Date   
Re: DRAWS Technical Documents

Dave_G0WBX <g8kbvdave@...>
 

I am subscribed to this group just fine (judging by the onslaught of WinLink spam, now filtered out) but I too cant see the documents as the link John posted results in a page showing a red banner at the top of the page that says:-
"You are not subscribed to this group with this email address."

I think that's because that page is not part of the "main" group.   So, what gives?

I only came here to find some tech info, at John's suggestion, as all that's publicized so far is advertising copy with no real "meat on the bone".

Dave G0WBX.

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Stuart Longland VK4MSL
 

On 05/10/18 12:05, sancudo wrote:
What Scott is saying rings true with me bc I've taught ham classes
locally and KISS is a big four letter word when it comes to my students
trying get hardware to work with simple software. Most folks barely know
how to access Windows, much less Linux or ARM based software. 
Yeah, well… KISS to me means dedicated system that just does ONE thing.
Maybe an embedded CPU of some kind running an emcomm application out of
ROM (flash).

If you want Linux that just does one thing and one thing well, perhaps
one can provide a USB stick/CD-R for you to boot off, and your machine
will do *only* that thing.

You're basically making an appliance. A single-board computer running
Linux such as a Raspberry Pi gets close. Still a lot of complexity
going on, but you've got more scope for paring it down to bare essentials.

I can freely do this with Linux, so long as I can lay my hands on the
sources in the event you ask me for them (GPLv2 clause 2b). I can also
do it with *BSD, and then I don't even have to give you the source.

If I try handing you Windows on a USB stick, I'm liable to be sued for
copyright violation unless I spend megabucks on appropriate licenses for
each and every copy I hand out.

That said, Windows in the right hands is a perfectly viable OS. There
are ways you can tame it and coerce it into working for you.

This is really beside the point however.

To quote what I actually said in my last email:
On 05/10/18 08:27, Stuart Longland wrote:
This is just a symptom of a larger problem, people who write software
for legacy operating systems only and don't document how their software
operates.

Really, it should not matter that Winlink Express is Windows-only. It
should not matter that they only support Windows.

The protocol should be open and documented. Sufficient for someone to
come up with an alternate but interoperable system.
If the details of Winlink Express are available and openly implementable
by anyone, this becomes a non-issue. You use Winlink Express, I use
whatever the hell I want, both tools talk the same language, we can
communicate.

I don't have to use Gmail to send you this reply, nor do you have to be
running Thunderbird to receive my reply. Our email clients speak the
same language: Unicode, RFC-822 and Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions.

It wasn't that long ago that the latter bit (MIME) was not a feature of
email clients, and so sending an attachment to someone was truly a dark
art requiring a good understanding of tools like `uuencode`. (My memory
is hazy, but I seem to recall Trumpet Mail & News reader on Windows 3.1
circa 1996 having problems in this department.)

What we use over the air should be the same.

If Microsoft get bored of running that activation server your Windows XP
box phones home to, preventing you from re-installing the OS when your
HDD crashes, or the latest Windows 10 update prevents you from
installing applications that aren't from the "Windows Store", you're not
stuck for a replacement computer, you can grab whatever's to hand and
load on whatever compatible replacement software.

So long as *you* know how to drive your end, I know how to drive mine,
and the two "systems" talk the same language, that is all that matters.
--
Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL)

I haven't lost my mind...
...it's backed up on a tape somewhere.

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

AE7G
 

One more comment and I will stop.

 

I consider myself reasonably smart and open to new ideas and new skills.  I also am educated but no science beyond freshman college level and no engineering or computer programming.

 

Like many other things, computer programming requires practice and repetitive use before you become fluent.  It is comparable to learning a new language, learning to type or learning morse code.   Most of those things are easier to pick up when you are young. 

 

In short, it is not that we in the 80% are less smart or capable, we were just not trained in your language.

 

People trained in computer language have useful skills and they are capable of applying those skills to do useful things for our community.  If you expect us to be able to use your creative product, you either need to be there for us to set it up and operate it, or you have to put it in a language we understand so we can do it ourselves.

