|
Re: No 2m but still an APRS igate?
Sander Pool <sander_pool@...>
I was actually thinking of using a soundmodem to add a second TNC to my D710. The intent was to run Winlink 2000 on one and APRS on the other, from the same laptop. The radio does the -plexing. I could also do the gating between 2m and 70cm APRS in the same way. Well, that's the theory anyway :) I've been running igate W1SOP-3 on 445.925 for a while now but haven't received anything but my own test packets from a D72. I think in this area a dedicated 70cm igate is not the best investment of resources yet. Maybe in time. 73, Sander W1SOP
On 5/23/2012 5:25 AM, Tony Langdon, VK3JED wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
Tim Hardy AF1G <hardyt@...>
I'm not opposed to linking different protocols, but there is value in some of the objections to linking specific networks. If the objections or concerns can be mitigated, then fewer people would resist.
The most often heard objection to linking FM systems to D-Star seems to be that D-Star users don't want all the white noise from a weak FM station digitized and retransmitted on D-Star, and I agree with this objection. Find a way to limit the retransmission of FM signals onto the D-Star network to only good, mostly full-quieting signals and you will probably overcome these objections. Echolink and IRLP were a match because they both use the same mode, FM. Linking one type of digital system to another won't have this specific problem, so I don't see why we couldn't develop this option as long as protocols in each system are satisfied. For example, D-Star sends the callsign of the transmitting station through the network. Make this happen from the non-D-Star system and the D-Star network would probably be satisfied. Otherwise, there will continue to be objections. Tim, AF1G ---- "Tony Langdon wrote: ============= At 11:51 AM 5/23/2012, you wrote: "this is something that should have been done ten years ago"D-STAR was developed a long time ago, technology has moved on since, also. What concerns me more is the (political) resistance to allowingAgree totally. To me, the ultimate aim is to have a I don't want to have to take three HT with me when I leave theI had the same issue back in 2002, when I was running IRLP and Echolink on a single antenna, which meant that two of the 3 ports on my triplexer were taken up with links! As I was the main user, there had to be a better way. I wasn't the only one who thought this, and a few people put their heads together and came up with EchoIRLP, which allowed the same analog endpoint to be used for both networks. With digital, there's no common medium until you get to the end user radio itself, so you either need a multiprotocol radio, or you need infrastructure which can route across networks (and willing network administrators!). At least with digital, it should be possible to transparently carry IDs from end to end, leaving only the need to cross from network to network, and transcoding the audio where necessary. If the gateways can be built out of something like the UDR, then that could push the protocol conversion as close to the edge of the network as possible, which might scale better, as well as minimising issues of "We don't want XXX on our network!". 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
|
|
|
|
Re: Modifying the Design
"Howard Small" <howard@...>
And still going to be under USD400????
Let’s just get this one on the market and then worry about bigger and better (?) models.
