1. main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io
   Date   
Re: project

Glenn Wright <gw.ka8e@...>
 

Yes

On 08/27/2012 02:48 AM, Chris B wrote:
This still alive?



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


--
73 de Glenn
Re: project

John Hays <john@...>
 

Yes. The engineering team is getting the product ready. More announcements will come as we get closer. The list is for sharing ideas and we try to answer questions as we receive them. 

--
John D. Hays
206-801-0820
Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 26, 2012, at 19:48, "Chris B" <brizey02@...> wrote:

 

This still alive?
Critical Mass

Bob Helling <bob.helling@...>
 

I like the idea of this product and will probably buy one just for my own experimental fun but it seems to me that this only becomes useful when you get a critical mass of people in the same geographical area that will buy and use them.

It looks like too much of a single purpose device as I see it now to get that critical mass.  I see it as a backup plan when repeaters aren't available in times of emergency.  I'm sure I'm missing some of the other uses but my question is pretty specific.  Assuming I am not able to convince an agency to buy these for all their volunteers, how do I convince my ham buddies that this is something that will be fun and/or useful in everyday use and worth spending as much as a nice dual band mobile rig.

There are a couple of ways to answer this.  First, how might we use these solely with each other.  Second how useful are these devices when interoperating with other ham devices.

Sorry if this has all been covered already.  If so, please point me to the relevant posts.
Thanks,
Bob Helling / K9PQ
Bothell, WA
Re: Critical Mass

Bryan Hoyer <bhhoyer@...>
 

Hi Bob,

Yes you are right about critical mass in an area, but let's talk first about the application.

You mention it as a backup to repeaters, I don't see it that way at all. Repeaters handle voice,  the UDR56k is a data radio. All of my served agencies have a need for hard copy communication, both peer to peer and via winlink. They require this in addition to voice capabilities.

As far as value goes, the proposition is simple. Boost your email capabilities 8x for less than the price of a nice dual-bander. Throw in D-STAR for free at the same time. Build your own network at 56K+. Add APRS on 440...

As for critical mass and served agencies, We are currently in discussions with San Juan, Whatcom, Skagit and Snohomish Counties. I spent an hour on the phone yesterday with the gentleman who handles emcomm for all of Southern British Columbia. If there is any place in the world with critical mass Bothell WA is in it,

So how does it work in other areas?

Check out Gary from Amateur Radio Video News, where he says they could use a couple hundred of these in North Carolina.


But you're right it has to start with some minimal group. Here's a few examples.

Budd in Blaine buys one and we set up a 56k link between us. Blaine is LOS to me on San Juan Island.

My local Radio club has a digi-peater site for 1200 baud packet on 2m and 220. They buy one unit and we add 9600 on 440 to talk to the existing RMS gateway up in Vancouver BC. A few club members want to play as well. Our 5 emcomm stations look to upgrade when funding becomes available.

We have a club $5000 D-STAR repeater near Friday Harbor. We buy one $400 unit to act as a hot-spot in Roche Harbor on the North of the Island. And maybe one in Eastsound over on Orcas. And perhaps we should do something in Lopez Village.

So how many does it take to get started? 2 or 3 interested hams in a given area. When it deploys at a hospital near you, will you buy a unit to play too?

Cheers,
Bryan

On Aug 26, 2012, at 9:37 PM, Bob Helling wrote:

 

I like the idea of this product and will probably buy one just for my own experimental fun but it seems to me that this only becomes useful when you get a critical mass of people in the same geographical area that will buy and use them.

It looks like too much of a single purpose device as I see it now to get that critical mass.  I see it as a backup plan when repeaters aren't available in times of emergency.  I'm sure I'm missing some of the other uses but my question is pretty specific.  Assuming I am not able to convince an agency to buy these for all their volunteers, how do I convince my ham buddies that this is something that will be fun and/or useful in everyday use and worth spending as much as a nice dual band mobile rig.

There are a couple of ways to answer this.  First, how might we use these solely with each other.  Second how useful are these devices when interoperating with other ham devices.

