Hi there
Is there a way to have a Packet Node with Pi (or any other small size solution that will not require a PC) ?
If yes How do I connect TNC (serial port) to PI is the Pi support USB to serial external interface (like the profilic ones) ?
Or (preferred) something can be done to do the TNC on Sound card (can be an External sound card that connect to the USB of the PI)
Please Advice
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
jttp://www.ronen.org
I'm not aware of anyone doing this, but it certainly could be done.
Andrew
On Mar 1, 2016, at 11:25 PM, R P ronenp@hotmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Hi there
Is there a way to have a Packet Node with Pi (or any other small size solution that will not require a PC) ?
If yes How do I connect TNC (serial port) to PI is the Pi support USB to serial external interface (like the profilic ones) ?
Or (preferred) something can be done to do the TNC on Sound card (can be an External sound card that connect to the USB of the PI)
Please Advice
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
jttp://www.ronen.org
The Raspberry Pi can use a USB-to-RS232 serial adapter, as long as there are drivers for the adapter that work on the OS you are running on the Pi.
Alternatively, there are pins on the GPIO header that are connected to a UART on the Pi’s board (pins 6, 8 and 10). With a voltage level converter (e.g. MAX3232) that can convert from the 0-3.3v on the Pi to RS232 levels (-12, 0, +12v), you can use those pins to communicate with a device that has an RS232 port.
Best regards and 73,
Scott HS0ZLW
On 2Mar, 2016, at 13:25, R P ronenp@hotmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Hi there
Is there a way to have a Packet Node with Pi (or any other small size solution that will not require a PC) ?
If yes How do I connect TNC (serial port) to PI is the Pi support USB to serial external interface (like the profilic ones) ?
Or (preferred) something can be done to do the TNC on Sound card (can be an External sound card that connect to the USB of the PI)
Please Advice
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
jttp://www.ronen.org
Ronen,
There are a lot of packet nodes running on a Pi. There is a version of the TNC-X that plugs directly onto the GPIO header (Google TNC-PI), over 2000 of which have been sold. Or you can use a conventional TNC with a USB-Serial converter. The Direwolf soundcard TNC also works well on the PI.
The Linux version of my BPQ32 networking software (LinBPQ) was inspired by the PI, and includes an AMPRNet Tunnel and RIP44 process that simplifies running IP over ax.25.
73, John G8BPQ
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+john.wiseman=cantab.net@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of R P Sent: 02 March 2016 06:25 To: AMPRNet working group Subject: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Hi there
Is there a way to have a Packet Node with Pi (or any other small size solution that will not require a PC) ?
If yes How do I connect TNC (serial port) to PI is the Pi support USB to serial external interface (like the profilic ones) ?
Or (preferred) something can be done to do the TNC on Sound card (can be an External sound card that connect to the USB of the PI)
Please Advice
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
jttp://www.ronen.org
Are you familiar with the tnc-pi ? (http://tnc-x.com/TNCPi.htm) ? Great companion to RPi. I've been running on 2m for a couple of years now withtout any issues. Ken - KD6OAT
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 11:25 PM, R P ronenp@hotmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Hi there
Is there a way to have a Packet Node with Pi (or any other small size solution that will not require a PC) ?
If yes How do I connect TNC (serial port) to PI is the Pi support USB to serial external interface (like the profilic ones) ?
