?(see attachment)

looks like about 76,000 per HF in January
another 45,000 or so over VHF
Total over RF >100,000? or over 3,000 per day.

Again, EVENTUALLY a system will show up that gains even wider acceptance.? ?For all I know UUCP is "there" if you count military? (the above figures have no military).? ? I hadn't thought of that.....

THANKS!? It is great to learn from all the smart people here!
Gordon KX4Z


On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 9:16?AM HA3HZ <gyula@...> wrote:

??? There are a few LOG programs on github that work under Linux.
??? It is currently still being developed. It communicates with the
??? radio via port:

??? FieldDayLogger <>

??? not1mm <>

??? As far as I know, the N3FJP AC program works under Windows.
??? Wine or box86 seems to me to be highly OS dependent.
??? Therefore, I think that communication through the port should be
??? prioritized.
??? It is difficult to part with the usual program. We need to know
??? that only change is constant.
??? -- ??? Gyula HA3HZ

Rafael, that is very upstanding of you!? ?I had no idea that uucp is still moving such traffic over HF radio? (I'm not counting Internet).
Thank you for the education -- I'm benefitting from your knowledge and experience!

The Winlink folks have both a centralized and a decentralized model, so it can gett tricky to count, but the data piles up month over month here:
(click the "traffic" tab):
?(see attachment)

looks like about 76,000 per HF in January
another 45,000 or so over VHF
Total over RF >100,000? or over 3,000 per day.

Again, EVENTUALLY a system will show up that gains even wider acceptance.? ?For all I know UUCP is "there" if you count military? (the above figures have no military).? ? I hadn't thought of that.....

THANKS!? It is great to learn from all the smart people here!
Gordon KX4Z


On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 9:16?AM HA3HZ <gyula@...> wrote:

There are a few LOG programs on github that work under Linux.
It is currently still being developed. It communicates with the
radio via port:

FieldDayLogger <>

not1mm <>

As far as I know, the N3FJP AC program works under Windows.
Wine or box86 seems to me to be highly OS dependent.
Therefore, I think that communication through the port should be
prioritized.
It is difficult to part with the usual program. We need to know
that only change is constant.
--
Gyula HA3HZ

Hi Gordon,

If you are asking in general, I cannot give you a figure as most of this information is classified. If you are asking about Rhizomatica's HERMES, we transfer messages at the same speed of most using Winlink, as we are currently using VARA. We are working on a new modem for faster communication and a tighter integration to UUCP. A gateway station routes dozen of messages every day from each community connected to our network. Needless to say, with proper network hierarchy, an HF UUCP network scales, while cleanly integrating with Postfix or any standard email stack. We also do specific trans-coding for audio and voice (on email attachments) for allowing them to flow over HF. Anyway, I don't wanna argue "who is bigger", as it makes no sense to compare UUCP to Winlink IMHO. Winlink is a very successful niche technology while UUCP is available on every Unix since late 70's for data exchange and remote command execution over radio, telephony lines or other mediums.

I remove what I said about de-facto standard for email exchange of HF, as may be you have better access to such information than me, and there is no point of disputing this.

Kind regards,
Rafael PU2UIT


On 2/2/24 13:23, Gordon Gibby wrote:

Rafael, how many messages move over uucp every month, over?HF?
Gordon KX4Z

On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 8:15?AM Rafael Diniz <rafael@...> wrote:

??? The default de-facto standard for email exchange over radio is
??? UUCP, not
??? Winlink. CODAN uses UUCP, for example. Winlink is just a simple
??? (while
??? useful, as you all mention) ham-radio focused protocol.