Sorry if this has all been covered already.  If so, please point me to the relevant posts.
Thanks,
Bob Helling / K9PQ
Bothell, WA
TAPR Announces DCC (Digital Communication Conference) Technical & Introductory Sessions Schedule, Banquet Speaker/Topic and Sunday Seminar Speaker/Topic

Mark Thompson <wb9qzb_groups@...>
 

 
 
TAPR Announces DCC (Digital Communication Conference)
Technical & Introductory Session Schedule,
Banquet Speaker/Topic and
Sunday Seminar Speaker/Topic
 
 
ARRL/TAPR DCC, Atlanta, September 21 - 23 
 
Sheraton Gateway Hotel Atlanta Airport
 1900 Sullivan Road
 Atlanta, GA 30337
 
 
Technical / Introductory Sessions Schedule
 
Technical Sessions
Friday - Saturday
 
Introductory Sessions
Saturday
 
 
Saturday Night Banquet Speaker & Topic
 
DCC Saturday Night Banquet Speaker
will be Bdale Garbee, KB0G
talking about the "Sharing the Joy of Making"
 
Sunday Morning Seminar Speaker & Topic
 
DCC Sunday Morning Seminar will be a hands-on tutorial
using Gnuradio  to design and implement software defined radios on your laptop
presented by Tom Rondeau, KB3UKZ, the leader of the Gnuradio project.
 
 
Re: Critical Mass

"gary.k7ek@..." <gary.k7ek@...>
 


I would purchase one or more units if there were others in my region with which to communicate. I operate several analog FM voice repeaters on VHF & UHF; They have IRLP & Echolink capability. I also have the last full service AX25 packet system in Western Washington (linux based),  APRS Igate, WL2K packet RMS, HF scanning WL2K pactor/winmor RMS, etc. All of these services are available to EMCOMM, Medical Services, WA EMD, etc. What would be good is to be able to integrate these systems with a common high speed backbone. There used to be a AX25 network of sorts in the 80's and maybe early 90's, but throughput was unacceptably slow, as it was fragmented and unstandardized, mostly due to turf wars, power plays, politics, lockouts, exclusionary measures, and hoarding of information, and other such stupidity.  Assuming that we have all grown up and are older and wiser since then, perhaps we can replace the former poor excuse for a network with something that works well,  for all to use and enjoy.  I for one will work with those that will work with me, despite any difference of personal opinion we may have with each other. I just ask to be treated fairly, as an equal stake holder, and with a little bit of  respect.  I welcome the possibility brought forth by the introduction of this new hardware. Is there anyone in the South Puget Sound area that would like to collaborate with me on this project?

Best regards,

Gary, K7EK

Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless
Re: Critical Mass

"qrv@..." <qrv@...>
 

Have you considered HSMM-Mesh in that mix?

I would purchase one or more units if there were others in my region
with which to communicate. ... I welcome the possibility
brought forth by the introduction of this new hardware. Is there
anyone in the South Puget Sound area that would like to collaborate
with me on this project?

Best regards,

Gary, K7EK
--

Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
David Colburn nevils-station.com
I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
Re: Critical Mass

Bob Helling <bob.helling@...>
 

Thanks Bryan for your reply.  I will reply more fully later tonight.

Gary, good luck to you.  I hope we are able to pull off a Puget Sound wide network.  I recently moved to Bothell on the Snohomish County side but I'm active still with Seattle ACS since I used to live in Seattle.  I would be happy to work with you if we can get enough links in between.

KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially "why bother with buying this expensive equipment".  The answer, as I see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of participants.  It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull off.  Of course I don't mean that it wouldn't be good to have.  It would be another tool in the toolbox.  But in my experience, it is more important to have a group of people that actively train with equipment and are familiar with procedures and each other than it is to have lots of cheap equipment and no organization.  Again, not meaning to be negative.  I think it would be good to have HSMM-Mesh too.  I just think I would rather work in a smaller dedicated group that is used to working together.
Re: Critical Mass

"qrv@..." <qrv@...>
 

Bob,

Point well taken.

I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.

I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the same challenge of many participants for adequate
coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.

There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
or forwarded via other communication modes.

That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.

I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
cross-country drive.

David

KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
"why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
off. Of course I don't mean that it wouldn't be good to have. It
would be another tool in the toolbox. But in my experience, it is
more important to have a group of people that actively train with
equipment and are familiar with procedures and each other than it is
to have lots of cheap equipment and no organization. Again, not
meaning to be negative. I think it would be good to have HSMM-Mesh
too. I just think I would rather work in a smaller dedicated group
that is used to working together.
--

Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
David Colburn nevils-station.com
I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
Re: Critical Mass

"ve7sru_225" <ve7dhm@...>
 

Regarding critical mass V.A.R.P.A is very interested in using the
UDR56K to upgrade speed / capabilities of the packet network for the
southern Vancouver Island area. A wireless mesh, using the UDR56K,
would certainly enhance Amateur Radio support of NGOs and local
authorities during times of disaster.