Or (preferred) something can be done to do the TNC on Sound card (can be an External sound card that connect to the USB of the PI)
Please Advice
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
jttp://www.ronen.org
Beyond what others have mentioned like the TNC-Pi (nice kit), using a $7 USB soundcard and Direwolf will provide superior decodes. As for OS images to run, that are packet centric, there are several available:
- Bernard's new Jessie based image for TNC-Pi - http://f6bvp.org/AX25_BBS_Node_RaspBerry_Pi_install.html
- Mitch's Wheezy based image with setup GUI which supports TNC-X and Direwolf - https://sourceforge.net/projects/haldigital/
- I've been working on my own documentation for such a thing (v2 on Jessie is close but incomplete, v1 for Wheezy is done) for Direwolf and TNC-Pi - http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/RPi/
- Brett's TNC-Pi centric image - https://sites.google.com/a/thinkonit.com/ax25-fpac/
I'm sure there are others out there as well but these are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
--David KI6ZHD
Greetings,
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, David Ranch wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Beyond what others have mentioned like the TNC-Pi (nice kit), using a $7 USB soundcard and Direwolf will provide superior decodes. As for OS images to run, that are packet centric, there are several available:
- Bernard's new Jessie based image for TNC-Pi -
http://f6bvp.org/AX25_BBS_Node_RaspBerry_Pi_install.html
- Mitch's Wheezy based image with setup GUI which supports TNC-X and
Direwolf - https://sourceforge.net/projects/haldigital/
- I've been working on my own documentation for such a thing (v2 on Jessie
is close but incomplete, v1 for Wheezy is done) for Direwolf and TNC-Pi - http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/RPi/
- Brett's TNC-Pi centric image -
https://sites.google.com/a/thinkonit.com/ax25-fpac/
I'm sure there are others out there as well but these are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
--David KI6ZHD
There is also a Pidora/JNOS package that we use here in Michigan where JNOS is pre-installed on the flash image. The configuration manager is imbedded into the Pidora image as well, which steps the user through a series of configuration screens. Though it is very much Michigan centric, it would be easy to re-edit the autoexec.nos for your own particular settings. Nicest thing is the easy Ctl-Alt-F1 Ctl-Alt-F6 switching between the Pidora desktop and the JNOS terminal. But most users just 'telnet' to the JNOS application and leave an xterm window open.
http://ares-mi.org/downloads/Packet/Configure_Personal_JNOS/Configure_Person... US.pdf
Enjoy! --- Jay WB8TKL o ARRL Michigan Section ASM for Digital Technologies
Hello Jay,
There is also a Pidora/JNOS package that we use here in Michigan where JNOS is pre-installed on the flash image.
Ok.. thanks for that and I've added that to my Rpi v2 documentation for people looking for a shortcut. If anyone is aware of other packet-centric Rpi images, I'd love to hear from you.
A little off topic but it seems I now need to update my doc a bit since the Rpi v3 is out. It brings in native 802.11n wifi, Bluetooth 4.1, a faster CPU (4x 64bit 1.2G cores running the ARM v8 instruction set), etc. ~50% faster than the Rpi v2. My only complaint is that it doesn't support external antennas for the Wifi/BT side of things. This URL and associated YouTube video is a good / short intro in to what makes the Rpi v3 new:
https://blog.adafruit.com/2016/03/04/raspberry-pi-3-model-b-breakdown-on-ras...
--David KI6ZHD
Has anyone seen any TNC are TNC-Pi like but support higher baud rate then 1200?
Jerry, KD4YAL
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, David Ranch amprgw@trinnet.net wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Beyond what others have mentioned like the TNC-Pi (nice kit), using a $7 USB soundcard and Direwolf will provide superior decodes. As for OS images to run, that are packet centric, there are several available:
- Bernard's new Jessie based image for TNC-Pi -
http://f6bvp.org/AX25_BBS_Node_RaspBerry_Pi_install.html
- Mitch's Wheezy based image with setup GUI which supports TNC-X and
Direwolf - https://sourceforge.net/projects/haldigital/
- I've been working on my own documentation for such a thing (v2 on
Jessie is close but incomplete, v1 for Wheezy is done) for Direwolf and TNC-Pi - http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/RPi/
- Brett's TNC-Pi centric image -
https://sites.google.com/a/thinkonit.com/ax25-fpac/
I'm sure there are others out there as well but these are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
--David KI6ZHD
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
According to the TNC-X website, John Hansen claims to be working on a 9K6 modem but that was quite a few years back and nothing has been heard since. I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
I've looked at quite a few of the old designs that came out of German and Slovenia back in the late 90's and early 2K's. They are either no longer available, require an SCC card to provide clocks etc, have no driver support any more or require firmware which is unavailable.
Whilst the soundcard road is somewhat acceptable, a hardware modem can't be beat..
Mark NI2O/G7LTT
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Jerry DeLong kd4yal@gmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Has anyone seen any TNC are TNC-Pi like but support higher baud rate then 1200?