 

Most of us in this country speak English.  If you write your stuff up in another language, most of us will never be able to use it.    You are never going be able to get us to learn your language. 

 

It is not that we are stupid, we just have other things going on in our lives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io <main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io> On Behalf Of Richard - VE7CVS
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 9:27 PM
To: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

This is the typical issue that you run into - "Oh, we found something that works for 80% of the users (i.e., Windows), everyone else will have to use this too because it's too difficult for us to try and support the 'marginal' OSes like Mac and Linux".

Really, the only way that you can counter this is with software that supports all of the platforms. And, realise that those 80% base Windows users are mostly not tech-savvy, so saying "Oh, just install Cygwin and use this package" is not going to fly. You have to provide a Windows app and full support for that 80%.

I'm not trying to be snide - just realistic. Many apps exist for Windows that are fully supported in Windows, but have no support for other OSes. It's really hard to suggest alternatives that work for those Windows users who need more detailed tech support than a typical Linux user.

Remember this hobby has a large range of people who have very differing levels of tech expertise. :-)

(I taught ham radio to a group of people who ranged from those who had less than full high school level math to a BSC in Physics - "tune to your audience" - that was a *very* wide band transmission! ;-) - Oh, and very enlightening!

- Richard



On 10/04/2018 07:59 PM, Randy Neals wrote:

Hi George,

That is generally true that the original forms, in their paper or PDF distributions are government created.
Form handling within Winlink - the ability to send the data, but not the form itself is only supported in Winlink express and as Basil noted, not documented.

 

-Randy

 

 

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

On October 5, 2018 12:46:26 AM EDT, Tony <w7efs@...> wrote:
Your point is precisely why I'm in favo[u]r of open-source software, and I've been rebuffed in the winlink groups several times in the last 'arf-decade for strongly suggesting it wrt WE formerly RE.

There are a very great many bright people who can improve open-source code and are willing to do so. The WDT (winlink development team) continually complain that they are just volunteers (what ham isn't?) and can't release their M$ code.

On 10/04/2018 09:26 PM, Richard - VE7CVS wrote:
This is the typical issue that you run into - "Oh, we found something that works for 80% of the users (i.e., Windows), everyone else will have to use this too because it's too difficult for us to try and support the 'marginal' OSes like Mac and Linux".

Really, the only way that you can counter this is with software that supports all of the platforms. And, realise that those 80% base Windows users are mostly not tech-savvy, so saying "Oh, just install Cygwin and use this package" is not going to fly. You have to provide a Windows app and full support for that 80%.

I'm not trying to be snide - just realistic. Many apps exist for Windows that are fully supported in Windows, but have no support for other OSes. It's really hard to suggest alternatives that work for those Windows users who need more detailed tech support than a typical Linux user.

Remember this hobby has a large range of people who have very differing levels of tech expertise. :-)

(I taught ham radio to a group of people who ranged from those who had less than full high school level math to a BSC in Physics - "tune to your audience" - that was a *very* wide band transmission! ;-) - Oh, and very enlightening!

- Richard



On 10/04/2018 07:59 PM, Randy Neals wrote:
Hi George,

That is generally true that the original forms, in their paper or PDF distributions are government created.
Form handling within Winlink - the ability to send the data, but not the form itself is only supported in Winlink express and as Basil noted, not documented.

-Randy





Not entirely true. When I first started talking to KN6KB about some things that ended up becoming part of ARDOP, he mentioned that he had been working with someone at one point that had been working on a port of WinMOR to Linux. After some discussions, the guy just vanished and was never heard from again. The WDT wants folks to commit to a long term development cycle and keep in regular contact so that the open source stuff stays in sync with the Windows side of things.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Tony <w7efs@...>
 

Your point is precisely why I'm in favo[u]r of open-source software, and I've been rebuffed in the winlink groups several times in the last 'arf-decade for strongly suggesting it wrt WE formerly RE.

There are a very great many bright people who can improve open-source code and are willing to do so. The WDT (winlink development team) continually complain that they are just volunteers (what ham isn't?) and can't release their M$ code.

