This morning I accessed BPQ Mail from a terminal window on the bpq host machine. Windows 10.? BPQ32 6.0.24.64 and BPQMail 6.0.24.62? (these were distributed together.)

?

Anything that I enter (LM, L, name, homebbs, anything) returns nothing to the terminal.? I can see that it connects to the BBS on the mail app, and the queue value goes to what looks to be accurate.? But nothing on the screen.

?

Accessing WebMail in a browser works normal.

Accessing the BBS from a browser terminal acts normal.

Accessing the BBS from another machin using telnet works normally.

The logs show exactly what the terminal does. No output to the terminal when accessed with a terminal window on the local machine.

?

I looked for all occurrances of my base call sign in my config. I do have a couple and commented them out.? Restarted and the same happens.

Forwarding is happening normally.

Recieving mail is happening normally.

?

Anyone else have this happen to them?? I probably have not accessed the BBS like this for months so have no clue when it started.? So many changes to the config file since I accessed the mail from a termina... Just not sure if this is isolated to my fat finguring the config file somewhere or if others have seen this.? Quite frankly, I don't even know where to start looking.

?

?

--

73,

Mark, N5MDT

Montgomery, Texas

?

?

?

There is no urgent need for this it is just me playing so whenever you get around to it is fine. I'll keep experimenting in the meantime. Thanks John.

73 de Rich WA3WLH

On 3/4/25 15:32, John G8BPQ via groups.io wrote:

Ok, Thanks.

I'll be away for a few days but will look at it what I get back.

73, John

On 04/03/2025 18:23, Rich Sahlender via groups.io wrote:

PS... I completely forgot that when using QTT in tabbed mode while connected with a bpq node via an FBB port the RF ports do not appear as an option for monitoring until AFTER the initial monitor tab connect... so if it helps the attached zip is take2 showing both RF ports monitored simultaneously within the same monitor tab.

On 3/4/25 11:33, Rich Sahlender via groups.io wrote:

Back at it... the attached zip includes the following files.

70cm-between-bridge-and-wlh7.txt - using linbpq status command to demonstrate good packet timing between the linbpq bridge system 70cm port and my primary home QTH node. Note that since my previous post I loaned the Signalink I was using on the bridge system 70cm port and had to replace with an old h/w pre-MFJ TNCX but the timing still looks good. Note also FWIW that the -7 node uses a KPC3+ on its 70cm port.

10m-between-client-and-bridge.txt - using linbpq status command to demonstrate good packet timing between the 10m client QTT and QTSM with an IC705 and the -13 linbpq bridge system using QTSM and a FT817.

10m-qtsm-bridged-to-wlh7.txt - the 10m client QTSM view of a linbpq status while bridged to my home node.

bridgenode-10m-listen.txt - a bpq listen view of the bridge nodes 10m port while bridge is active.

bridgenode-70cm-listen.txt - a bpq listen view of the bridge nodes 70cm port while bridge is active.

Let me know what else might help if needed.

Tnx es 73 de Rich WA3WLH

On Mar 5, 2025, at 10:54?AM, Rich Sahlender via groups.io <wa3wlh@...> wrote:

Hello Robby,

Tough to find you at WL2K without providing your call.

73 de Rich WA3WLH

On 03/04/2025 8:59 PM EST Chuck Gelm <nc8q-aredn@...> wrote:

?

?

On 3/4/25 17:16, Chris Lance WW2BSA wrote:

Need Advice:

I'm setting up 2 RF only BPQ nodes that are not within RF range of each other. (Please see diagram below.) However, they each can access a node on a mountain between them. The node is a Kantronics? V9.1. In Scenario 1, forwarding would be done during sleep hours to avoid tying up the user channel. In Scenario 2, the data link would be 24/7.

?

1. Kantronics has a KNet, KA-Node, and a simple Digipeater? Which type of node do you think would play well with BPQ for forwarding?
2. What would the forwarding scripts look like between both stations via the node in each scenario?
3. I'm curious to hear member comments on the pros and cons for each scenario.

Thank you!

73 de Chris WW2BSA

Hi, Chris:

Digipeating is the fastest.
Any node-mode would be more polite.
In your diagram I guarantee the mountaintop node will be an 'exposed node'.

It is likely that the nodes in each of the 2 valleys will be hidden nodes to each other.


Is there any chance that there could be 2 nodes on the mountain?
Wire connected and each covering a different valley and each on a different channel.

73, Chuck

On 03/04/2025 7:01 PM EST Mark Taylor <mtaylor@...> wrote:

?

?

?

Ok, here are your considerations.

?

Kantronics in KA-Node is creating a NetRom link, if i am not mistaken, and creates a LOT of traffic.? I avoid this at all costs.? But that is just me in my county and my preferences.