Jerry, KD4YAL
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, David Ranch amprgw@trinnet.net wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Beyond what others have mentioned like the TNC-Pi (nice kit), using a $7 USB soundcard and Direwolf will provide superior decodes. As for OS
images
to run, that are packet centric, there are several available:
- Bernard's new Jessie based image for TNC-Pi -
http://f6bvp.org/AX25_BBS_Node_RaspBerry_Pi_install.html
- Mitch's Wheezy based image with setup GUI which supports TNC-X and
Direwolf - https://sourceforge.net/projects/haldigital/
- I've been working on my own documentation for such a thing (v2 on
Jessie is close but incomplete, v1 for Wheezy is done) for Direwolf and TNC-Pi - http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/RPi/
- Brett's TNC-Pi centric image -
https://sites.google.com/a/thinkonit.com/ax25-fpac/
I'm sure there are others out there as well but these are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
--David KI6ZHD
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
Kantronics 9612+ Still in production... 73
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 5:19 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ According to the TNC-X website, John Hansen claims to be working on a 9K6 modem but that was quite a few years back and nothing has been heard since. I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
I've looked at quite a few of the old designs that came out of German and Slovenia back in the late 90's and early 2K's. They are either no longer available, require an SCC card to provide clocks etc, have no driver support any more or require firmware which is unavailable.
Whilst the soundcard road is somewhat acceptable, a hardware modem can't be beat..
Mark NI2O/G7LTT
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Jerry DeLong kd4yal@gmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Has anyone seen any TNC are TNC-Pi like but support higher baud rate then 1200?
Jerry, KD4YAL
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, David Ranch amprgw@trinnet.net wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
Beyond what others have mentioned like the TNC-Pi (nice kit), using a $7 USB soundcard and Direwolf will provide superior decodes. As for OS
images
to run, that are packet centric, there are several available:
- Bernard's new Jessie based image for TNC-Pi -
http://f6bvp.org/AX25_BBS_Node_RaspBerry_Pi_install.html
- Mitch's Wheezy based image with setup GUI which supports TNC-X
and Direwolf - https://sourceforge.net/projects/haldigital/
- I've been working on my own documentation for such a thing (v2
on Jessie is close but incomplete, v1 for Wheezy is done) for Direwolf and TNC-Pi - http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/RPi/
- Brett's TNC-Pi centric image -
https://sites.google.com/a/thinkonit.com/ax25-fpac/
I'm sure there are others out there as well but these are the ones I'm aware of at the moment.
--David KI6ZHD
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: < http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/44net/attachments/20160302/c5 8fb3d4/attachment.html
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP
Yes I have an SCS Tracker and yes it too can do 9600 baud..
A lot of miss information going on here...
That's two TNCs... Still in production.... Any more probably...
73 jerry n9lya
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 6:18 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
I have a paccomm 9600 which i really never used much way back when. I'd unload it if anyone wants it. please contact me off list.
Leon WA4ZLW
On 3/2/2016 6:43 PM, Jerry Kutche (N9LYA) wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Yes I have an SCS Tracker and yes it too can do 9600 baud..
A lot of miss information going on here...
That's two TNCs... Still in production.... Any more probably...
73 jerry n9lya
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 6:18 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
On 16-03-02 07:43 PM, Jerry Kutche (N9LYA) wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Yes I have an SCS Tracker and yes it too can do 9600 baud..
A lot of miss information going on here...
That's two TNCs... Still in production.... Any more probably...
73 jerry n9lya
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 6:18 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the US our "300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd symbol rate we could use it.
Mark NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
On 16-03-02 07:43 PM, Jerry Kutche (N9LYA) wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Yes I have an SCS Tracker and yes it too can do 9600 baud..
A lot of miss information going on here...
That's two TNCs... Still in production.... Any more probably...
73 jerry n9lya
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 6:18 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://electronicdesign.com/communications/what-s-difference-between-bit-rat...
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Mark Phillips g7ltt@g7ltt.com wrote:
I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the US our "300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd symbol rate we could use it.
Mark NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
On 16-03-02 07:43 PM, Jerry Kutche (N9LYA) wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Yes I have an SCS Tracker and yes it too can do 9600 baud..
A lot of miss information going on here...
That's two TNCs... Still in production.... Any more probably...
73 jerry n9lya
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 6:18 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
I just went digging into the Canadian regs that I can find online - and they seem to have been massively simplified compared to earlier releases. This one: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10650.html shows only bandwidth limitations on most of the bands (including most HF bands) - mode of emission and data rate is not mentioned at all.
I know that this was the eventual intent when the regs were redone in the late '70s, but is that what actually happened?
Is there something I've missed from there, or from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-96-484/index.html ?
