Brian, In Santa Clara County, CA, we have BBSs W1XSC, W2XSC, W3XSC, W4XSC, W5XSC and W6XSC. They share a common 440 frequency for forwarding. W[1-4]XSC are the primary BBSs and are usually the only ones on the 440 frequency. Each has 2m and 220 access frequencies. Some of the sites also have 802.11 point-to-point links between them. (We do not use converted amateur frequency/power 802.11 stuff because it doesn't really buy us anything and, in fact, restricts us due to part 97 restrictions on 3rd party traffic.) W5XSC is a training and "fill-in" BBS that moves about to events and can be deployed in a remote location if necessary. It would use the 440 frequency to communicate with the other BBSs. W6XSC is really just a hot stand-by to quickly replace W[1-4]XSC, if needed. Currently, W2XSC serves as the primary gateway. It has AXIP links to a variety of other systems in California. We are currently waiting on another local BBS sysop to fix his 220 radio. When that happens (this month or next), two of our local BBS network links will convert from AXIP to AX.25 on 220 radio. We're hoping that the UDR56K guys will see the importance of adding forward error correction. If they do that, we'll probably switch to that for the backbone. With FEC, we figure we could probably get 32-36 kbps of real error-free performance. Without FEC, it's just not going to work any better than what we have now. A few folks are investigating ham mesh applications for local user access (instead of 1200 baud AX.25). I don't know how far this will go or how dependable it would be in an emergency due to the need for some many hams to keep their part of the mesh operating. But we'll see. More internet stuff: W2XSC also serves as a one-way out e-mail gateway from all of the BBSs. Email is deemed important by various organizations so they can get health and welfare word out to families and/or communicate with vendors. Due to the problem with 3rd party traffic, we are working on establishing direct Internet access for each BBS. This will allow all of the BBSs to perform 2-way email gateway functions. When Internet is available at all sites, we will also convert each to be their own AMPRnet gateways. But for BBS network stuff, I presume other systems will still prefer to forwarding through W2XSC or maybe one other site. Maintaining too many forwarding definitions is just a pain. Even with Internet at each site, we intend to continue to have the BBSs communicate with each other over radio. More about the network: "XSC" is the Cal-Fire designation for the Santa Clara County operational area. The network is open for anyone to use. But it is primarily oriented toward ARES/RACES support. Therefore each of the systems is in hardened locations, with UPS and generator, etc. and we guard uptime and security as much as any commercial carrier would. Users are assigned a primary and a backup BBS to help even out the load in the event of a disaster that takes down any particular BBS. Hams stationed at cities and agencies use the tactical call feature of JNOS that one of our guys wrote and Maiko incorporated into the code. The typical user connects with Outpost as an access application. We also have PacFORMS which is an application that presents standard county forms in an HTML format to the user but sends only the data (not all the html formatting) in the packet message. We have regular check-ins twice a week and all-radio-based packet activities are a standard part of all of our drills. In fact, most message traffic is now transmitted with packet and only emergency or other "must talk to a human" traffic goes on the traditional voice "message net". For further information, see: http://www.scc-ares-races.org/packet.html or contact me off list. Michael N6MEF ________________________________ From: Brian Kantor <Brian(a)UCSD.Edu> To: 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:19:04 AM Subject: [44net] Radio-based networking I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network. Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?

Check out http://hamwan.org ------------------------------ John D. Hays K7VE PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 <http://k7ve.org/blog> <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays> <http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Ronen Pinchuk &lt;drorap(a)netvision.net.il&gt;wrote;wrote: > (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) > _______________________________________________ > we used to have a big wireless network > you can see here http://www.qsl.net/4z4zq/wlan.html > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Scanferla" &lt;va3rjs(a)yahoo.ca&gt; > To: "AMPRNet working group" &lt;44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu&gt; > Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 4:49 PM > Subject: Re: [44net] Radio-based networking > > > (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) > _______________________________________________ > My plan is to rebuild the RF network....in times of emergency, which is > what > my network is for you can't depend on the carrier based services to be > available. > > B > > > > ________________________________ > From: Brian Kantor &lt;Brian(a)UCSD.Edu&gt; > To: 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu > Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:19:04 AM > Subject: [44net] Radio-based networking > > > (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) > _______________________________________________ > I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. > I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the > network. > > Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? > Could you supply some details? > > (All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network > are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based > networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.) > - Brian > _________________________________________ > 44Net mailing list > 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu > http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net > http://www.ampr.org/donate.html >

On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 10:21 -0700, Blaine Forbort spake: You may want to read into dgip. You load the server side, and the clients each request their routing when they become active... similar to dhcp. I have it available at ftp://n1uro.ampr.org/packet/dgipip_0.1a.orig.tar.gz -- 73 de Brian Rogers - N1URO email: &lt;n1uro(a)n1uro.ampr.org&gt; Web: http://www.n1uro.net/ Ampr1: http://n1uro.ampr.org/ Ampr2: http://nos.n1uro.ampr.org Linux Amateur Radio Services axMail-Fax & URONode AmprNet coordinator for: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

I too run serveral rf ports and at least one of them is included in the tcpip process. It telnets to another province then from there connects to an rf station there. I don't allow anything but 44/8 or callsign connects to/from the rf ports. 73, Don - ve3zda On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Bernd Strehhuber &lt;44net(a)inti.inka.de&gt;wrote;wrote: