|
Hey All, I'm not a rules stickler but a significant number of stations I hear are not following the suggestions set out by the originator of this network. I readily admit to having a few mistakes in my configuration that ran afoul but it was unintentional and I have since fixed it. This is amateur radio after all. I think some of the faux pas are due to ignorance as packet radio setups can be complicated but others are definitely intentional. This makes passing traffic on the net more difficult for all of us. It's worth reviewing the recommendations on the homepage if you haven't. After having the station up for a while and analyzing the traffic I observe regular:
- Digipeating
- APRS
- Aliases
- WX
- RMS traffic
- Excessively long and short PAC lengths
- Excessively long FRACK times
Some of the most insidious problems are actually poorly configured radios and fundamental modem misconfigurations that make communicating nearly impossible. I'm hoping the documentation I'm working on will help to correct this issue over time.
|
And another very annoying, unnecessary, and irresponsible action is CWID's. Turn 'em off, guys (if your software permits, as it should)! FCC rules permit us to identify in the mode of transmission, AX 25, or PSK31, or Baudot, etc.? CWID's are strictly optional and NOT required by law. They are more of a nuisance than anything. It's irresponsible to enable unnecessary functionality that takes up additional precious bandwidth, especially on the ACDS segments. The activity of repeatedly sending CWID's (beaconing?) without any digital traffic being passed is also legally questionable, but above all,? it marks one as a LID. Nobody owns any frequency. Marking "your" frequency with incessant automatic CWID's does not allow you to lay claim to it. You may very well be cited for causing intentional malicious interference to others. Give it a rest, guys!
Best regards,
Gary, K7EK
Get
On Sep 16, 2023, at 19:18, "Chris, N6CTA" < mail@...> wrote:
Hey All,
I'm not a rules stickler but a significant number of stations I hear are not following the suggestions set out by the originator of this network. I readily admit to having a few mistakes in my configuration that ran afoul but it was unintentional but I have since fixed it. This is amateur radio after all. I think some of the faux pas are due to ignorance as packet radio setups can be complicated but others are definitely intentional. This makes passing traffic on the net more difficult for all of us. It's worth reviewing the recommendations on the homepage if you haven't.
After having the station up for a while and analyzing the traffic I observe regular:
- Digipeating
- APRS
- Aliases
- WX
- RMS traffic
- Excessively long and short PAC lengths
- Excessively long FRACK times
Some of the most insidious problems are actually poorly configured radios and fundamental modem misconfigurations that make communicating nearly impossible. I'm hoping the documentation I'm working on will help to correct this issue over time.
|
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 07:54 AM, Gary - K7EK wrote:
And another very annoying, unnecessary, and irresponsible action is CWID's. Turn 'em off, guys (if your software permits, as it should)! FCC rules permit us to identify in the mode of transmission, AX 25, or PSK31, or Baudot, etc.? CWID's are strictly optional and NOT required by law. They are more of a nuisance than anything. It's irresponsible to enable unnecessary functionality that takes up additional precious bandwidth, especially on the ACDS segments. The activity of repeatedly sending CWID's (beaconing?) without any digital traffic being passed is also legally questionable, but above all,? it marks one as a LID. Nobody owns any frequency. Marking "your" frequency with incessant automatic CWID's does not allow you to lay claim to it. You may very well be cited for causing intentional malicious interference to others. Give it a rest, guys!
Best regards,
Gary, K7EK
Get
On Sep 16, 2023, at 19:18, "Chris, N6CTA" < mail@...> wrote:
Hey All,
I'm not a rules stickler but a significant number of stations I hear are not following the suggestions set out by the originator of this network. I readily admit to having a few mistakes in my configuration that ran afoul but it was unintentional but I have since fixed it. This is amateur radio after all. I think some of the faux pas are due to ignorance as packet radio setups can be complicated but others are definitely intentional. This makes passing traffic on the net more difficult for all of us. It's worth reviewing the recommendations on the homepage if you haven't.
After having the station up for a while and analyzing the traffic I observe regular:
- Digipeating
- APRS
- Aliases
- WX
- RMS traffic
- Excessively long and short PAC lengths
- Excessively long FRACK times
Some of the most insidious problems are actually poorly configured radios and fundamental modem misconfigurations that make communicating nearly impossible. I'm hoping the documentation I'm working on will help to correct this issue over time.