Adding the UDR56K to the V.A.R.P.A. nodestacks will certainly help
critical mass expansion in the Puget Sound area.

I look forward with anticipation the production release of the
UDR56K so that testing can begin.

Regards

Paul VE7DHM

--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@yahoogroups.com, "qrv@..." <qrv@...> wrote:

Bob,

Point well taken.

I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.

I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the
same challenge of many participants for adequate
coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.

There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
or forwarded via other communication modes.

That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.

I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
cross-country drive.

David

KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
"why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
off. Of course I don't mean that it wouldn't be good to have. It
would be another tool in the toolbox. But in my experience, it is
more important to have a group of people that actively train with
equipment and are familiar with procedures and each other than it is
to have lots of cheap equipment and no organization. Again, not
meaning to be negative. I think it would be good to have HSMM-Mesh
too. I just think I would rather work in a smaller dedicated group
that is used to working together.


--

Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
David Colburn nevils-station.com
I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
Re: Critical Mass

Steve <stevewa206@...>
 

Now there is an interesting question. How would you do MESH..
 
Add a WRT with the MESH software and just use the UDR56k in layer 2? Or do it in the UDR56K natively?
 
Steve N0FPF

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM, ve7sru_225 <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
 

Regarding critical mass V.A.R.P.A is very interested in using the
UDR56K to upgrade speed / capabilities of the packet network for the
southern Vancouver Island area. A wireless mesh, using the UDR56K,
would certainly enhance Amateur Radio support of NGOs and local
authorities during times of disaster.

Adding the UDR56K to the V.A.R.P.A. nodestacks will certainly help
critical mass expansion in the Puget Sound area.

I look forward with anticipation the production release of the
UDR56K so that testing can begin.

Regards

Paul VE7DHM



--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., "qrv@..." wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Point well taken.
>
> I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
> 24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
> may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.
>
> I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the
> same challenge of many participants for adequate
> coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.
>
> There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
> or forwarded via other communication modes.
>
> That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
> valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
> when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.
>
> I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
> cross-country drive.
>
> David
>
> > KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
> > "why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
> > see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
> > participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
> > off. Of course I don't mean that it wouldn't be good to have. It
> > would be another tool in the toolbox. But in my experience, it is
> > more important to have a group of people that actively train with
> > equipment and are familiar with procedures and each other than it is
> > to have lots of cheap equipment and no organization. Again, not
> > meaning to be negative. I think it would be good to have HSMM-Mesh
> > too. I just think I would rather work in a smaller dedicated group
> > that is used to working together.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
> David Colburn nevils-station.com
> I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
> Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
> Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
>
Re: Critical Mass

Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
 

Steve,

It could be done either way, though I would probably use the hsmm-mesh as the primary network transport and the UDR56K as whichever secondary system I happened to need. I'm even contemplating pairing the UDR56K with a USRP and some open source software as an emergency telephone system for use until normal telephone service can be restored to an affected area.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU


Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android


From: Steve <stevewa206@...>;
To: ;
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Re: Critical Mass
Sent: Wed, Aug 29, 2012 6:25:25 PM

 

Now there is an interesting question. How would you do MESH..
 
Add a WRT with the MESH software and just use the UDR56k in layer 2? Or do it in the UDR56K natively?
 
Steve N0FPF

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM, ve7sru_225 <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
 

Regarding critical mass V.A.R.P.A is very interested in using the
UDR56K to upgrade speed / capabilities of the packet network for the
southern Vancouver Island area. A wireless mesh, using the UDR56K,
would certainly enhance Amateur Radio support of NGOs and local
authorities during times of disaster.

Adding the UDR56K to the V.A.R.P.A. nodestacks will certainly help
critical mass expansion in the Puget Sound area.

I look forward with anticipation the production release of the
UDR56K so that testing can begin.