??? 73s,
??? Rafael PU2UIT

??? On 2/1/24 14:03, Dave, N1AI wrote:
??? > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 04:51 AM, Gordon Gibby wrote:
??? >
??? >? ? ?Thank you Gwen, for your question and your "user context" that
??? >? ? ?helps explain your question.
??? >
??? >? ? ?To say that "N3FJP is just a logger" seems somewhat similar to
??? >? ? ?saying "The Eifel Tower is just a monument." ?N3FJP is widely
??? >? ? ?used by not just individuals but GROUPS of individuals,
??? >
??? >? ? ? ?* has specifically crafted uniquely intuitive interfaces for
??? >? ? ? ? ?each of a few dozen contests
??? >? ? ? ?* has multi-user simultaneous capabilities
??? >? ? ? ?* can interface with dozens of different radios to capture
??? >? ? ? ? ?frequency and mode information
??? >
??? >? ? ?and, most usefully,
??? >
??? >? ? ? ?* can control several different radios to actually send voice
??? >? ? ? ? ?messages or CW messages
??? >
??? >? ? ?As far as I know, the internal single-user sBitx logger has none
??? >? ? ?of those features at this time.
??? >
??? >? ? ?Our small club used N3FJP productively in the last Winter Field
??? >? ? ?Day and made use of all of those advantages, particularly the
??? >? ? ?ability to control radios.? So when in PHONE competition, users
??? >? ? ?could simply strike F1 and their CQ message would
??? automatically be
??? >? ? ?transmitted, would pause a determined number of seconds, and
??? then
??? >? ? ?repeat until they strike any key to enter a callsign.
??? >
??? >? ? ?In CW, I could strike F1 to initiate a CQ message, interrupt
??? it by
??? >? ? ?entering VU2ESE, reply by striking F2 (giving back an
??? >? ? ?acknolwedgement and a full exchange) and then confirm receipt by
??? >? ? ?striking F4 and? automatically initiiate a new request for
??? contacts.
??? >
??? >? ? ?I'm not a truly skilled user, but skilled users hit 60-100
??? >? ? ?contacts per hour with these type systtems....I'm more in the
??? >? ? ?20-30 range.? ? Our group expects to be in the top 4% of
??? submitted
??? >? ? ?logs, and we're pretty happy with that since we had never done
??? >? ? ?that and had to build antenna multiplexers to operate three
??? >? ? ?100-watt radios simultaneously over the only coax the
??? authorities
??? >? ? ?have penetrating their tornado-proof walls....
??? >
??? >? ? ?So if you want your radio to be competitive in the
??? marketplace of
??? >? ? ?people who do Field Day or Winter Field Day yada yada
??? yada....you
??? >? ? ?can't box yourselff out from these usetul systems, that are NOT
??? >? ? ?going to be running on raspberry pi's in the foreseeable
??? >? ? ?future....but are used by thousands to tens of thousands....
??? >
??? >? ? ?WINLINK is a 23+ year old radio email system that has basically
??? >? ? ?won the battle for higher speed digital ARQ
??? (acknowledge-request,
??? >? ? ?a form of data integrity guarantee) communications in the USA
??? >? ? ?after a 2-year battle with people who wished to limit amateur
??? >? ? ?radio.? ?Most of their software (in current versions) is
??? truly the
??? >? ? ?product one one man W4PHS.? ?It is the de facto standard for
??? >? ? ?100%-correct digital radio email the world over and moves
??? >? ? ?approximately 50,000 radio emails per month.? Their programming
??? >? ? ?staff of precisely 1? (and hopefully growing) is not going to be
??? >? ? ?able to address niche radios like the sBitx unless you make it
??? >? ? ?extremely easy, and by that, I mean "emulate something they
??? >? ? ?already address"? ?Radios for which they provide connections
??? >? ? ?include:? Barrett, Codan, Micom, a zillion Yaesu's, a zillion
??? >? ? ?ICOMs, Elecraft, Flex and Kenwoods.? ?Perhaps there is a quite
??? >? ? ?simple way to craft the recently created Telnet interface to
??? >? ? ?emulate one of those, at least for the basic functions?? ? I
??? know
??? >? ? ?that for the uBitx I was able to craft an ICOM interface that
??? >? ? ?worked for my purposes.
??? >
??? >? ? ?The sBitx has orders of magnitude more programming "staff" than
??? >? ? ?either of those other systems....and if you wish to increase
??? your
??? >? ? ?use-ability and market share, making life easier on others is a
??? >? ? ?good way to win friends and influence people!
??? >
??? >? ? ?Hope that helps explain it,
??? >
??? > With all due respect, if these software packages are so
??? monumentally
??? > important to you, your local club, and local and nationwide
??? emergency
??? > response teams, why buy equipment that doesn't readily support
??? those
??? > software packages?? Why not buy equipment that already does,
??? instead
??? > of hoping that other people fill the gaps for you?
??? >
??? > Why spend your time publicly putting pressure on other, mostly
??? unpaid
??? > people, to do the work that is needed to resolve the problem of not
??? > having support for the exact software that you feel is so
??? monumentally
??? > important on the exact platforms you choose to buy?
??? >
??? > Don't the N3FJP and WINLINK authors deserve to be rewarded by you
??? > using their software on the platforms they chose to support,
??? instead
??? > of being pressured to move it all to monumentally different
??? platforms
??? > you chose to use, or provide and support mechanisms that enable
??? it to
??? > be used on those other platforms?
??? >
??? > Doesn't the sbitx platform deserve to be what it has been since you
??? > bought it, a unique platform for software and hardware tinkerers,
??? > instead of becoming just another box for other people's software
??? to drive?
??? >
??? > Aren't you really just looking for an IC-705 and a Windows
??? tablet for
??? > EMCOM, and/or an IC-7300 and a Windows PC for Field Day, and not
??? > really looking for a platform to tinker with?
??? >
??? > --
??? > Regards,
??? > Dave, N1AI
??? >