Howard VK4BS
From: UniversalDigitalRadio@... [mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@...] On Behalf Of siegfried jackstien
Sent: Wednesday, 23 May 2012 19:14 To: UniversalDigitalRadio@... Subject: AW: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Modifying the Design
Now build that for vhf and uhf bands all in one box and we are in business
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
"Tony Langdon, VK3JED" <vk3jed@...>
At 11:51 AM 5/23/2012, you wrote:
"this is something that should have been done ten years ago"D-STAR was developed a long time ago, technology has moved on since, also. What concerns me more is the (political) resistance to allowing interoperability/gateways between systems. The transcoding, gateways and transports themselves are all relatively minor feats in comparison. All it takes is "someone" saying they won't allow gating from IRLP to Echolink, Echolink to D-Star, or P25 to whatever, and a segment becomes isolated. We're our own worst enemy and we'll pay for it in real dollars.Agree totally. To me, the ultimate aim is to have a I don't want to have to take three HT with me when I leave the house, or have a rack of three mobile rigs in the car. I also don't want my investment in D-Star to become worthless.I had the same issue back in 2002, when I was running IRLP and Echolink on a single antenna, which meant that two of the 3 ports on my triplexer were taken up with links! As I was the main user, there had to be a better way. I wasn't the only one who thought this, and a few people put their heads together and came up with EchoIRLP, which allowed the same analog endpoint to be used for both networks. With digital, there's no common medium until you get to the end user radio itself, so you either need a multiprotocol radio, or you need infrastructure which can route across networks (and willing network administrators!). At least with digital, it should be possible to transparently carry IDs from end to end, leaving only the need to cross from network to network, and transcoding the audio where necessary. If the gateways can be built out of something like the UDR, then that could push the protocol conversion as close to the edge of the network as possible, which might scale better, as well as minimising issues of "We don't want XXX on our network!". 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
"Tony Langdon, VK3JED" <vk3jed@...>
At 09:37 AM 5/23/2012, you wrote:
CODEC 2 is currently missing any FEC, and willIn time, I'm sure Codec2 will get there. I'm not sold on TDMA myself. That comes from living in a land known for its wide open spaces, and a past history of working VHF/UHF openings. What are the timing (and effective range limitations) of DMR TDMA? Agree totally. It would be nice to be able to say "I want to communicate with..." and let the network figure out what network and mode that destination is on, and how the two should be connected (callsign route? link? via a reflector or transcoding conference server?). From my experience with EchoIRLP, if you find a way to make the different systems accessible to end users in a single place, in a convenient way, they'll love you for it. :) The "internetworking protocol" (not to be confused with IP ;) ) should be open, flexible and extensible. Almost the subject of a group in its own right! :) 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
|
|
|
|
Re: No 2m but still an APRS igate?
"Tony Langdon, VK3JED" <vk3jed@...>
At 04:29 AM 5/23/2012, you wrote:
Here's the good news though. Â If you have aNow this is a neat idea! 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
|
|
|
|
Re: Heard on the street
"Tony Langdon, VK3JED" <vk3jed@...>
At 03:55 AM 5/23/2012, you wrote:
Not just as a development environment; The stability of Linux makes it ideal for consumer grade products as well, which is why so many consumer grade products (like phones and TVs and routers and firewalls and... etc) use it.Unless you're in the know, you'd be surprised where Linux pops up. It's a solid workhorse platform, which is extremely versatile. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
|
|
|
|
AW: Modifying the Design
"siegfried jackstien" <siegfried.jackstien@...>
Now build that for vhf and uhf bands all in one box and we are in business
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
144, 440 1230 ... and maybe higher?!? Dg9bfc Sigi
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
"David Lake (dlake)" <dlake@...>
"What concerns me more is the (political) resistance to allowing
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
interoperability/gateways between systems." Now.... Article 1.56 of the ITU Radio Regulations define amateur service as "A Radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunications and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is by duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest." That sounds pretty clear to me. Intercommunication, technical investigations, no pecuniary interest. BTW, you have not mentioned Motorola. So far, they are the worst offender and they have bite. Icom are trying to be open and so far, things have gone pretty well with them (especially Icom US). It's early days for Yaesu. Hardware is only half the battle - software and protocols are needed to interconnect the hardware. Both parts are important, and that is what I hope this group manages to achieve. David
-----Original Message-----