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 3/3/16 7:33 AM, Mark Phillips wrote:
I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the US our "300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd symbol rate we could use it.
Mark NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
Good find, I'll have to dig into that a bit...I'm pretty sure they don't care much any more about it, but I'll not be taking any chances...license is for life, and don't want to ever jeopardize that heh!
On 16-03-03 12:04 PM, Richard Chycoski wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I just went digging into the Canadian regs that I can find online - and they seem to have been massively simplified compared to earlier releases. This one: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10650.html shows only bandwidth limitations on most of the bands (including most HF bands) - mode of emission and data rate is not mentioned at all.
I know that this was the eventual intent when the regs were redone in the late '70s, but is that what actually happened?
Is there something I've missed from there, or from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-96-484/index.html ?
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 3/3/16 7:33 AM, Mark Phillips wrote:
I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the US our "300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd symbol rate we could use it.
Mark NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
Richard,
The simplified changes that I am aware of make Amateur Radio Experimentation easier in Canada in as much as the regulations^[1][2] limit the bandwidth use and input power. The rest is left to coordination with neighboring frequency reuse (such as repeater councils) and agreed band plans[3] (RAC/ARRL/etc).
Canadian link references follow: [1] http://wp.rac.ca/study-guides-2/regulatory-info/ [2] http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01226.html#t1 [3] http://wp.rac.ca/rac-0-30-mhz-band-plan/
Michael Durrant VE3PNX ve3pnx at andier.com www.packetradio.ca
.
On 2016-03-03 (W10) 11:04 AM, Richard Chycoski wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I just went digging into the Canadian regs that I can find online - and they seem to have been massively simplified compared to earlier releases. This one: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10650.html shows only bandwidth limitations on most of the bands (including most HF bands) - mode of emission and data rate is not mentioned at all.
I know that this was the eventual intent when the regs were redone in the late '70s, but is that what actually happened?
Is there something I've missed from there, or from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-96-484/index.html ?
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 3/3/16 7:33 AM, Mark Phillips wrote:
I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the US our "300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd symbol rate we could use it.
Mark NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
So it looks pretty much as I thought - keep within the bandwidth limits, use whatever modulation technique that you want! Cool!
I got my Digital Radio Operators Certificate in 1979. Even then, DOC/IC/whatever they call it today was moving towards this destination. As usual, government takes time to move. :-)
I'm in California now, so I have to live within the intersection of the Canadian and US regs, so not so wide open here. It would be wonderful if the US government could be convinced to adopt similar regulations.
[I do need to go get my US licence - it's on my (very extended) 'to do' list...]
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 3/3/16 8:24 AM, Michael Durrant (VE3PNX) wrote:
Richard,
The simplified changes that I am aware of make Amateur Radio Experimentation easier in Canada in as much as the regulations^[1][2] limit the bandwidth use and input power. The rest is left to coordination with neighboring frequency reuse (such as repeater councils) and agreed band plans[3] (RAC/ARRL/etc).
Canadian link references follow: [1] http://wp.rac.ca/study-guides-2/regulatory-info/ [2] http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf01226.html#t1 [3] http://wp.rac.ca/rac-0-30-mhz-band-plan/
Michael Durrant VE3PNX ve3pnx at andier.com www.packetradio.ca
I've heard of them using 9600 on HF over in Eu....
On 16-03-03 11:33 AM, Mark Phillips wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I don't know how it is up there in the Frozen North but here in the US our "300bd restriction" is very often misunderstood. We are allowed a symbol rate of 300bd. Not a data rate. If we can jamb 1.2mbps into a 300bd symbol rate we could use it.
Mark NI2O
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:56 AM, ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ And there is still an extensive packet network, with more nodes being deployed, in fact, there seems to be a resurgence of the mode, as folks have mentioned...but I have dropped my hardware TNC's in favor of software modems that are more robust, less current drain, less birdies, and options that were only dreamed about back in packets hey-day thanks to uz7ho, uronode,bpq,FBB, Direwolf to name just a few...and these are actively being maintained..in fact, I may have forgotten a few others...packet is alive and well, and not just as aprs nodes...and with the advent of very inexpensive computers like the pi, arduino, etc etc, it's a LOT of fun and I see a lot of newcomers, even on slow old 300 baud HF daily...there *has* been experimentation with higher data rates on HF, but our archaic laws prevent us from going much faster than 300b on HF...9600b *is* doable on HF, but not legal below 28mhz...that law needs to be revised, hi hi! (and yes, TCP/IP also works on HF, but painful due to low 300b restriction) Cheers, John
On 16-03-02 07:43 PM, Jerry Kutche (N9LYA) wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Yes I have an SCS Tracker and yes it too can do 9600 baud..
