Hello, I posted here a while back but have not made much progress.
I am a new Ham operator interested in packet and digital modes. I have
a small home setup with a terminal node controller attached to a vt100
terminal, I have been using it to reach the only other 2 packet
stations i was able to find in my area.
I have an interest in tcp/ip and wanted to try and connect to the 44
network if possible. I have had trouble finding information and
getting started.
I have a big interest in using some big older ibm gear. I have found
many programs that should get the job done, of interest is ka9q net
nos.
I have the hardware, the tnc, the computer, I am just uncertain of how
to go about using the software. Im having a real hard time finding any
local help on the subject. Ive tried no less than 3 of the local
clubs, none seem to have any members that even know much about packet
or tcp/ip over radio.
Ive asked around on a couple of the local repeaters as well, asked
some questions at the end of the weekly nets, only to find that there
does not to be anyone around with much knowledge on the subject.
I want to get started with this, i look to have all the hardware
needed to get it working but need advice on how to proceed. Any help
is much appreciated.
> Why not use LOTW for authentication?
> It's been done before and if you are LOTW verified it means that you are a radio amateur
It has also been done before (ab)using Echolink for authentication.
However they do not seem to like that, and probably rightly so.
(it puts the burden of license validation on them)
The same is probably true for LOTW when it would be heavily used outside its scope.
Some services require some form of client certificate, others (like NNTP) are better
off with a username/password. Both have to be catered for.
A good project on AMPRNet would be to setup a user authentication system that can be
used for our services without running the risk that some (ab)used party suddenly
draws back the support, or delays validation of new applicants (if only due to lack
of volunteers to do the validation).
Rob
I don't use the e-mail client to "reply". I have set the list to digest mode, the daily digests
I move to a separate folder that effectively is a trashcan, and I read the topics via the mailman
archive site where I cut and paste parts into a new mail message every time.
So no threads from me.
I don't like mailing lists. At ALL. Precisely because thread management is so difficult,
uninteresting threads cannot be killed, and traffic comes in between normal mail.
I would propose setting up a small USENET server with one or a couple of groups and then
use a newsreader to read and reply to the threads.
But that is apparently considered old-fashioned as well by some, and newer methods
are considered unacceptable.
So, no change. Live with it. Make a processing rule in your mailclient that dumps the 44net
mail in a separate folder, so your Inbox is left clean.
Rob
> >/The problem is that many readers get the "Digest" version of this list, /> >/which means that they don't have any easy way to respond to a post from /> >/a digest, without breaking the threading info that needs to be included /> >/in the reply's headers. /
> This is rather easy, and incumbent on the digest users.
> 1. In your list preferences, "Get MIME or Plain Text Digests?" needs to be set
> to MIME.
> 2. In the digest now you will have a link to click on as a reply.
The problem with that is the digest only arrives once per day, so you will
be replying quite late and the whole discussion becomes very difficult to
track when some people reply right away and others reply after receiving the
digest.
Rob
So if he was not run off from all of the Social media vs email list stuff.
Sherman W4ATL joined the list to answer any Data Radio questions. Sherman
was the chief engineer at DR when I was there. His knowledge is going to
be pre-cal amp take over. So any of the current off the shelf stuff is
going to use proprietary information that I doubt Cal-Amp will publish.
Even the older stuff uses proprietary code mmunitariona protocals, but the
ability to hack these is likely as they are just Z80 processors. So
Sherman if your still here and are willing to answer any questions go for
it....
Lin N4YCI
Applying for a LOTW cert is a rather painful and intrusive process outside of the USA.
Josh
-------- Original message --------
From: Ruben ON3RVH <on3rvh(a)on3rvh.be>
Date: 15/09/2017 20:01 (GMT+10:00)
To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: [44net] USENET news on AMPRNet
Why not use LOTW for authentication?