On 10/04/2018 09:26 PM, Richard - VE7CVS wrote:
This is the typical issue that you run into - "Oh, we found something that works for 80% of the users (i.e., Windows), everyone else will have to use this too because it's too difficult for us to try and support the 'marginal' OSes like Mac and Linux".

Really, the only way that you can counter this is with software that supports all of the platforms. And, realise that those 80% base Windows users are mostly not tech-savvy, so saying "Oh, just install Cygwin and use this package" is not going to fly. You have to provide a Windows app and full support for that 80%.

I'm not trying to be snide - just realistic. Many apps exist for Windows that are fully supported in Windows, but have no support for other OSes. It's really hard to suggest alternatives that work for those Windows users who need more detailed tech support than a typical Linux user.

Remember this hobby has a large range of people who have very differing levels of tech expertise. :-)

(I taught ham radio to a group of people who ranged from those who had less than full high school level math to a BSC in Physics - "tune to your audience" - that was a *very* wide band transmission! ;-) - Oh, and very enlightening!

- Richard



On 10/04/2018 07:59 PM, Randy Neals wrote:
Hi George,

That is generally true that the original forms, in their paper or PDF distributions are government created.
Form handling within Winlink - the ability to send the data, but not the form itself is only supported in Winlink express and as Basil noted, not documented.

-Randy




Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Richard - VE7CVS
 

This is the typical issue that you run into - "Oh, we found something that works for 80% of the users (i.e., Windows), everyone else will have to use this too because it's too difficult for us to try and support the 'marginal' OSes like Mac and Linux".

Really, the only way that you can counter this is with software that supports all of the platforms. And, realise that those 80% base Windows users are mostly not tech-savvy, so saying "Oh, just install Cygwin and use this package" is not going to fly. You have to provide a Windows app and full support for that 80%.

I'm not trying to be snide - just realistic. Many apps exist for Windows that are fully supported in Windows, but have no support for other OSes. It's really hard to suggest alternatives that work for those Windows users who need more detailed tech support than a typical Linux user.

Remember this hobby has a large range of people who have very differing levels of tech expertise. :-)

(I taught ham radio to a group of people who ranged from those who had less than full high school level math to a BSC in Physics - "tune to your audience" - that was a *very* wide band transmission! ;-) - Oh, and very enlightening!

- Richard



On 10/04/2018 07:59 PM, Randy Neals wrote:
Hi George,

That is generally true that the original forms, in their paper or PDF distributions are government created.
Form handling within Winlink - the ability to send the data, but not the form itself is only supported in Winlink express and as Basil noted, not documented.

-Randy



Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Randy Neals
 

Hi George,

That is generally true that the original forms, in their paper or PDF distributions are government created.
Form handling within Winlink - the ability to send the data, but not the form itself is only supported in Winlink express and as Basil noted, not documented.

-Randy


On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 6:59 PM, AE7G <gthornton@...> wrote:

From the perspective of EMCOMM leaders, forms are NOT proprietary (for the most part). 

 

The forms are part of the Incident Command System structure, and they dovetail well with all sorts of planning documents and principles as part of the overall ICS structure.

 

The government provides ICS forms on line, they are available to copy and integrate into any structure. 

 

From: main@....io <main@....io> On Behalf Of Randy Neals
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 6:11 PM
To: main@....io
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

I don't disagree John.


But the EmComm leaders have decided that forms save critical bandwidth over the air, and forms must be used.
Regrettably, forms are proprietary in Winlink, so EmComm leaders have locked us into Winlink Express, and Windows in one fell swoop.

-R

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:33 PM, John D Hays - K7VE <john@...> wrote:

I looked on the winlink site and the HTML and CSS for existing forms does not appear to be independently downloadable, nor do I see a quick link to the data only transport. 

 

Open things up and maybe some development will follow. 

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 17:08 Randy Neals <randy@...> wrote:

 

For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport

-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:


Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil


 

 


Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Tony <w7efs@...>
 

http://winlink.org/content/how_manually_update_standard_templates_version_10690 "Step 2" has the link I believe you're searching for.

On 10/04/2018 05:33 PM, John D Hays - K7VE wrote:
I looked on the winlink site and the HTML and CSS for existing forms does not appear to be independently downloadable, nor do I see a quick link to the data only transport. 