Rafael, how many messages move over uucp every month, over?HF?
Gordon KX4Z

On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 8:15?AM Rafael Diniz <rafael@...> wrote:

The default de-facto standard for email exchange over radio is
UUCP, not
Winlink. CODAN uses UUCP, for example. Winlink is just a simple
(while
useful, as you all mention) ham-radio focused protocol.

73s,
Rafael PU2UIT

On 2/1/24 14:03, Dave, N1AI wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 04:51 AM, Gordon Gibby wrote:
>
>? ? ?Thank you Gwen, for your question and your "user context" that
>? ? ?helps explain your question.
>
>? ? ?To say that "N3FJP is just a logger" seems somewhat similar to
>? ? ?saying "The Eifel Tower is just a monument."? ?N3FJP is widely
>? ? ?used by not just individuals but GROUPS of individuals,
>
>? ? ? ?* has specifically crafted uniquely intuitive interfaces for
>? ? ? ? ?each of a few dozen contests
>? ? ? ?* has multi-user simultaneous capabilities
>? ? ? ?* can interface with dozens of different radios to capture
>? ? ? ? ?frequency and mode information
>
>? ? ?and, most usefully,
>
>? ? ? ?* can control several different radios to actually send voice
>? ? ? ? ?messages or CW messages
>
>? ? ?As far as I know, the internal single-user sBitx logger has none
>? ? ?of those features at this time.
>
>? ? ?Our small club used N3FJP productively in the last Winter Field
>? ? ?Day and made use of all of those advantages, particularly the
>? ? ?ability to control radios.? So when in PHONE competition, users
>? ? ?could simply strike F1 and their CQ message would
automatically be
>? ? ?transmitted, would pause a determined number of seconds, and
then
>? ? ?repeat until they strike any key to enter a callsign.
>
>? ? ?In CW, I could strike F1 to initiate a CQ message, interrupt
it by
>? ? ?entering VU2ESE, reply by striking F2 (giving back an
>? ? ?acknolwedgement and a full exchange) and then confirm receipt by
>? ? ?striking F4 and? automatically initiiate a new request for
contacts.
>
>? ? ?I'm not a truly skilled user, but skilled users hit 60-100
>? ? ?contacts per hour with these type systtems....I'm more in the
>? ? ?20-30 range.? ? Our group expects to be in the top 4% of
submitted
>? ? ?logs, and we're pretty happy with that since we had never done
>? ? ?that and had to build antenna multiplexers to operate three
>? ? ?100-watt radios simultaneously over the only coax the
authorities
>? ? ?have penetrating their tornado-proof walls....
>
>? ? ?So if you want your radio to be competitive in the
marketplace of
>? ? ?people who do Field Day or Winter Field Day yada yada
yada....you
>? ? ?can't box yourselff out from these usetul systems, that are NOT
>? ? ?going to be running on raspberry pi's in the foreseeable
>? ? ?future....but are used by thousands to tens of thousands....
>
>? ? ?WINLINK is a 23+ year old radio email system that has basically
>? ? ?won the battle for higher speed digital ARQ
(acknowledge-request,
>? ? ?a form of data integrity guarantee) communications in the USA
>? ? ?after a 2-year battle with people who wished to limit amateur
>? ? ?radio.? ?Most of their software (in current versions) is
truly the
>? ? ?product one one man W4PHS.? ?It is the de facto standard for
