Re: [44net] ASN # and Network Service Provider (NSP)

"Once I'm going overseas, usable bandwidth can drop to 10 Mbps or less, from end to end" What a lucky man you are! If we use other software then OpenHPSDR we can get away with using abiut 10Mb/s for one slice. SparkSDR is one of them. "The biggest challenge with high speed RF is cost and complexity. " Cost, Ok a pair of 5.8Ghz Ubiquity radio that can do 30 KM+ high speed links will cost around 300$ US that is not that expensive but not every can buy a pair. But we dont need every one to be connected by RF, it would be an incitative, But not every one can do sta tracking, Not every one can have a tilt tower with beam for HF and a 3000$ radio and amp. But If we would have a nice backbone all around the planet for the 44 net and local (national) way to connect to it, we could be able to do something like that project. But without a backbone I dont think project like that would be possible. Try to pass 10 Mb/s on ipip with the USCD modem and you will see that it is not possible to substain for long. I know that cheap vps with limted BW and Ram would not do the job. But there is a way to scale things for sure with out spending the entire ARDC assets. There was a baseball movie in the 80's and a voice in the movie kept saying , built it and they will come. I am not saying that we will have hugh inflow of ham using the 44 net adress just like that out of no where. But if we keep the BW to the level of the USDC modem on ipip we wont see much more activity then we have now. I did try to run a ipip tunnel on ampr. I quickly figured that almost nothing that I had insterest in would work under that infrastructure. Yes a small web server, a mail server, maybe an Ip phone connection on a low codec. But real time voice communication at a good quality level would suffer cut and instability very fast. SDR even with a small BW device like the RTL-SDR would be marginal. With such infrastructure you dont dream big. And I am not saying that what Brian did was bad. Far from it, he had I am sure big dream for the 44 net. But he worked with what he had. The selling of an asset that had no utilisation and would have had not much more use gave us now the possibility to dream big. He was not able to push his vision to the max. We should not keep on waiting for something to happen. It will not happen. Lets move, lets figure out what we will be able to do with a stronger infrastructure and then project will come. and if we need to modify the backbone, we will do it. There is no perfect backbone we can think of. If we wait for perfect decision, Brain would have not make the move he did. Lets be bold, but not crazy ;-) Pierre VE2PF ________________________________________ De : 44Net <44net-bounces+petem001=hotmail.com(a)mailman.ampr.org> de la part de Tony Langdon via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> Envoyé : 6 février 2021 18:54 À : 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org Cc : Tony Langdon Objet : Re: [44net] ASN # and Network Service Provider (NSP) On 7/2/21 8:32 am, pete M via 44Net wrote: Now that would be neat - having access to SDR IFs remotely, though those speeds are only going to be available at a regional level if routing over the Internet. While I have 80+ Mbps available downstream, that really only applies to relatively local (within VK for me) endpoints. Once I'm going overseas, usable bandwidth can drop to 10 Mbps or less, from end to end. But the 2-2.4 MHz bandwidth of RTL-SDR class devices might be more practical on an international scale, which means a transport that can scale to suit available bandwidth. Also, for latency reasons, we would want optimal routing on our core infrastructure, which ties back to the previous discussion. Nice out of the box thinking there. :) The biggest challenge with high speed RF is cost and complexity. Not everyone is able to build UHF/microwave equipment reliably. I have a number of issues in that area - some intrinsic, some are time related, and the cost of high speed/wide bandwidth microwave equipment tends to be rather expensive, given that amateur applications tend to be low volume, compared to something like mobile phones or wifi. I'm pretty sick to death of being held back by archaic US regulations. Here, we can also use whatever bandwidth a mode requires, provided we stay within the band limits (on VHF and up). There may be some interesting band plan issues on 70cm, but we hams can resolve those. On 1.2 GHz and up, there's bandwidth to burn, and it would be good to make use of that. :) Maybe the rest of the world should just get on with it and encourage US hams to lobby to get their regulations updated to match the rest of the world, and in the meantime, the US battles on as best it can until they can sort out their regs and join us RF wise. -- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net