The advantage is that a message send from one use to the other as the packets are sent they are ACK'd by the KA-node and that's that.? Then the KA-node transmit to destination and the destination ACK's the packets.

?

If the Kantronics is a digipeater (my preference) then it remains silent except to ID, beacons, and when it receives something to be repeated.

The disadvantage is that the packet is sent by the origin, is repeated by the Kantronics, then is ACK'd by the destination, which has to then be sent back to and repeated by the Kantronics all the way back to the origin for the packet to be considered delivered.

This method results in minimal air time.

?

?

If you are in a sparcely populated area then the first scenario would work.

If you are in an area with even a small number of packet stations then you might get complaints about the amount of traffic heard.

?

?

?

?

--

73,

Mark, N5MDT

Montgomery, Texas

?

?

?

On 03/04/2025 6:22 PM EST Jeff KP3FT via groups.io <kp3ft@...> wrote:

?

?

Hi Chris,

My opinion is K-Net since it's good for node-broadcasting and pretty sure for forwarding, And Scenario 2 with backbones for sure. You'd need a second radio at the mountaintop site for the backbone freq. The forwarding script I'm not sure about; K-Net is Netrom-like and does link with BPQ but I don't know the full details on the limitations. In Puerto Rico the network is almost exclusively BPQ, but there are a couple K-Net nodes linked in.

Is using HF NVIS a possibility there? If the stations on either side of the mountain are close , then NVIS would make the mountain disappear, eliminating the need for the mountaintop node as the middle-man. The ACDS sections of HF allow high baudrates now, so I imagine a 600-baud, 1200-baud or maybe even 2400-baud standard AX25 AFSK signal would work as a backbone since they are still within the now FCC-legal bandwidth (depending on the quality of the signal). There's also the IL2P variation of AX25 which is supposed to have better performance, which Direwolf and Soundmodem both have, besides the Nino TNC..

Also, for a backbone, ARDOP or VARA would work really well since the two stations would be a dedicated link only between them (ARDOP and VARA only allow one connection at a time).

It would be a cool experiment for sure to see how well NVIS worked between the stations especially of they're pretty close. NVIS refracts not only from the F-layers but also the E-layer. For whatever reason, a lot of NVIS documentation doesn't say much about the E-layer, probably because E-layer skip isn't as strong as F-layer, but I have seen it mentioned in a couple docs and I've seen it work. The further the stations are apart, the less strong the NVIS signal from F and E layers will be usually, since the signal has to pass thru more D-layer.

On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 05:16:28 PM EST, Chris Lance WW2BSA <ww2bsa@...> wrote:

?

?

Need Advice:

I'm setting up 2 RF only BPQ nodes that are not within RF range of each other. (Please see diagram below.) However, they each can access a node on a mountain between them. The node is a Kantronics? V9.1. In Scenario 1, forwarding would be done during sleep hours to avoid tying up the user channel. In Scenario 2, the data link would be 24/7.

?

1. Kantronics has a KNet, KA-Node, and a simple Digipeater? Which type of node do you think would play well with BPQ for forwarding?
2. What would the forwarding scripts look like between both stations via the node in each scenario?
3. I'm curious to hear member comments on the pros and cons for each scenario.

Thank you!

73 de Chris WW2BSA

Ok, Thanks.

I'll be away for a few days but will look at it what I get back.

73, John

On 04/03/2025 18:23, Rich Sahlender via groups.io wrote:

PS... I completely forgot that when using QTT in tabbed mode while connected with a bpq node via an FBB port the RF ports do not appear as an option for monitoring until AFTER the initial monitor tab connect... so if it helps the attached zip is take2 showing both RF ports monitored simultaneously within the same monitor tab.

On 3/4/25 11:33, Rich Sahlender via groups.io wrote:

Back at it... the attached zip includes the following files.

70cm-between-bridge-and-wlh7.txt - using linbpq status command to demonstrate good packet timing between the linbpq bridge system 70cm port and my primary home QTH node. Note that since my previous post I loaned the Signalink I was using on the bridge system 70cm port and had to replace with an old h/w pre-MFJ TNCX but the timing still looks good. Note also FWIW that the -7 node uses a KPC3+ on its 70cm port.

10m-between-client-and-bridge.txt - using linbpq status command to demonstrate good packet timing between the 10m client QTT and QTSM with an IC705 and the -13 linbpq bridge system using QTSM and a FT817.

10m-qtsm-bridged-to-wlh7.txt - the 10m client QTSM view of a linbpq status while bridged to my home node.

bridgenode-10m-listen.txt - a bpq listen view of the bridge nodes 10m port while bridge is active.

bridgenode-70cm-listen.txt - a bpq listen view of the bridge nodes 70cm port while bridge is active.

Let me know what else might help if needed.

Tnx es 73 de Rich WA3WLH