A lot of miss information going on here...
That's two TNCs... Still in production.... Any more probably...
73 jerry n9lya
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Vodall Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 6:18 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________
I'd LOVE a 9K6+++ modem but they just don;t seem to be available.
SCS TNC tracker (http://www.p4dragon.com/en/Modems.html#widget4) and the sound card modes such as DireWolf and UZ7HO now claim to support 19,200 so 9600 should be doable.
Bill, WA7NWP _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
9600 on HF ? what bandwidth and what modulation type ?
________________________________________ From: 44Net 44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com@hamradio.ucsd.edu on behalf of ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 8:19 AM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I've heard of them using 9600 on HF over in Eu....
I will ask the source that told me...he told me using usb, normal b/w.... they were using uz7ho soundmodem...15 meters...
On 16-03-03 12:51 PM, R P wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ 9600 on HF ? what bandwidth and what modulation type ?
From: 44Net 44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com@hamradio.ucsd.edu on behalf of ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 8:19 AM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I've heard of them using 9600 on HF over in Eu....
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
I will appreciate any info abut that Thank forward Ronen - 4Z4ZQ http://www.ronen.org
________________________________________ From: 44Net 44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com@hamradio.ucsd.edu on behalf of ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 9:03 AM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I will ask the source that told me...he told me using usb, normal b/w....
Pactor 4 using a P4dragon Modem (very pricey) can go up to 10500bps with compression when transferring a text file or half when transferring an already compressed file!
It only needs a 2.4KHZ bandwidth, but Pactor can only do a P2P connection, it is not like AX25 PACKET!
Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol rate restrictions of HF.
Allowed everywhere else in the world!
--- 73 Δημήτρης - SV1UY 73 de Demetre - SV1UY IP Coordinator for AMPRNet in Greece e-mail: demetre.sv1uy@gmail.com Radio e-mail: sv1uy@winlink.org AMPRnet e-mail: sv1uy@sv1uy.ampr.org PACKET mail: SV1UY@SV1UY.ATH.GRC.EU WEB: http://www.qsl.net/sv1uy
On 3 March 2016 at 18:51, R P ronenp@hotmail.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ 9600 on HF ? what bandwidth and what modulation type ?
From: 44Net 44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com@hamradio.ucsd.edu on behalf of ve1jot ve1jot@eastlink.ca Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 8:19 AM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I've heard of them using 9600 on HF over in Eu....
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
In the FCC arena, one of the better ways to get technical restrictions removed is to apply for and operate under an STA - Special Temporary Authority, a document from the FCC that basically allows you to operate an exception to the normal rules. Typically the only requirement is that you make a good case for it technically and that you write up a report afterwards. In the past, STAs have been the basis for changes to the rules. Someone who writes well may want to consider submitting one to allow higher data rates based solely on bandwidth and then experimenting with it.
Another possibility is to apply for a Experimental Radio Service license which basically allows you to do just about anything if you can make a good case for it. They used to be a little expensive and they require a written report on what you found out with your experiments but it does allow nearly anything you can think of. - Brian
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:09PM +0200, Demetre - SV1UY wrote:
Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol rate restrictions of HF.
Regarding an STA for higher data rates experimentation: I would think a well written proposal accompanied by the signature of a number of licensed operators willing to participate in experiments would go a long way. Count me in as one who would be willing to sign on. Ken - KD6OAT
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ In the FCC arena, one of the better ways to get technical restrictions removed is to apply for and operate under an STA - Special Temporary Authority, a document from the FCC that basically allows you to operate an exception to the normal rules. Typically the only requirement is that you make a good case for it technically and that you write up a report afterwards. In the past, STAs have been the basis for changes to the rules. Someone who writes well may want to consider submitting one to allow higher data rates based solely on bandwidth and then experimenting with it.