>? ? ?100%-correct digital radio email the world over and moves
>? ? ?approximately 50,000 radio emails per month.? Their programming
>? ? ?staff of precisely 1? (and hopefully growing) is not going to be
>? ? ?able to address niche radios like the sBitx unless you make it
>? ? ?extremely easy, and by that, I mean "emulate something they
>? ? ?already address"? ?Radios for which they provide connections
>? ? ?include:? Barrett, Codan, Micom, a zillion Yaesu's, a zillion
>? ? ?ICOMs, Elecraft, Flex and Kenwoods.? ?Perhaps there is a quite
>? ? ?simple way to craft the recently created Telnet interface to
>? ? ?emulate one of those, at least for the basic functions?? ? I
know
>? ? ?that for the uBitx I was able to craft an ICOM interface that
>? ? ?worked for my purposes.
>
>? ? ?The sBitx has orders of magnitude more programming "staff" than
>? ? ?either of those other systems....and if you wish to increase
your
>? ? ?use-ability and market share, making life easier on others is a
>? ? ?good way to win friends and influence people!
>
>? ? ?Hope that helps explain it,
>
> With all due respect, if these software packages are so
monumentally
> important to you, your local club, and local and nationwide
emergency
> response teams, why buy equipment that doesn't readily support
those
> software packages?? Why not buy equipment that already does,
instead
> of hoping that other people fill the gaps for you?
>
> Why spend your time publicly putting pressure on other, mostly
unpaid
> people, to do the work that is needed to resolve the problem of not
> having support for the exact software that you feel is so
monumentally
> important on the exact platforms you choose to buy?
>
> Don't the N3FJP and WINLINK authors deserve to be rewarded by you
> using their software on the platforms they chose to support,
instead
> of being pressured to move it all to monumentally different
platforms
> you chose to use, or provide and support mechanisms that enable
it to
> be used on those other platforms?
>
> Doesn't the sbitx platform deserve to be what it has been since you
> bought it, a unique platform for software and hardware tinkerers,
> instead of becoming just another box for other people's software
to drive?
>
> Aren't you really just looking for an IC-705 and a Windows
tablet for
> EMCOM, and/or an IC-7300 and a Windows PC for Field Day, and not
> really looking for a platform to tinker with?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Dave, N1AI
>

On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 04:51 AM, Gordon Gibby wrote:

Thank you Gwen, for your question and your "user context" that
helps explain your question.

To say that "N3FJP is just a logger" seems somewhat similar to
saying "The Eifel Tower is just a monument."? ?N3FJP is widely
used by not just individuals but GROUPS of individuals,

* has specifically crafted uniquely intuitive interfaces for
each of a few dozen contests
* has multi-user simultaneous capabilities
* can interface with dozens of different radios to capture
frequency and mode information

and, most usefully,

* can control several different radios to actually send voice
messages or CW messages

As far as I know, the internal single-user sBitx logger has none
of those features at this time.