From: UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dnolder@...m Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 7:52 PM To: UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Re: Codec2 "this is something that should have been done ten years ago" QFT Unfortunately it wasn't, and that the biggest issue I have with the development of D-Star. Having said that, Amateur Radio is already a splintered hobby with many niches, so it's nothing new. What concerns me more is the (political) resistance to allowing interoperability/gateways between systems. The transcoding, gateways and transports themselves are all relatively minor feats in comparison. All it takes is "someone" saying they won't allow gating from IRLP to Echolink, Echolink to D-Star, or P25 to whatever, and a segment becomes isolated. We're our own worst enemy and we'll pay for it in real dollars. I don't want to have to take three HT with me when I leave the house, or have a rack of three mobile rigs in the car. I also don't want my investment in D-Star to become worthless. The Icom/Yaesu situation is a classic. Can you imagine a CW/AM/SSB/FM transceiver that would only work with another transceiver of the same brand? That's effectively what we're talking about. I really think hardware is the key. An extensible, fully open, software defined, HT, mobile and base with enough processing power on-board to handle whatever is required, even if it has to have an AMBE chip sitting to the side for backwards compatibility. Give the developers the platform and let them have at it. Icom is the incumbent with the monopoly. Yeasu has played the FUD card with their "Digital Vision" document and the subsequent presentation of their solution at Dayton. We'll be the ones that pay if we play the game. --- In UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com, Perry Chamberlain <canoeman@...> wrote: and is cool amateur radio engineering, the hundreds, and hundreds of thousands of dollars that has been spent on the AMBE CODEC EMBEDED equipment, is a massive barrier to this ever changing the Dstar system. And why yaesu, has decided to come out with yet another digital mode, is baffling. ( just a note, I own 6 yeasu radios, so I am a yaesu fan) But, thatschoose a common codec. I'm financially entrenched in Icom D-star now, so I'm locked in. ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
|
Re: Modifying the Design
Joshua Mesilane <josh@...>
Hi John,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks for taking what I said on board, I was worried I may have been a little aggressive and offended you/your team. People don't really like it when you pick on their products saying "what if this" or "what if that" so it's good to see that my feedback hasn't been taken the wrong way. Once the unit is ready to release to public I'm sure we'll discuss more. I'll be one of those people that falls into the "unsupported mods" category so perhaps there is an opportunity for future development there. I do hope in the future though that the hardware can be opened up for development and experimentation by the community with the support of the parent company. Completely understand minimum viable product, and I think you should be commended on even getting this far. So often really good products get stumped before they make it to market. Do you have a delivery expectation for Australia as yet? Cheers, Josh
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM, John D. Hays <john@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Modifying the Design
"John D. Hays" <john@...>
Josh,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Keeping this short :) 1. The radio side has a very small part count and very high integration. For the most part, moving to another band has to do with some discrete components and the PA module. I'm sure some enterprising person will figure out "unsupported" mods. This radio expects logic level digital in and out, we aren't taking things to audio level at all, the analog in it is at the antenna :) The computer side and radio side are separable if one wanted to really dig into building something to replace the radio.
2. It may be possible to "hack" in a serial interface if a user really feels the need. But remember there is no need for any external TNC, etc. except in special circumstances -- one can add them, but the radio does most functions internally. One of the goals is to keep it an attractive price, so we try to minimize the extra add-ons that turn it into a duckbill platypus.
Thanks for your input, enthusiasm, and support. I welcome suggestions and they will be taken into consideration, however we do have an aggressive goal and at this point in time, I'm inclined to work toward delivery of the product we have presented.
One of our principles is to listen to the user community and to be as responsive and open as possible, with the caveat that some of our team members still have "day jobs" and other obligations :)
I would rather be open about what we are or can do, than to promise everything and deliver little of it. John D. Hays K7VE PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223   
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Joshua Mesilane <josh@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
Perry Chamberlain <canoeman@...>
Excellent, you have to love the ingenuity of hams crowd sourcing. I was under the impression the two were not compatible. Great to know this can be overcome. Ke6anm Respectfully Perry Chamberlain
On May 22, 2012, at 4:37 PM, "David Lake (dlake)" <dlake@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: No 2m but still an APRS igate?
Joshua Mesilane <josh@...>
Hi John,
Thanks for the quick reply. To avoid this getting too big I'll snip out the bits I'd like to add further comment/clarification to.