Hey Gary, Thank you for mentioning this! I have CWID disabled but it sounds like all timed ID packets are also not needed because the call is in every packet. I will disable my ID packets and just beacon my node's SSID's and grid as mentioned on the homepage every twenty or thirty minutes or so to allow people to find me. This is something I'll make sure to add to my documentation. Best, Chris, N6CTA
|
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
|
Hi Chris,?
I would like to make a suggestion if I may. Is there anyway that there could be a “FAQ” of sorts on the home page/directions of suggested other locations for packet traffic that have some activity but are a little less tied to the past? (Reference to “the past” in this case is NOT meant to be an insult, but reality based on this discussion.). I think for those wanting to do all the things that you list as problems observed it would be more “HAM friendly” if there would be a suggested alternative. Currently a lot of people (myself included) have turned to net 105 because it has traffic and it is a known.
Thanks, -Chris KO4YAW
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sep 17, 2023, at 7:19 PM, Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
|
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time, live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
|
A lot of Chris' on this group! LOL
?
The homepage:? has a wealth of info as outlined by Burt.
What additional information would you like to see?
?
Chris Lance
WW2BSA
Moderator
Network105 Web Master
?
On 09/17/2023 8:02 PM EDT Christopher Molnar KO4YAW <cmolnar65@...> wrote:
?
?
Hi Chris,?
?
I would like to make a suggestion if I may. Is there anyway that there could be a “FAQ” of sorts on the home page/directions of suggested other locations for packet traffic that have some activity but are a little less tied to the past? (Reference to “the past” in this case is NOT meant to be an insult, but reality based on this discussion.). I think for those wanting to do all the things that you list as problems observed it would be more “HAM friendly” if there would be a suggested alternative. Currently a lot of people (myself included) have turned to net 105 because it has traffic and it is a known.
?
Thanks,
-Chris
KO4YAW
On Sep 17, 2023, at 7:19 PM, Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
|
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 05:03 PM, Christopher Molnar KO4YAW wrote:
Hi Chris,?
?
I would like to make a suggestion if I may. Is there anyway that there could be a “FAQ” of sorts on the home page/directions of suggested other locations for packet traffic that have some activity but are a little less tied to the past? (Reference to “the past” in this case is NOT meant to be an insult, but reality based on this discussion.). I think for those wanting to do all the things that you list as problems observed it would be more “HAM friendly” if there would be a suggested alternative. Currently a lot of people (myself included) have turned to net 105 because it has traffic and it is a known.
?
Thanks,
-Chris
KO4YAW
On Sep 17, 2023, at 7:19 PM, Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
The designated HF APRS/WX frequency is? 10.1510 LSBIf you’re interested in HF PBBS forwarding/routing, have a look at some of the other efforts going on.? For me, Network 105 is/was a place to get my feet wet and learn the HF packet radio ropes. I’ve done unproto directed traffic chat, bpqchat, direct TNC:TNC chat, and PBBS mailbox correspondence. I feel like I know what I’m doing now with all the services and techniques encouraged on this particular frequency. My activity will likely taper off as I document what I learned and direct my efforts to building out the 300Bd IL2P network.? Digipeating is just a bad idea on HF BTW. That just needs to stop. There is no good way to handle it. It’s best to connect directly to an intermediate station and then connect out from there as outlined on the homepage.
|
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 08:07 PM, Chris Lance WW2BSA wrote:
<!doctype html>
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time, live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
There really isn’t enough configurability in the software to do what you are suggesting unless it’s done from cron or similar. Are you suggesting people manually send their beacon directed messages? The first letter of a callsign suffix usually works well for sorting radio amateurs assuming normal distribution. Doesn’t have to be this but for example… Base time = 30 min West +1 East + 2 EU + 3 West Alpha-Echo 31 Foxtrot-Juliet 32 Kilo-Oscar 33 Papa-Tango 34 Uniform-Zulu 35 East Alpha-Echo 32 Foxtrot-Juliet 34 Kilo-Oscar 36 Papa-Tango 38 Uniform-Zulu 40 EU Alpha-Echo 33 Foxtrot-Juliet 36 Kilo-Oscar 39 Papa-Tango 41? Uniform-Zulu 44
|
Hi,
My 2-cents, while a lot of it ought to be common sense and basic good 'ham practice', including noting 105 is not an aprs or wx spot (APRS has own frequency spots), this is really also very key;
"There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway."