Regards

Paul VE7DHM



--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., "qrv@..." wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Point well taken.
>
> I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
> 24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
> may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.
>
> I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the
> same challenge of many participants for adequate
> coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.
>
> There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
> or forwarded via other communication modes.
>
> That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
> valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
> when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.
>
> I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
> cross-country drive.
>
> David
>
> > KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
> > "why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
> > see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
> > participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
> > off. Of course I don't mean that it wouldn't be good to have. It
> > would be another tool in the toolbox. But in my experience, it is
> > more important to have a group of people that actively train with
> > equipment and are familiar with procedures and each other than it is
> > to have lots of cheap equipment and no organization. Again, not
> > meaning to be negative. I think it would be good to have HSMM-Mesh
> > too. I just think I would rather work in a smaller dedicated group
> > that is used to working together.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
> David Colburn nevils-station.com
> I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
> Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
> Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
>
Re: Critical Mass

Steve <stevewa206@...>
 

So are you going to be adding routing and switching protocols to the base system? 
Which USRP are you adding? It is a widly used acronym.  If you do VOIP, ROIP, maybe MSRP would be a good option too. This would not be needed at the clients but I could see it at repeater / backbone nodes.

Steve N0FPF

On Sunday, September 2, 2012, Matthew Pitts wrote:
 

Steve,

It could be done either way, though I would probably use the hsmm-mesh as the primary network transport and the UDR56K as whichever secondary system I happened to need. I'm even contemplating pairing the UDR56K with a USRP and some open source software as an emergency telephone system for use until normal telephone service can be restored to an affected area.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU


Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android


From: Steve <stevewa206@...>;
To: <UniversalDigitalRadio@...>;
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Re: Critical Mass
Sent: Wed, Aug 29, 2012 6:25:25 PM

 

Now there is an interesting question. How would you do MESH..
 
Add a WRT with the MESH software and just use the UDR56k in layer 2? Or do it in the UDR56K natively?
 
Steve N0FPF

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM, ve7sru_225 <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
 

Regarding critical mass V.A.R.P.A is very interested in using the
UDR56K to upgrade speed / capabilities of the packet network for the
southern Vancouver Island area. A wireless mesh, using the UDR56K,
would certainly enhance Amateur Radio support of NGOs and local
authorities during times of disaster.

Adding the UDR56K to the V.A.R.P.A. nodestacks will certainly help
critical mass expansion in the Puget Sound area.

I look forward with anticipation the production release of the
UDR56K so that testing can begin.

Regards

Paul VE7DHM



--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., "qrv@..." wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Point well taken.
>
> I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
> 24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
> may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.
>
> I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the
> same challenge of many participants for adequate
> coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.
>
> There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
> or forwarded via other communication modes.
>
> That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
> valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
> when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.
>
> I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
> cross-country drive.
>
> David
>
> > KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
> > "why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
> > see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
> > participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
> > off. Of course I don't mean that it wouldn't be good to have. It
> > would be another tool in the toolbox. But in my experience, it is
> > more important to have a group of people that actively train with
> > equipment and are familiar with procedures and each other than it is
> > to have lots of cheap equipment and no organization. Again, not
> > meaning to be negative. I think it would be good to have HSMM-Mesh
> > too. I just think I would rather work in a smaller dedicated group
> > that is used to working together.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
> David Colburn nevils-station.com
> I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
> Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
> Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
>

Re: Critical Mass

Steve <stevewa206@...>
 

Ha!  I ment MPLS...  To much wine tonight.

N0FPF


On Sunday, September 2, 2012, Steve wrote:
So are you going to be adding routing and switching protocols to the base system? 
Which USRP are you adding? It is a widly used acronym.  If you do VOIP, ROIP, maybe MSRP would be a good option too. This would not be needed at the clients but I could see it at repeater / backbone nodes.

Steve N0FPF

On Sunday, September 2, 2012, Matthew Pitts wrote:
 

Steve,

It could be done either way, though I would probably use the hsmm-mesh as the primary network transport and the UDR56K as whichever secondary system I happened to need. I'm even contemplating pairing the UDR56K with a USRP and some open source software as an emergency telephone system for use until normal telephone service can be restored to an affected area.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU


Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android


From: Steve <stevewa206@...>;
To: <UniversalDigitalRadio@...>;
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Re: Critical Mass
Sent: Wed, Aug 29, 2012 6:25:25 PM

 

Now there is an interesting question. How would you do MESH..
 
Add a WRT with the MESH software and just use the UDR56k in layer 2? Or do it in the UDR56K natively?
 
Steve N0FPF

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM, ve7sru_225 <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
 

Regarding critical mass V.A.R.P.A is very interested in using the
UDR56K to upgrade speed / capabilities of the packet network for the
southern Vancouver Island area. A wireless mesh, using the UDR56K,
would certainly enhance Amateur Radio support of NGOs and local
authorities during times of disaster.

Adding the UDR56K to the V.A.R.P.A. nodestacks will certainly help
critical mass expansion in the Puget Sound area.

I look forward with anticipation the production release of the
UDR56K so that testing can begin.