Competely understand. I deploy and manage servers that exist predominantly in an open-source environment, however I know that some aspects of the various systems employed do need to interconnect with other proprietary systems which often also means proprietary licensing. I guess the open source and open hardware was more targeted at the design, build etc of the device as much as you can without breaching any existing proprietary licensing arrangements. If however this is going to be a truly 100% proprietary hardware build (where none or little of the hardware design details are released), then that does take some of the excitement out of the product for me. That's not to say that the product is not without merit (And also not that I won't buy one) but the concept of an open-hardware platform (or even semi-open) as well as software to suit one's needs I think is really exciting. If this is only an open software platform then it does take a little of the excitement out of it. To me, that's kind of like saying "Here, we have this fantastic new radio bolted to a Linux PC - you're allowed to design software to run on the PC, but you're locked in to our API to the radio, and you're not allowed to play with the physical hardware". I know that my description is greatly simplified but isn't playing with hardware what HAMs do? Isn't it what we've been doing for years? Why should the open-ness stop at the software? I will re-iterate however that does not mean that I don't like the product, and also does not mean that i wouldn't buy one.
So essentially at this stage, no. The RF side of the unit will be proprietary and closed, and we're locked in to when expansions are released by/for UDR however you may be suggesting that you're not entirely locking yourself in to 70cm, and that we should watch this space.
So that's an outright no?
But this isn't also entirely unique to RF on cables. Things like Ignition spikes on the DC from the power supply in a car are inevitable and can be for the most part mitigated but do still exist. One can try to mitigate the noise/RF as much as possible however it's going to be a inevitability. I really think that not adding an RS-232 port is somewhat limiting the potential marker for the product. You really do have a wide market outside of HAM radio (and potentially a much wider market than HAM operators) if you can get your RF board certified, but the addition of an RS-232 port would be a requirement.
I think you may have misunderstood what i was suggesting. It was more in relation to USB being unstable in mobile environments and resetting. Something that happens on USB and even moreso on bluetooth (even in stable environments). What I'm perhaps suggesting is that in a mobile environment what happenes if your aprs daemon loses connectivity to the gps? Will your daemon just hang or will it close and re-open the serial port. What happens if the USB device resets and creates a new serial port on the machine? I know these are more software issues, but they all essentially come down to the absense of a serial port. Perhaps I'm harping on about RS232, but the thing is it's a reliable proven technology, and with so many HAMs out there already having RS232 gear, I think it's a HUGE omission. Particular considering that so many Auto Tuners, TNCs, and even other radios that you might interface with this radio often have inbuilt RS232 (Or TTL, which can be boosted with a MAX232) and to then have to rely on an unknown quantity - an USB - Serial adaptor (FWIW - I had a good quality known USB Serial adaptor blow up and take the Level converter in my TNC for my IGate about three weeks ago, so it DOES happen) when the addition of a RS232 port on the device would seem to make the device more flexible, and marketable. Interesting to hear your thoughts. As I said, I do think that this in a fantastic product, and keep in mind this is only my opinion - nothing more. Cheers, Josh -- VK3XJM 0416039082 josh@... http://www.zindello.com.au/
|
|
|
|
Re: New file uploaded to UniversalDigitalRadio
"John" <john@...>
Hi Karen,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
The UDR56K has been designed for high duty cycle at 25 watts, but not all tests for specifications have been performed. More data will be available in the future. If you look at the illustration, it has a substantial heat sink to dissipate heat. (Thermal calculations have been done -- testing remains.) This is not a SDR radio, the de/modulation is performed within a high integration RF IC. Electronic RX/TX switching very low settle time on frequency change or TX/RX switch. (Fast enough for frequency hopping.) This is not a kit, it is a complete radio. More specific specifications will be released in the future, including spectrum plots and other engineering measurements. The buss from the computing board to transceiver mates the two eurocard boards. Probably not at Friedrichafen this year -- our team will likely be "heads down" completing integration work through the summer to get the radio ready for the Q4 delivery goal.