Open things up and maybe some development will follow. 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 17:08 Randy Neals <randy@...> wrote:

For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport
-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.



On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:

Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil





Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Andy KI6SEP
 

In Santa Clara County, CA we use a program that works with Outpost for forms. It is called PacFORMS.

A form needs a one time conversion to html. From then on, an operator merely needs to open the form in a browser, fill in the information, and click Submit to Outpost. The field contents alone are placed in a plain text message.

The operator needs merely to enter the destination station and transmit.

Upon receipt, Outpost detects the message is a PacFORM and calls the reverse read routine which then opens the same Form in a browser with all the fields filled in.

Yes, this requires that PacForms be installed at both the sending and receiving stations. The number of bytes transmitted is minimal as only the field contents are sent (with an identifier for each) and no html is transmitted. 

We have converted a number of ICS forms and even some WEBEOC forms.

Separately, Outpost has native support for the ICS-213 without even needing a browser.

Here's more information
https://www.scc-ares-races.org/pfpublic/pacforms.html

Andy

-------- Original message --------
From: AE7G <gthornton@...>
Date: 10/4/18 21:59 (GMT-05:00)
To: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

From the perspective of EMCOMM leaders, forms are NOT proprietary (for the most part). 

 

The forms are part of the Incident Command System structure, and they dovetail well with all sorts of planning documents and principles as part of the overall ICS structure.

 

The government provides ICS forms on line, they are available to copy and integrate into any structure. 

 

From: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io <main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io> On Behalf Of Randy Neals
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 6:11 PM
To: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

I don't disagree John.
But the EmComm leaders have decided that forms save critical bandwidth over the air, and forms must be used.
Regrettably, forms are proprietary in Winlink, so EmComm leaders have locked us into Winlink Express, and Windows in one fell swoop.

-R

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:33 PM, John D Hays - K7VE <john@...> wrote:

I looked on the winlink site and the HTML and CSS for existing forms does not appear to be independently downloadable, nor do I see a quick link to the data only transport. 

 

Open things up and maybe some development will follow. 

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 17:08 Randy Neals <randy@...> wrote:

 

For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport

-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:


Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil


 

 

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

AE7G
 

As one of the hordes of EMCOMM trainees, I agree wholeheartedly with this.

 

I have been in the EMCOMM and public service world for a long time.  People have been pushing Linux based ideas at me for 20 years.  I almost always have to rely on them to finish the installation and configuration because I can’t do it myself. 

 

Even if it gets running fine, something happens to my computer and things have to be reinstalled.  Now the person who helped me is no longer available and I no longer have the application. 

 

On the other hand, give me Windows and instructions on how to do it, and I can pretty much figure it out on my own.    If it goes, I can reconstruct what I did before and get it going.

 

 

From: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io <main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io> On Behalf Of Scott Currie
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 5:07 PM
To: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

I'm going to regret wading into this, but here I go anyway....

I've been instructing EMCOMM teams on WE for quite some time now. It can be rather challenging to say the least. While the folks in this group are not likely to struggle at all with an RPi or Linux or even UNIX, and can probably compile a kernel blindfolded with one hand tied behind your back, you are not the average EMCOMM operator. Most of the EMCOMM teams I train struggle with zipped files! They really don't want to use anything that ends in X (except maybe a few OSX people). 

Do I like WE? Not really, but it does the job. Would I rather have something more robust that runs on Win, Linux, Unix, OSX, iOS and Android? Absolutely, but it's not going to happen. I can't even tell you how many people who have told me they were going to write something waaay better. It either never happens, or gets only as far as early and ugly beta with no documentation or support. Meanwhile WE plugs along, gets a little better with each revision, and is in continuous support and development. So you need a Windows box, get over it. My portable station is a Win10 Tablet with keyboard that cost me less than $80. It runs WE and Direwolf just fine, and it would happily connect to a DRAW for RF connectivity if one was in WiFi range (or it can use a number of other hardware options).

If you are going to write something waaay better, let me know when it is done, I'll beta test it.
Until then, we're getting by just fine with WE.