I've seen some of this lately on 20m 105 and I really think it should be avoided. Even if it seems benign, it really congests the heck out of the shared spot for all others.
Use an alternative freq for it.
Hopefully we all can use these bands well if we are considerate of others, and a lot of it is basically this premise, fundamentally.
All the best, de louis / kd2yck
On Sun, 17 Sept 2023 at 23:07, Chris Lance WW2BSA < Ww2bsa@...> wrote:
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time, live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA < mail@...> wrote:
?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
-- Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail
|
On the automatic forwarding, this activity is limited to the narrow bit of the band in 14.095 - 14.112 MHz (excluding 14.100) by Part 97.221.? Wouldn't it be easier instead to move the keyboard to keyboard packet and VARAC activity out of this range to where the automatic forwarding can't affect it?
73,
? --Michael? WZ0C
On Monday, September 18, 2023 at 11:47:12 AM EDT, Louis Botterill <chillipower.uk@...> wrote:
Hi,
My 2-cents, while a lot of it ought to be common sense and basic good 'ham practice', including noting 105 is not an aprs or wx spot (APRS has own frequency spots), this is really also very key;
"There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway."
I've seen some of this lately on 20m 105 and I really think it should be avoided. Even if it seems benign, it really congests the heck out of the shared spot for all others.
Use an alternative freq for it.
Hopefully we all can use these bands well if we are considerate of others, and a lot of it is basically this premise, fundamentally.
All the best, de louis / kd2yck
On Sun, 17 Sept 2023 at 23:07, Chris Lance WW2BSA < Ww2bsa@...> wrote:
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time, live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA < mail@...> wrote:
?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
-- Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail
|
I like your pattern and base time. Of course, one does not want the freq to be a non-stop beacon festival or WWV'ish lol but looks logical. Implementing is another story. :-)
A couple of months ago I suggested a monthly or every other month Network105 QSO party, but received no feedback. :-(
73 Chris ww2bsa
Prof. Chris Lance www.ww2bsa.org www.EastNetPacket.com www.Network105.org Radio Station Manager Mount Allamuchy Scout Reservation ARRL Life Member
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original message -------- From: "Chris, N6CTA" <mail@...> Date: 9/18/23 5:50 AM (GMT-05:00) Subject: Re: [network105] Net105 Observations
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 08:07 PM, Chris Lance WW2BSA wrote:
<!doctype html>
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time, live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
There really isn’t enough configurability in the software to do what you are suggesting unless it’s done from cron or similar. Are you suggesting people manually send their beacon directed messages? The first letter of a callsign suffix usually works well for sorting radio amateurs assuming normal distribution. Doesn’t have to be this but for example… Base time = 30 min West +1 East + 2 EU + 3 West Alpha-Echo 31 Foxtrot-Juliet 32 Kilo-Oscar 33 Papa-Tango 34 Uniform-Zulu 35 East Alpha-Echo 32 Foxtrot-Juliet 34 Kilo-Oscar 36 Papa-Tango 38 Uniform-Zulu 40 EU Alpha-Echo 33 Foxtrot-Juliet 36 Kilo-Oscar 39 Papa-Tango 41? Uniform-Zulu 44
|
I like the idea of a 105 qso party - tell us more :)
On Mon, 18 Sept 2023 at 12:51, Chris Lance WW2BSA < Ww2bsa@...> wrote: I like your pattern and base time. Of course, one does not want the freq to be a non-stop beacon festival or WWV'ish lol but looks logical. Implementing is another story. :-)
A couple of months ago I suggested a monthly or every other month Network105 QSO party, but received no feedback. :-(
73 Chris ww2bsa
Prof. Chris Lance Radio Station Manager Mount Allamuchy Scout Reservation ARRL Life Member
-------- Original message -------- Date: 9/18/23 5:50 AM (GMT-05:00) Subject: Re: [network105] Net105 Observations
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 08:07 PM, Chris Lance WW2BSA wrote:
<!doctype html>
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time, live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA < mail@...> wrote: ?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
There really isn’t enough configurability in the software to do what you are suggesting unless it’s done from cron or similar. Are you suggesting people manually send their beacon directed messages? The first letter of a callsign suffix usually works well for sorting radio amateurs assuming normal distribution. Doesn’t have to be this but for example… Base time = 30 min West +1 East + 2 EU + 3 West Alpha-Echo 31 Foxtrot-Juliet 32 Kilo-Oscar 33 Papa-Tango 34 Uniform-Zulu 35 East Alpha-Echo 32 Foxtrot-Juliet 34 Kilo-Oscar 36 Papa-Tango 38 Uniform-Zulu 40 EU Alpha-Echo 33 Foxtrot-Juliet 36 Kilo-Oscar 39 Papa-Tango 41? Uniform-Zulu 44
-- Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e-mail
|
I am game for that.?