--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com, "Karen Tadevosyan, RA3APW" <ra3apw@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
"dnolder@..." <vk7yxx@...>
"this is something that should have been done ten years ago"
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
QFT Unfortunately it wasn't, and that the biggest issue I have with the development of D-Star. Having said that, Amateur Radio is already a splintered hobby with many niches, so it's nothing new. What concerns me more is the (political) resistance to allowing interoperability/gateways between systems. The transcoding, gateways and transports themselves are all relatively minor feats in comparison. All it takes is "someone" saying they won't allow gating from IRLP to Echolink, Echolink to D-Star, or P25 to whatever, and a segment becomes isolated. We're our own worst enemy and we'll pay for it in real dollars. I don't want to have to take three HT with me when I leave the house, or have a rack of three mobile rigs in the car. I also don't want my investment in D-Star to become worthless. The Icom/Yaesu situation is a classic. Can you imagine a CW/AM/SSB/FM transceiver that would only work with another transceiver of the same brand? That's effectively what we're talking about. I really think hardware is the key. An extensible, fully open, software defined, HT, mobile and base with enough processing power on-board to handle whatever is required, even if it has to have an AMBE chip sitting to the side for backwards compatibility. Give the developers the platform and let them have at it. Icom is the incumbent with the monopoly. Yeasu has played the FUD card with their "Digital Vision" document and the subsequent presentation of their solution at Dayton. We'll be the ones that pay if we play the game.
--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com, Perry Chamberlain <canoeman@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
"John" <john@...>
If Codec-2 is ported to the UDR56K a user would have the option of using AMBE based DV (with the add-on card) and/or Codec-2. Codec-2 has been making a lot of progress but isn't quite ready. A framing and error-correction protocol is likely required and the current code uses floating point calculations which makes real time coding on difficult on this class of processor. A move to fixed point and/or the use of a dedicated processor (like what is done with AMBE) should make it feasible.
The UDR56K AMBE card will likely carry the newer chip which supports more coding formats than what is needed for D-STAR, while remaining compatible with D-STAR. Other AMBE based DV may be possible.
--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., Perry Chamberlain <canoeman@...> wrote: > > Although this is something that should have been done ten years ago, and is cool amateur radio engineering, the hundreds, and hundreds of thousands of dollars that has been spent on the AMBE CODEC EMBEDED equipment, is a massive barrier to this ever changing the Dstar system. And why yaesu, has decided to come out with yet another digital mode, is baffling. > ( just a note, I own 6 yeasu radios, so I am a yaesu fan) > But, thats what amateur radio is all about. But it would be nice if we could choose a common codec. > I'm financially entrenched in Icom D-star now, so I'm locked in. > > > > Respectfully > > Perry Chamberlain > > > On May 22, 2012, at 9:17 AM, "nikropht" nikropht@... wrote: > > > I wanted to let this group know about the progress on Codec2. Codec2 is a fully open source DV codec being developed as a replacement for AMBE2000 see http://www.codec2.org/ for details. > > > > -Mike > > KD5QLN > > > > >
|
|
|
|
Re: No 2m but still an APRS igate?
"John" <john@...>
Hi Josh,
--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., Joshua Mesilane wrote:
> > Hi All, > > I LOVE what this radio stands for. I love the fact that it will be an open > source radio, but is the hardware going to be open as well? PCB design, > chip code, etc? Is the project going to be completely open source & open > hardware, or only partially? > This is a commercial product. NorthWest Digital Radio has and is making significant investment to bring it to the marketplace. The company's goal is to provide an open platform for amateur radio at an attractive price point. The reality is that every modern piece of equipment has some proprietary intellectual property, and when someone manufacturers a product there is always a trade-off between cost and delivery. It is often less expensive to buy parts than to make them, and when you buy parts you have to live within the terms of the purchase/license. For example, to support many Digital Voice protocols you must use a proprietary Vocoder (this isn't just a D-STAR requirement, it applies to all current major Digital Voice protocols). NWDR will offer a daughter card with a chip that does that, but can't reverse engineer and provide open source for intellectual property they do not own. Sometimes you have to sign restrictive agreements just to buy parts from some manufacturers. This will be a barrier to sharing some low level details. > > Will the radio be designed in such a way that if we wish to contribute to > the project a "2m" version could be designed? > Are the RF components modular and would they allow for swapping? (So that > third parties could easily design and produce open hardware alternative RF > boards) I won't comment on specific product plans (there are identified product concepts which will be worked on after the initial UDR is ready), but if this product sells well, that will motivate and help fund future products. The basic design is such that the engineering to place the UDR is pretty straight forward for a few VHF/UHF bands. > Is there any hope for an RS-232 port? The design for the UDR56K4 is 1 Ethernet and 4 USB ports. > > USB-Serial/USB devices in general are notoriously bad for crashing and > rebooting in RF environments which can easily cause the serial port to lock > up and you then need to remove and re-plug the serial port. I have experienced this in other projects. This is usually due to ingress via RF on cables. Using good shielding, quality cables with ferrite chokes on both ends, and good grounding will often mitigate the problem. > I'm not so sure > that I'd want to use my NMEA GPS via a USB/Serial adaptor (Or even an FTDI > USB GPS) if it were going to be hard wired into a mobile installation. In > that environment (IMO and in the field experience) RS232 is the only way to > go. Cables can be minimized or eliminated using certain form factors for the device, another option is Bluetooth. (E.g. a bluetooth GPS or Audio device with a micro-adapter (no cable). 73 - John
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
David,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Not intentionally, by any means; I was discussing a way to link Codec2 and D-Star with Tony VK3JED and Kristoff ON1ARF last fall or winter. I recently thought of finding a way to do this with open-source Echolink clients and D-Star, but haven't had time to experiment with it (working 56 hours a week tends to do things like that). Maybe you and I can work together instead of duplicating each other's efforts. Matthew Pitts N8OHU ------------------------------
On Tue, May 22, 2012 7:40 PM EDT David Lake (dlake) wrote:
OK now you're talking politics.
|
|
|
|
Re: No 2m but still an APRS igate?
Joshua Mesilane <josh@...>
Hi All,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I LOVE what this radio stands for. I love the fact that it will be an open source radio, but is the hardware going to be open as well? PCB design, chip code, etc? Is the project going to be completely open source & open hardware, or only partially? As for APRS. Here in VK we primarily use the 2m network with a nation-wide frequency of 145.175 and to a much lesser degree 70cm is used typically for experimental purposes. I run a 2m IGate at home using javAPRSSrvr and the idea of having this run on the device directly I think is exciting, however: Will the radio be designed in such a way that if we wish to contribute to the project a "2m" version could be designed? Are the RF components modular and would they allow for swapping? (So that third parties could easily design and produce open hardware alternative RF boards) Is there any hope for an RS-232 port? USB-Serial/USB devices in general are notoriously bad for crashing and rebooting in RF environments which can easily cause the serial port to lock up and you then need to remove and re-plug the serial port. I'm not so sure that I'd want to use my NMEA GPS via a USB/Serial adaptor (Or even an FTDI USB GPS) if it were going to be hard wired into a mobile installation. In that environment (IMO and in the field experience) RS232 is the only way to go. In some applications (Remote telemetry systems - And we're not just talking about HAM radio now) quite a lot of gear still uses RS232. I can see a MUCH wider use for this radio if the cost can be kept low, if it has interchangeable/configurable RF stage an RS232 capability. You could even aim for certification of the RF boards to comply with govt standards and market the product as an "open" alternative to the proprietary telemetry/data radios currently on the market. Cheers, Josh
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:37 AM, richark <richark@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Codec2
"David Lake (dlake)" <dlake@...>
OK now you're talking politics.
I do have a bridge running between D-Star and Echolink, but there are some admin areas that need to be fixed especially around identification. The audio quality is actually surprisingly good (unless the incoming Echolink is from a repeater that has not filtered it's CTCSS tone out sufficiently in which case it is HORRIBLE). It's not a production system purely for me to play with. David From: UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Matthew Pitts Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 5:31 PM To: UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Re: Codec2 Not directly, no. It is possible to communicate between them with software acting as a bridge between the two, though I haven't actually written the application that will do so. I am also thinking of allowing for normal voice; the D-Star Protocol does include a bridge that allows analogue voice and callsign routing, but this hasn't been implemented by Icom, nor has Jonathan done so, to my knowledge. Matthew Pitts N8OHU
|
|
|