-Scott, NS7C

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

sancudo
 

What Scott is saying rings true with me bc I've taught ham classes locally and KISS is a big four letter word when it comes to my students trying get hardware to work with simple software. Most folks barely know how to access Windows, much less Linux or ARM based software. 
I really like WE. Probably the best it has been since it's inception in WinXP or earlier days. I was on forty miles from the eye of Hurricane Harvey last year... hunkered down in courthouse with high velocity winds blowing things sideways outside. And yet I was able to send messages thru my radio and pactor modem using WE on a Win7 desktop. The WE software worked flawlessly in send and receive mode. And even a non-ham could have operated the station. KISS. It worked for me.

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 7:07 PM Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> wrote:
I'm going to regret wading into this, but here I go anyway....

I've been instructing EMCOMM teams on WE for quite some time now. It can be rather challenging to say the least. While the folks in this group are not likely to struggle at all with an RPi or Linux or even UNIX, and can probably compile a kernel blindfolded with one hand tied behind your back, you are not the average EMCOMM operator. Most of the EMCOMM teams I train struggle with zipped files! They really don't want to use anything that ends in X (except maybe a few OSX people). 

Do I like WE? Not really, but it does the job. Would I rather have something more robust that runs on Win, Linux, Unix, OSX, iOS and Android? Absolutely, but it's not going to happen. I can't even tell you how many people who have told me they were going to write something waaay better. It either never happens, or gets only as far as early and ugly beta with no documentation or support. Meanwhile WE plugs along, gets a little better with each revision, and is in continuous support and development. So you need a Windows box, get over it. My portable station is a Win10 Tablet with keyboard that cost me less than $80. It runs WE and Direwolf just fine, and it would happily connect to a DRAW for RF connectivity if one was in WiFi range (or it can use a number of other hardware options).

If you are going to write something waaay better, let me know when it is done, I'll beta test it.
Until then, we're getting by just fine with WE.

-Scott, NS7C

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

AE7G
 

From the perspective of EMCOMM leaders, forms are NOT proprietary (for the most part). 

 

The forms are part of the Incident Command System structure, and they dovetail well with all sorts of planning documents and principles as part of the overall ICS structure.

 

The government provides ICS forms on line, they are available to copy and integrate into any structure. 

 

From: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io <main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io> On Behalf Of Randy Neals
Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2018 6:11 PM
To: main@nw-digital-radio.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

I don't disagree John.
But the EmComm leaders have decided that forms save critical bandwidth over the air, and forms must be used.
Regrettably, forms are proprietary in Winlink, so EmComm leaders have locked us into Winlink Express, and Windows in one fell swoop.

-R

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:33 PM, John D Hays - K7VE <john@...> wrote:

I looked on the winlink site and the HTML and CSS for existing forms does not appear to be independently downloadable, nor do I see a quick link to the data only transport. 

 

Open things up and maybe some development will follow. 

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 17:08 Randy Neals <randy@...> wrote:

 

For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport

-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.

 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:


Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil


 

 

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Randy Neals
 

Bud, that's an interesting solution - I've not used FL Digi forms capability.
I suppose you could fun FSQ and FLMSG simultaneously.

I'm wondering if the forms capability in FL Digi is compatible with the forms in Winlink Express?

Randy, W3RWN

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:27 PM, Budd Churchward <budd@...> wrote:
Whatcom county is doing something very interesting to solve these problems and it works very well on a Rpi with a UDRC controller. We are using Fldigi with Flmsg running MT-63 2000L on VHF. Flmsg supports the ICS forms. MT-63 sends very fast with error correction. We also use FSQ. This works for us because all units only need to communicate with the county EOC and they talk to the rest of the state. MT-63 allows you to broadcast the message, which means that all stations copy it at the same time. Each one does not have to make its own connection and download the message separately. BTW Fldigi runs on all platforms, so it works with any computer.
 
At the Red Cross in Bellingham, when we want to send a message with WinLink, we use a Windows laptop which connects it to the same Rpi and UDRC using TCP/IP over our local network. Our regular WinLink operator is not a Linux guy. All we had to do was make a simple change in a menu and everything was the same as what he has always done.
 