Regards

Paul VE7DHM



--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., "qrv@..." wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Point well taken.
>
> I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
> 24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
> may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.
>
> I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the
> same challenge of many participants for adequate
> coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.
>
> There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
> or forwarded via other communication modes.
>
> That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
> valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
> when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.
>
> I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
> cross-country drive.
>
> David
>
> > KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
> > "why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
> > see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
> > participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
> > off. Of course I don't mean that it wou
Re: Critical Mass

Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
 

In my case, it will be the Ettus Research Universal Software Radio Peripheral version 1 with GnuRadio, OpenBTS, and Asterisk (quite probably using the AllStar Link version for other functionality).

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU


Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android


From: Steve ;
To: UniversalDigitalRadio@... ;
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Critical Mass
Sent: Mon, Sep 3, 2012 3:37:24 AM

 

Ha!  I ment MPLS...  To much wine tonight.


N0FPF


On Sunday, September 2, 2012, Steve wrote:
So are you going to be adding routing and switching protocols to the base system? 
Which USRP are you adding? It is a widly used acronym.  If you do VOIP, ROIP, maybe MSRP would be a good option too. This would not be needed at the clients but I could see it at repeater / backbone nodes.

Steve N0FPF

On Sunday, September 2, 2012, Matthew Pitts wrote:
 

Steve,

It could be done either way, though I would probably use the hsmm-mesh as the primary network transport and the UDR56K as whichever secondary system I happened to need. I'm even contemplating pairing the UDR56K with a USRP and some open source software as an emergency telephone system for use until normal telephone service can be restored to an affected area.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU


Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android


From: Steve <stevewa206@...>;
To: <UniversalDigitalRadio@...>;
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Re: Critical Mass
Sent: Wed, Aug 29, 2012 6:25:25 PM

 

Now there is an interesting question. How would you do MESH..
 
Add a WRT with the MESH software and just use the UDR56k in layer 2? Or do it in the UDR56K natively?
 
Steve N0FPF

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM, ve7sru_225 <ve7dhm@...> wrote:
 

Regarding critical mass V.A.R.P.A is very interested in using the
UDR56K to upgrade speed / capabilities of the packet network for the
southern Vancouver Island area. A wireless mesh, using the UDR56K,
would certainly enhance Amateur Radio support of NGOs and local
authorities during times of disaster.

Adding the UDR56K to the V.A.R.P.A. nodestacks will certainly help
critical mass expansion in the Puget Sound area.

I look forward with anticipation the production release of the
UDR56K so that testing can begin.

Regards

Paul VE7DHM



--- In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., "qrv@..." wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Point well taken.
>
> I have ordered a couple of the routers and will test them with
> 24db gain beams and perhaps with Rx/Tx amps on either end to see what
> may be the reliable distance at a reasonable cost.
>
> I agree that the routers alone, even with gain antennas, present the
> same challenge of many participants for adequate
> coverage as D-Star and APRS - with less ease of portability.
>
> There is also the challenge of extracting data to be delivered
> or forwarded via other communication modes.
>
> That said, a portable HSMM-Mesh network would be exceptionally
> valuable to a field team (EOC, DMAT, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc)
> when a lot of data (images & text) needs to be shared among sub-teams.
>
> I'm planning to test the system mobile this Fall as I take a
> cross-country drive.
>
> David
>
> > KD4E, I have had a few people suggest this to me and say essentially
> > "why bother with buying this expensive equipment". The answer, as I
> > see it is that, at 2.4GHz you need a much higher density of
> > participants. It's great in theory but I think would be tough to pull
> > off. Of course I don't mean that it wou
Re: Critical Mass

"qrv@..." <qrv@...>
 

This has probably been asked and answered but I could not find the
thread ...

Will there be a version of this which uses existing hardware?

I find it very difficult to believe that we could get sufficient
density of users at $395. (or even $200) each.

I get that some will be willing to pay for plug-n-play - and a
repeater installation needs to be simple and small - so the all-
in-one solution makes sense in those contexts.

An add-on device that functions like a TNC between computer and
existing rig - and is in the $75. - $125. range should result in
widespread adoption.

Our systems are impossibly fragmented right now so I'd anticipate
considerable interest in a cross-system OS-platform-independent
device and app that are affordable for users.

BTW: I received the two routers ($50. for the pair including
shipping) and had them up and running on HSMM-Mesh in a very
short time -- it's really simple!

The Winlink2000 folks are pushing rally hard, as have been the
D-Link folks, as they see non-proprietary alternatives coming
at them and they know they cannot compete.

IMHO, YMMV, 73 ...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would probably use the hsmm-mesh as the primary network transport and the UDR56K as whichever secondary system I happened to need. I'm even contemplating pairing the UDR56K with a USRP and some open source software as an emergency telephone system for use until normal telephone service can be restored to an affected area.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

--

Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
David Colburn nevils-station.com
I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
Does Winlink do more than text messaging?

"qrv@..." <qrv@...>
 

Now that APRS is available for HF, not to mention a dozen
digital-mode apps, what is the value-added of the proprietary
Winlink app?


--

Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
David Colburn nevils-station.com
I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
Re: Does Winlink do more than text messaging?

Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
 

Winlink on Linux (RMS Gateway at this point) is open source and there is work progressing on an open implementation of the Winmor TNC. I also know that there is interest in an open source client application similar to RMS Express.

Winlink actually utilizes standard TCP/IP for the bulk of what it does; it can be used to send attachments like is done via normal email though there are size limits for that. The only thing that is technically proprietary is the use of Pactor; the Winlink development team is too small to devote time to development of Linux applications and maintain the Windows software too.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
Re: Does Winlink do more than text messaging?

Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
 

Winlink on Linux (RMS Gateway at this point) is open source and there is work progressing on an open implementation of the Winmor TNC. I also know that there is interest in an open source client application similar to RMS Express.

Winlink actually utilizes standard TCP/IP for the bulk of what it does; it can be used to send attachments like is done via normal email though there are size limits for that. The only thing that is technically proprietary is the use of Pactor; the Winlink development team is too small to devote time to development of Linux applications and maintain the Windows software too.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
Re: Critical Mass

Matthew Pitts <daywalker_blade_2004@...>
 

As I said in the other thread, the only thing that is really proprietary about Winlink 2000 is the support for any form of Pactor; they do support Linux via the Open Source community; they just don't have the resources (meaning development staff) to do the work themselves and still maintain the Windows applications they are working on.

As far as lower cost interfaces to existing equipment goes, these things do already exist, but to my knowledge there is nothing currently available that will handle the higher speeds that the UDR56K is capable of out of the box; I know that Kantronics did have a 70 cm high speed packet radio at one time, but I don't know if that is still available brand new, and it wouldn't be able to do the newer digital voice and data modes without work as far as I know.

HSMM-MESH will work on more than just the Linksys WRT series, as far as I know; it just needs to have support for the CPU used in the specific router (code is likely available from the OpenWRT or DD-WRT code bases to do this). This will have to happen as the WRT54G routers that are supported become more difficult to find new. I know there are other routers that would be quite appropriate to use for this, even if they would need modifications that the currently supported ones don't require.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU


From: "qrv@..."
To: UniversalDigitalRadio@...
Sent: Monday, September 3, 2012 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [UniversalDigitalRadio] Critical Mass

 
This has probably been asked and answered but I could not find the
thread ...

Will there be a version of this which uses existing hardware?

I find it very difficult to believe that we could get sufficient
density of users at $395. (or even $200) each.

I get that some will be willing to pay for plug-n-play - and a
repeater installation needs to be simple and small - so the all-
in-one solution makes sense in those contexts.

An add-on device that functions like a TNC between computer and
existing rig - and is in the $75. - $125. range should result in
widespread adoption.

Our systems are impossibly fragmented right now so I'd anticipate
considerable interest in a cross-system OS-platform-independent
device and app that are affordable for users.

BTW: I received the two routers ($50. for the pair including
shipping) and had them up and running on HSMM-Mesh in a very
short time -- it's really simple!

The Winlink2000 folks are pushing rally hard, as have been the
D-Link folks, as they see non-proprietary alternatives coming
at them and they know they cannot compete.

IMHO, YMMV, 73 ...

----------------------------------------------------------
I would probably use the hsmm-mesh as the primary network transport and
the UDR56K as whichever secondary system I happened to need. I'm even
contemplating pairing the UDR56K with a USRP and some open source
software as an emergency telephone system for use until normal telephone
service can be restored to an affected area.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

--

Thanks! & 73, KD4E.com
David Colburn nevils-station.com
I don't google I SEARCH! duckduckgo.com
Network: groups.yahoo.com/group/qrv
Restored to design-spec at Heaven's gate 1Cor15:22
221 - 240 of 2576  
More
Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups Wiki About Features Pricing Updates Terms Help Twitter