Our small club used N3FJP productively in the last Winter Field
Day and made use of all of those advantages, particularly the
ability to control radios.? So when in PHONE competition, users
could simply strike F1 and their CQ message would automatically be
transmitted, would pause a determined number of seconds, and then
repeat until they strike any key to enter a callsign.

In CW, I could strike F1 to initiate a CQ message, interrupt it by
entering VU2ESE, reply by striking F2 (giving back an
acknolwedgement and a full exchange) and then confirm receipt by
striking F4 and? automatically initiiate a new request for contacts.

I'm not a truly skilled user, but skilled users hit 60-100
contacts per hour with these type systtems....I'm more in the
20-30 range.? ? Our group expects to be in the top 4% of submitted
logs, and we're pretty happy with that since we had never done
that and had to build antenna multiplexers to operate three
100-watt radios simultaneously over the only coax the authorities
have penetrating their tornado-proof walls....

So if you want your radio to be competitive in the marketplace of
people who do Field Day or Winter Field Day yada yada yada....you
can't box yourselff out from these usetul systems, that are NOT
going to be running on raspberry pi's in the foreseeable
future....but are used by thousands to tens of thousands....

WINLINK is a 23+ year old radio email system that has basically
won the battle for higher speed digital ARQ (acknowledge-request,
a form of data integrity guarantee) communications in the USA
after a 2-year battle with people who wished to limit amateur
radio.? ?Most of their software (in current versions) is truly the
product one one man W4PHS.? ?It is the de facto standard for
100%-correct digital radio email the world over and moves
approximately 50,000 radio emails per month.? Their programming
staff of precisely 1? (and hopefully growing) is not going to be
able to address niche radios like the sBitx unless you make it
extremely easy, and by that, I mean "emulate something they
already address"? ?Radios for which they provide connections
include:? Barrett, Codan, Micom, a zillion Yaesu's, a zillion
ICOMs, Elecraft, Flex and Kenwoods.? ?Perhaps there is a quite
simple way to craft the recently created Telnet interface to
emulate one of those, at least for the basic functions?? ? I know
that for the uBitx I was able to craft an ICOM interface that
worked for my purposes.

The sBitx has orders of magnitude more programming "staff" than
either of those other systems....and if you wish to increase your
use-ability and market share, making life easier on others is a
good way to win friends and influence people!

Hope that helps explain it,
With all due respect, if these software packages are so monumentally important to you, your local club, and local and nationwide emergency response teams, why buy equipment that doesn't readily support those software packages?? Why not buy equipment that already does, instead of hoping that other people fill the gaps for you?

Why spend your time publicly putting pressure on other, mostly unpaid people, to do the work that is needed to resolve the problem of not having support for the exact software that you feel is so monumentally important on the exact platforms you choose to buy?

Don't the N3FJP and WINLINK authors deserve to be rewarded by you using their software on the platforms they chose to support, instead of being pressured to move it all to monumentally different platforms you chose to use, or provide and support mechanisms that enable it to be used on those other platforms?

Doesn't the sbitx platform deserve to be what it has been since you bought it, a unique platform for software and hardware tinkerers, instead of becoming just another box for other people's software to drive?

Aren't you really just looking for an IC-705 and a Windows tablet for EMCOM, and/or an IC-7300 and a Windows PC for Field Day, and not really looking for a platform to tinker with?

--
Regards,
Dave, N1AI

On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 02:29 AM, Rafael Diniz wrote:

Hi JJ,

There is no tx_compression implemented in Farhan's (there are no
programmers, just one programmer) sBitx code.

- Rafael

Hi.

Compression IS a value that is available via telnet in v3.x so I assumed it was still in v3.x code. The compression setting is available in v2.0 as seen here.




Also, There are "programmers" aka developers working with Farhan to enhance the code according to the GH page.. Recognize someone on there :)






-JJ