Budd WB7FHC
 
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?
 
 
For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport
-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.


 
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:

Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil



 


Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Randy Neals
 

I don't disagree John.
But the EmComm leaders have decided that forms save critical bandwidth over the air, and forms must be used.
Regrettably, forms are proprietary in Winlink, so EmComm leaders have locked us into Winlink Express, and Windows in one fell swoop.

-R

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:33 PM, John D Hays - K7VE <john@...> wrote:
I looked on the winlink site and the HTML and CSS for existing forms does not appear to be independently downloadable, nor do I see a quick link to the data only transport. 

Open things up and maybe some development will follow. 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 17:08 Randy Neals <randy@...> wrote:

For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport
-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.



On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:

Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil





Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

 

I looked on the winlink site and the HTML and CSS for existing forms does not appear to be independently downloadable, nor do I see a quick link to the data only transport. 

Open things up and maybe some development will follow. 

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 17:08 Randy Neals <randy@...> wrote:

For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport
-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.



On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:

Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil




Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Budd Churchward
 

Whatcom county is doing something very interesting to solve these problems and it works very well on a Rpi with a UDRC controller. We are using Fldigi with Flmsg running MT-63 2000L on VHF. Flmsg supports the ICS forms. MT-63 sends very fast with error correction. We also use FSQ. This works for us because all units only need to communicate with the county EOC and they talk to the rest of the state. MT-63 allows you to broadcast the message, which means that all stations copy it at the same time. Each one does not have to make its own connection and download the message separately. BTW Fldigi runs on all platforms, so it works with any computer.
 
At the Red Cross in Bellingham, when we want to send a message with WinLink, we use a Windows laptop which connects it to the same Rpi and UDRC using TCP/IP over our local network. Our regular WinLink operator is not a Linux guy. All we had to do was make a simple change in a menu and everything was the same as what he has always done.
 
Budd WB7FHC
 

Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [nw-digital-radio] Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?
 
 
For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport
-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.


 
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:

Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil



 

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Randy Neals
 


For EmComm oriented clients, there are a few key functions necessary in client software:
-Forms ie: HTML/CSS Forms creation & content-only transport
-Tactical Address Support

Outpost, Pat, Paclink (but not Paclink-Unix) and Winmail Express support tactical addressing.
Only Winlink Express supports Forms.

I'd dearly love to see a client that supports Forms and Tactical addresses that would run on a Raspberry Pi, such as the new DRAWS station.

It has been my experience that nearly every time I fire up my ham radio ThinkPad, that it wants to download an update or do something other than the Winlink message I want to send.



On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Basil Gunn <basil@...> wrote:

Scott Currie <scott.d.currie@...> writes:

> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.

Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.

/Basil




Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Scott Currie
 

I'm going to regret wading into this, but here I go anyway....

I've been instructing EMCOMM teams on WE for quite some time now. It can be rather challenging to say the least. While the folks in this group are not likely to struggle at all with an RPi or Linux or even UNIX, and can probably compile a kernel blindfolded with one hand tied behind your back, you are not the average EMCOMM operator. Most of the EMCOMM teams I train struggle with zipped files! They really don't want to use anything that ends in X (except maybe a few OSX people). 

Do I like WE? Not really, but it does the job. Would I rather have something more robust that runs on Win, Linux, Unix, OSX, iOS and Android? Absolutely, but it's not going to happen. I can't even tell you how many people who have told me they were going to write something waaay better. It either never happens, or gets only as far as early and ugly beta with no documentation or support. Meanwhile WE plugs along, gets a little better with each revision, and is in continuous support and development. So you need a Windows box, get over it. My portable station is a Win10 Tablet with keyboard that cost me less than $80. It runs WE and Direwolf just fine, and it would happily connect to a DRAW for RF connectivity if one was in WiFi range (or it can use a number of other hardware options).

If you are going to write something waaay better, let me know when it is done, I'll beta test it.
Until then, we're getting by just fine with WE.