N3LBP?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I like your pattern and base time. Of course, one does not want the freq to be a non-stop beacon festival or WWV'ish lol but looks logical.
Implementing is another story. :-)
A couple of months ago I suggested a monthly or every other month Network105 QSO party, but received no feedback. :-(
73
Chris ww2bsa
Prof. Chris Lance
www.ww2bsa.org
www.EastNetPacket.com
www.Network105.org
Radio Station Manager
Mount Allamuchy Scout Reservation
ARRL Life Member
-------- Original message --------
From: "Chris, N6CTA" <mail@...>
Date: 9/18/23 5:50 AM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: Re: [network105] Net105 Observations
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 08:07 PM, Chris Lance WW2BSA wrote:
<!doctype html>
I'm not sure if I am echoing what you are saying and apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying: a CW ID isn't necessary on packet because you call is already included in the data. Not even sure why it's there. Never seen it used
in packet.
I believe what Burt was saying in regards to "there are no full server BBS to BBS forwarding systems" is because it ties up the frequency. Remember, the purpose of Network105 is real-time,
live, keyboard-to-keyboard 300 baud AX.25 packet QSO's. Nodes help promulgate that goal, while mailboxes are a perk.
?
There shouldn't be "forwarding" or "sending messages at a timed interval" of any kind on frequency because it ties it up. If you want to forward, add an additional HF port on another frequency or 220 Mhz backbone frequency. It will
be more effective anyway.
?
My advice on beacons: west of the Mississippi River - beacon on the hour every 30 mins. East of the Mississippi - beacon 10 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Europe - beacon every 20 mins past the hour every 30 mins. Too many collisions
that way? Then stagger beacons. How? Note sure...
?
Your thoughts on all this
Chris Lance
ww2bsa?
On 09/17/2023 7:19 PM EDT Chris, N6CTA <mail@...> wrote:
?
?
I will say though that LID comments are unnecessary and I did want to clarify some things.
We’re all forever learning here.
CWID is identifying via CW instead of packet. That’s not the same as sending traffic with the BEACON or ID designation. Sending a message at a timed interval to all the stations on this network detailing services and maidenhead is the same as calling CQ if
the station can and will respond to queries. That is the nature of ACDS and differentiates the traffic from a beacon. That is well within the letter and spirt of both the law and the guidelines of the network.
Sending traffic to PBBS’s is K2K. It does not need to be two live operators at the same time to qualify.?
There really isn’t enough configurability in the software to do what you are suggesting unless it’s done from cron or similar. Are you suggesting people manually send their beacon directed messages?
The first letter of a callsign suffix usually works well for sorting radio amateurs assuming normal distribution.
Doesn’t have to be this but for example…
Base time = 30 min
West +1
East + 2
EU + 3
West
Alpha-Echo 31
Foxtrot-Juliet 32
Kilo-Oscar 33
Papa-Tango 34
Uniform-Zulu 35
East
Alpha-Echo 32
Foxtrot-Juliet 34
Kilo-Oscar 36
Papa-Tango 38
Uniform-Zulu 40
EU
Alpha-Echo 33
Foxtrot-Juliet 36
Kilo-Oscar 39
Papa-Tango 41?
Uniform-Zulu 44
|
Christopher Molnar KO4YAW
Chris Lance WW2BSA