Another possibility is to apply for a Experimental Radio Service license which basically allows you to do just about anything if you can make a good case for it. They used to be a little expensive and they require a written report on what you found out with your experiments but it does allow nearly anything you can think of. - Brian
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:09PM +0200, Demetre - SV1UY wrote:
Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol rate
restrictions of HF. _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
+1
On 16-03-04 08:16 PM, kd6oat wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Regarding an STA for higher data rates experimentation: I would think a well written proposal accompanied by the signature of a number of licensed operators willing to participate in experiments would go a long way. Count me in as one who would be willing to sign on. Ken - KD6OAT
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ In the FCC arena, one of the better ways to get technical restrictions removed is to apply for and operate under an STA - Special Temporary Authority, a document from the FCC that basically allows you to operate an exception to the normal rules. Typically the only requirement is that you make a good case for it technically and that you write up a report afterwards. In the past, STAs have been the basis for changes to the rules. Someone who writes well may want to consider submitting one to allow higher data rates based solely on bandwidth and then experimenting with it.
Another possibility is to apply for a Experimental Radio Service license which basically allows you to do just about anything if you can make a good case for it. They used to be a little expensive and they require a written report on what you found out with your experiments but it does allow nearly anything you can think of. - Brian
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:09PM +0200, Demetre - SV1UY wrote:
Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol rate
restrictions of HF. _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
Is this how STAs now work?
When we were implementing packet radio in Canada in the late seventies, American hams claimed that the STA process was slow and difficult, the equivalent to getting an act through Congress that was difficult and slow
Was this real at the time? Is it better now?
I may have to go through this to push a new mesh protocol through as STA (yah, gotta do my local exams first!) and what to know what I'll be up against.
- Richard
On 3/4/16 10:30 PM, ve1jot wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ +1
On 16-03-04 08:16 PM, kd6oat wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Regarding an STA for higher data rates experimentation: I would think a well written proposal accompanied by the signature of a number of licensed operators willing to participate in experiments would go a long way. Count me in as one who would be willing to sign on. Ken - KD6OAT
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ In the FCC arena, one of the better ways to get technical restrictions removed is to apply for and operate under an STA - Special Temporary Authority, a document from the FCC that basically allows you to operate an exception to the normal rules. Typically the only requirement is that you make a good case for it technically and that you write up a report afterwards. In the past, STAs have been the basis for changes to the rules. Someone who writes well may want to consider submitting one to allow higher data rates based solely on bandwidth and then experimenting with it.
Another possibility is to apply for a Experimental Radio Service license which basically allows you to do just about anything if you can make a good case for it. They used to be a little expensive and they require a written report on what you found out with your experiments but it does allow nearly anything you can think of. - Brian
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:09PM +0200, Demetre - SV1UY wrote:
Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol rate
restrictions of HF. _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
+1 more..
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+n9lya=uronode.n9lya.ampr.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of ve1jot Sent: Saturday, March 5, 2016 1:31 AM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Making Packet Node with Pi ?
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ +1
On 16-03-04 08:16 PM, kd6oat wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Regarding an STA for higher data rates experimentation: I would think a well written proposal accompanied by the signature of a number of licensed operators willing to participate in experiments would go a long way. Count me in as one who would be willing to sign on. Ken - KD6OAT
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ In the FCC arena, one of the better ways to get technical restrictions removed is to apply for and operate under an STA - Special Temporary Authority, a document from the FCC that basically allows you to operate an exception to the normal rules. Typically the only requirement is that you make a good case for it technically and that you write up a report afterwards. In the past, STAs have been the basis for changes to the rules. Someone who writes well may want to consider submitting one to allow higher data rates based solely on bandwidth and then experimenting with it.
Another possibility is to apply for a Experimental Radio Service license which basically allows you to do just about anything if you can make a good case for it. They used to be a little expensive and they require a written report on what you found out with your experiments but it does allow nearly anything you can think of. - Brian
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 07:42:09PM +0200, Demetre - SV1UY wrote:
Not good for US though, "thanks" to FCC's 300baud symbol rate
restrictions of HF. _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/44net/attachments/20160304/0 833e059/attachment.html _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-
Andrew Ragone -
Bill Vodall -
Brian Kantor -
David Ranch -
Demetre - SV1UY -
Jay Nugent -
Jerry DeLong -
Jerry Kutche (N9LYA) -
John Wiseman -
kd6oat -
Leon Zetekoff -
Mark Phillips -
Michael Durrant (VE3PNX) -
R P -
Richard Chycoski -
Scott Earle -
ve1jot