It's been done before and if you are LOTW verified it means that you are a radio amateur
73,
Ruben - ON3RVH
-----Original Message-----
From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+on3rvh=on3rvh.be@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Rob Janssen
Sent: vrijdag 15 september 2017 11:43
To: 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: [44net] USENET news on AMPRNet
> Don't solve a problem that doesn't exist.
> Usenet access is readily and economically available. There are enough
> providers that there are sites that review which is best.
> Google for 'usenet providers' and see for yourself.
The idea of course (at least I think) wasn't to provide generic usenet access on AMPRNet. Instead, it would be used for closed access discussion like this mailing list. Only a couple of hamradio related groups.
Of course this immediately shows the practical problem: the authentication of valid users. You would need to maintain a table of users similar to what the mailing list now has, and when you want a couple of news servers around the world, you would want this access information to be somehow synchronized between them.
Additionally, you may want some groups accessible to "any radio amateur".
But then you run into the problem that has been encountered so often: how to authenticate a radio amateur without maintaining yet another user list where new applicants have to be validated by people who would prefer to do more valued work.
Rob
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
> Don't solve a problem that doesn't exist.
> Usenet access is readily and economically available. There are
> enough providers that there are sites that review which is best.
> Google for 'usenet providers' and see for yourself.
The idea of course (at least I think) wasn't to provide generic usenet access
on AMPRNet. Instead, it would be used for closed access discussion like this
mailing list. Only a couple of hamradio related groups.
Of course this immediately shows the practical problem: the authentication of
valid users. You would need to maintain a table of users similar to what the
mailing list now has, and when you want a couple of news servers around the
world, you would want this access information to be somehow synchronized between
them.
Additionally, you may want some groups accessible to "any radio amateur".
But then you run into the problem that has been encountered so often: how to
authenticate a radio amateur without maintaining yet another user list where
new applicants have to be validated by people who would prefer to do more
valued work.
Rob
> If you're one of the very few people who have ever taken advantage of
> the ability to read USENET news via AMPRNet and the news.ucsd.edu server,
> you should be aware that that server is failing from old age and will be
> taken out of service soon. We don't plan to replace it; Usenet itself
> is fading away. I co-authored the NNTP protocol some 31 years ago;
> that's a pretty good run for any internet standard.
I wasn't aware that there was any special service from news.ucsd.edu towards
AMPRNet... does it carry any special groups other than rec.radio.amateur.*?
Fortunately my ISP still maintains USENET servers, two separate clusters
even, one for what we used to use for news and another one dedicated to
moving large blobs of gibberish :-)
Indeed I see your name above RFC977! Great!
I once maintained a CNEWS server for a company, which used a UUCP batch
feed over a 9600 baud phone modem. The group list had to be trimmed all the
time so it would not get behind so much it would never catch up, and the
200MB spool had to be carefully watched as well. Those were the days...
Greetings, friends, allow me comment on this topic and after having seen
all the comments, I would like to express too.
Many of us who are already time in the Amprnet understand the rules to be
followed by our great friend Brian Kantor as proyect lider who for many
years now does much to keep the Amprnet 44 together with many contributions
from many other colleagues. Gentlemen, the world has advanced a few years
since IRC, Usenet, etc, we are in time to think that social platforms are
now important or more than before, more powerful than the conventional ways
of communication, and I think, that we should use for Amprnet chat in
privately (private group).
If the information is more confidential for any reason the social networks
are not used, and exits now other routes that are used now. But Facebook,
for example, would serve to us as a more "real" link between all the
Coordinators and people with whom we can share general information of this
activity of this tecnical HOBBY and sure may to grow in friends and should
not be confused with our professional activities in this environment.
In my case I would like to have contact via Facebook with Brian or any
Regional Amprnet Coordinators and have a more relaxed arena to be able to
speak general topics of our Hobby.
73 de Gabriel YV5KXE.
Venezuela Amprnet Coordinator
----------------------------------------------------
1. Re: New Facebook Group (Richard Chycoski)
*************************************