-Scott, NS7C

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

Stuart Longland VK4MSL
 

On 05/10/18 08:09, Steve wrote:
Is the real challenge here a Winlink development team which is myopic in
their support for various operating systems?  If W1HKJ can build, test,
and support three operating systems for the FLDigi suite, why can't
they?  In Emcomm situations, where interoperability is the key, that
just doesn't make sense.

It is most difficult to be boxed into a position where one has to tell a
volunteer that they must pay homage to a large company in Redmond,
Washington, in order to use Winlink Express forms.  That would be like
telling hams they all have to buy radios from the same company.
This is just a symptom of a larger problem, people who write software
for legacy operating systems only and don't document how their software
operates.

Really, it should not matter that Winlink Express is Windows-only. It
should not matter that they only support Windows.

The protocol should be open and documented. Sufficient for someone to
come up with an alternate but interoperable system.

Example: consider ECMAScript. Prior to that coming on the scene, there
were several attempts at doing scripting on web pages. Microsoft threw
their hat in the ring with, wait for it, VBScript, but it never took
off. The other way was to embed applets, again mostly using proprietary
extensions.

ActiveX only took off in enterprise circles, with it generally being
accepted as a poor solution elsewhere. Macromedia^WAdobe Flash and Java
were more common ways of filling in where JavaScript couldn't.
JavaScript has largely taken over, because it is open and royalty free.

I've actually considered some ideas for an emergency comms system here:
https://stuartl.longlandclan.id.au/blog/2017/03/26/digital-emergency-comms-ideas/

I've also considered the idea of whether to use a "blockchain" as a way
of indicating the route taken by a message. The idea that the sender
starts the chain (the message is the "genesis"), and each party
forwarding hashes and signs the previous block. That way you have
mathematical proof that a message was passed on via a particular route
and that the message received at the far end is "authentic".

It should be possible for anyone to obtain the relevant public keys,
verify each signature, and reproduce each hash, to prove that a message
was sent by a particular person and took a given route.

There was also scope for encryption in there, ACMA rules allow that for
bonafide emergencies, but I realise this is problematic elsewhere, so
would be a strictly optional feature. You'll have to go to special
effort to enable it.

Many of the ideas considered there would be compatible with the UDRC.
The project though is on the back burner whilst I deal with some more
pressing projects.

Regards,
--
Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL)

I haven't lost my mind...
...it's backed up on a tape somewhere.

Re: Linux RMS - headed for digital dustbin?

sancudo
 

I agree with Steve. The whole idea of Emcomm is for portability, in my opinion. I like using laptops too but I would like an option of using an OS other than WinDoze if the case arises that WinDoze has been compromised. And if the pi or another OS based microcomputer is available that's light and less power hungry the better.
Mario

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 5:09 PM Steve <yahoo-udr@...> wrote:
Wine has not been ported to the ARM architecture, so NO Windoze app will
work on a RPi.

Is the real challenge here a Winlink development team which is myopic in
their support for various operating systems?  If W1HKJ can build, test,
and support three operating systems for the FLDigi suite, why can't
they?  In Emcomm situations, where interoperability is the key, that
just doesn't make sense.

It is most difficult to be boxed into a position where one has to tell a
volunteer that they must pay homage to a large company in Redmond,
Washington, in order to use Winlink Express forms.  That would be like
telling hams they all have to buy radios from the same company.

We need to have a viable RPi solution for very portable Emcomm use, both
in the client (with forms) and RMS rolls.

Steve


Basil Gunn wrote on 10/4/18 2:29 PM:
> Scott Currie<scott.d.currie@...>  writes:
>
>> plinBPQ is not a platform you can run WE on. It can serve as a CMS
>> gateway, or even a connection to a TNC/soundcard for WE to use, but
>> you would still need to install WE "elsewhere". Getting WE to install
>> and run on the Pi architecture is indeed difficult if not
>> impossible. Certainly not something I would suggest.
> > Yes my apologies if anyone thought I was promoting that. You can NOT run
> WE or most/any windows apps on an ARM platform under wine.  I am not a
> fan of wine ... the not an emulator thing. The native linux apps work
> pretty well for winlink messaging when using an RPi/Direwolf/UDRC.