Let me agree, by mentioning how this "figure it out" approach (and related issues) is making D-Star uninteresting for anyone interested in digital communications beyond a "wow, digital is cool" attitude that follows their first iPhone experience.
Ten years ago, I was working on software to replace FNpack (yes, even now, a decade later FNpack is still being used by "forward-thinking" EmComm organizations) when Icom/USA approached me to do an equivalent D-Star version and loaned me several D-Star radios. I subsequently purchased an entire Icom repeater stack (144, 440, 1.2G), only to discover to my HORROR that the Icom repeater software had HARD-CODED IP addresses, with ZERO flexibility in being integrated into an existing private network. Further, the only ones in the country that seemed to really know how the software worked, was a group in Texas, and they weren't publicly documenting ONE THING about what they had discovered. Help (ie, responses to questions) took the form of "once you install it and use it, you'll figure it out." To make a long story somewhat shorter, I donated the entire repeater stack IN DISGUST and a couple D-star radios to a local amateur radio club, took a charitable tax deduction on the equipment, and washed my hands of the whole mess.
A few passed, and recently I got involved in D-Star again. Well, one set of amateur radio horrors has been replaced with another set. Fortunately, European amateurs somehow reverse engineered (without any help from USA amateurs) the D-Star repeater network protocol, and provided open source software to completely replace the Icom software. This new software not only works very well, but avoids all of the IDIOCY in the Icom software. Good, right? Well, no good deed goes unpunished, and other amateurs have taken the software and rather than contribute their changes to the originators, they have set up competing systems. So, if you want full callsign forwarding on your D-Star repeater system, you have to install the Icom software plus three additional packages (identical except for where they forward their data).
Further, there are amateurs who are injecting erroneous data into the D-Star network streams used, apparently as part of "amateur radio experimentation". There are amateurs, because they can solder, think they are electronic engineers, and because they can write a simple script, think they are software engineers. This is not new; look at the APRS-IS system. Despite very good APRS-IS documentation by Pete Loveall, dimbulb amateurs are writing "software" that injects malformed APRS data into the APRS-IS system.
When I first got involved in D-Star, 1200bps was already old, and I hoped that one day Icom might support (at least) a 4800 bps data-only mode, since the radio supports that (3600bps for voice, 1200bps for data), Unfortunately, I learned that Icom/Japan (the only manufacturer to bring D-Star radios to market) doesn't even have an OUNCE of vision when it comes to digital data. Yes, I have an Icom ID-1 (1.2GHz), and so far the most useful thing it has done was to allow me to verify that I had a direct line-of sight path to a HamWAN node before buying and installing the 5.9GHz MikroTik radio and antenna. Yes, the latter works very well, but the hardware is not the problem, is it?
So, here I am, in the 44net environment, and what is the first thing I find? A reluctance to support ampr.org subdomain delegation, with the reason that "every forward name must have a reverse IP mapping". Trivial changes to hostnames require going through a coordinator, and (of course) no DDNS. Subdomain delegation doesn't require any additional resources if properly done, because any references to a subdomain are handled by the subdomain's nameservers.
So, what is the value of the 44.x.x.x network? To me, to allow amateur RADIOS to verify that the remote entity that they are communicating with, is (barring falsification, which can happen anywhere in amateur radio) another licensed amateur station.
The value to me of the ampr.org domain is less clear, other than providing a domain with nameservers that are on the 44.x.x.x network, and have a hope (?) of being reachable in a network outage. Ideally, there are several ampr.org nameservers scattered around the 44.x.x.x network, although I don't see that. Hmm ...
So, rather than fight city hall on this, a week ago I obtained the 44rf.net domain, for the SOLE PURPOSE of allowing ANY amateur to set up a subdomain and manage that subdomain with his/her subdomain nameserver (hopefully, all the nameservers will be on the 44.x.x.x network). The domain name doesn't matter; if someone else has a similar project in progress, I'll defer to that. I don't need to reinvent the wheel (I know, amateur radio heresy), and it was only $12.
Then, I find people still hanging on to DOS networking. I like DOS. I ran Lantastic on it. I wrote commercial software for it. I even have DOS installed (as a dual-boot option) on my 8GB 64-bit Windows 7 system (somehow DOS can't find all the memory -- grin). However, let's get real, folks. The practical network standard for routing is Linux. Cost is not a factor; I ran old versions of Linux on 4MB 386 systems, and I knew someone who (as an experiment) ran it on a 1.44MB floppy. If DOS-based networking software can run in the Linux network environment without impacting others, fine. Otherwise, let's move on.
Finally, as to documentation: I've made a number of wiring (power and Ethernet) changes to my house, and I DOCUMENT (and update!) them. I use HTML because it's easier to insert diagrams. I tell others (and sometimes myself) that the reason is so that when I sell the house, the next owner will know what I did, and not have to reverse-engineer the wiring.
But that is not the real reason. The real reason is so that, in six months, when I have forgotten the details, I don't have to reverse engineer what I've done, myself.
-- Dean AE7Q
On 2014-04-18 07:22, Michael E Fox - N6MEF wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ +1
So the people who are trying to figure it out are supposed to document what someone else defined? Ridiculous. Dozens or hundreds of people stumbling around in the dark, each for hours or days, is not an effective use of anyone's time and it stifles growth. Instead, whoever installed the lights should spend ten or twenty minutes to write down how to turn them on.
Michael N6MEF
On 18.4.2014 10:24, Rob Janssen wrote:
That may be a frustrating endeavour for a professional network admin, but for the average hobbyist it is a learning experience and a way to get things working by gradually tweaking the configuration.
This is very strange approach that I, frankly met nowhere else in ham world but here.
...
Pedja YT9TP