From benjamin.naber at 3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL  Mon Jan 28 15:14:58 2008
From: benjamin.naber at 3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL (Naber, Benjamin L. SPC)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:14:58 +0300
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
Message-ID: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>

Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?
 
~Benjamin, KB9LFZ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/ff551739/attachment.htm 

From ooe at odessaoffice.com  Mon Jan 28 17:49:24 2008
From: ooe at odessaoffice.com (Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:49:24 -0800
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
Message-ID: <00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>

Been pretty quiet here lately.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181                                   
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
42846865 (icq)                                    WISP Operator since 1999!
ooe at odessaoffice.com
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Naber, Benjamin L. SPC 
  To: ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org 
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 7:14 AM
  Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?


  Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?

  ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ


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


  _______________________________________________
  ham-80211 mailing list
  ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
  https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/c1e50f82/attachment.htm 

From bob at sinister.com  Mon Jan 28 19:30:20 2008
From: bob at sinister.com (Bob Keyes)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:30:20 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>

Pretty sleepy around here

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:

> Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?
>
> ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ
>



From kd4moj at kd4moj.org  Mon Jan 28 19:51:57 2008
From: kd4moj at kd4moj.org (Doug Ferrell)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:51:57 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0801281451300.9419-100000@www.ferrellsecurity.com>

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Bob Keyes wrote:

> Pretty sleepy around here

ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz {yawn}

> 
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:
> 
> > Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?
> >
> > ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ



-- 
...DOUG
KD4MOJ







From tarvid at ls.net  Mon Jan 28 20:01:48 2008
From: tarvid at ls.net (Jim Tarvid)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:01:48 -0500
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>
Message-ID: <41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>

Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types - (paraphrased)

Spread Spectrum is permitted on the following bands (over the entire
band unless otherwise indicated):

UHF: 70 cm (420-450 MHz), ...

Any hardware that might make that easy?

up/down converters to 13cm?

Jim


On 1/28/08, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 <ooe at odessaoffice.com> wrote:
>
>
> Been pretty quiet here lately.
>
> Marlon
> (509) 982-2181
> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
> 42846865 (icq)                                    WISP
> Operator since 1999!
> ooe at odessaoffice.com
> www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
> www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Naber, Benjamin L. SPC
> To: ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 7:14 AM
> Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
>
>
> Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?
>
> ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ
>
>  ________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
>
>



From beatnic at comcast.net  Mon Jan 28 20:13:14 2008
From: beatnic at comcast.net (Alex Fraser)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:13:14 -0500
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>
	<41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <479E375A.8050600@comcast.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/541c3465/attachment.htm 

From kilgore1317 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Jan 28 20:44:41 2008
From: kilgore1317 at sbcglobal.net (Kilgore)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:44:41 -0600
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
Message-ID: <479E3EB9.6000703@sbcglobal.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/c58ef11a/attachment.htm 

From bob at sinister.com  Mon Jan 28 20:55:15 2008
From: bob at sinister.com (Bob Keyes)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:55:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>
	<41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281553240.13744@dark.sinister.com>



On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Jim Tarvid wrote:

> Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types - (paraphrased)
>
> Spread Spectrum is permitted on the following bands (over the entire
> band unless otherwise indicated):
>
> UHF: 70 cm (420-450 MHz), ...
>
> Any hardware that might make that easy?
>
> up/down converters to 13cm?

Are you sayong you want to operate on 13cm? Because that equipment is easy
to come by.

I am not so sure that operating SS at 70cm is a great idea. Maybe OFDM?



From tarvid at ls.net  Mon Jan 28 21:16:09 2008
From: tarvid at ls.net (Jim Tarvid)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:16:09 -0500
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281553240.13744@dark.sinister.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>
	<41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281553240.13744@dark.sinister.com>
Message-ID: <41acbd2a0801281316n78dd40d0y2fb0ad2b1f4d3e3d@mail.gmail.com>

What do you have against SS? I was looking for OTS hardware such as
the Ubiquiti SR9 but 70 cm. The 700 MHZ is out before the auction and
more than a year before the spectrum is available.

On 1/28/08, Bob Keyes <bob at sinister.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Jim Tarvid wrote:
>
> > Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types - (paraphrased)
> >
> > Spread Spectrum is permitted on the following bands (over the entire
> > band unless otherwise indicated):
> >
> > UHF: 70 cm (420-450 MHz), ...
> >
> > Any hardware that might make that easy?
> >
> > up/down converters to 13cm?
>
> Are you sayong you want to operate on 13cm? Because that equipment is easy
> to come by.
>
> I am not so sure that operating SS at 70cm is a great idea. Maybe OFDM?
>
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
>



From wa7nwp at jnos.org  Mon Jan 28 22:21:40 2008
From: wa7nwp at jnos.org (Bill Vodall WA7NWP)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:21:40 +0000
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <41acbd2a0801281316n78dd40d0y2fb0ad2b1f4d3e3d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>
	<41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281553240.13744@dark.sinister.com>
	<41acbd2a0801281316n78dd40d0y2fb0ad2b1f4d3e3d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5abd436b0801281421n4783fe46ue1a81bf8cc1d79fe@mail.gmail.com>

> > Pretty sleepy around here
>
> ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz {yawn}

Sleep?   Who has time to sleep??

With the N800, XO, meraki's, CB-3, NSLU2, JNOS and basic Linux IP over
Packet (and Packet over UDP) I'm lucky to get 4 hours a night.  The
list of interesting, educational and sometimes even useful projects
just keeps growing.

73
Bill - WA7NWP



From gerry.creager at tamu.edu  Mon Jan 28 22:24:37 2008
From: gerry.creager at tamu.edu (Gerry Creager)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:24:37 -0600
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?
In-Reply-To: <5abd436b0801281421n4783fe46ue1a81bf8cc1d79fe@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<00f501c861d6$2a91c130$09ba9240@marlon>	<41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec@mail.gmail.com>	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281553240.13744@dark.sinister.com>	<41acbd2a0801281316n78dd40d0y2fb0ad2b1f4d3e3d@mail.gmail.com>
	<5abd436b0801281421n4783fe46ue1a81bf8cc1d79fe@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <479E5625.8050006@tamu.edu>

4 hrs a night?  Back when I was still doing medical research, anything 
OVER 4 hrs sleep/night was charged against vacation!

Bill Vodall WA7NWP wrote:
>>> Pretty sleepy around here
>> ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz {yawn}
> 
> Sleep?   Who has time to sleep??
> 
> With the N800, XO, meraki's, CB-3, NSLU2, JNOS and basic Linux IP over
> Packet (and Packet over UDP) I'm lucky to get 4 hours a night.  The
> list of interesting, educational and sometimes even useful projects
> just keeps growing.
> 
> 73
> Bill - WA7NWP
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.862.3982 FAX: 979.862.3983
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843




From k8ocl at arrl.net  Tue Jan 29 01:06:52 2008
From: k8ocl at arrl.net (John Champa)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:06:52 -0600
Subject: [Ham-80211] The ARRL VHF Digital Handbook
Message-ID: <BAY122-W26004DF8614C40A9E0989DB8350@phx.gbl>


A MUST READ COMING SOON TO THE ARRL BOOK STORE!
 
Around March 1st the League will be releasing a revolutionary (evolutionary?)
new First Printing, First Edition of what may be an historical new work in our field:
 
The ARRL VHF Digital Handbook.
 
This is the book we have all long awaited!  It is the fulfillment of our many 
thoughts, labors, and loves in this area.  At long last a document which anchors
what we have long discussed as a thorough part of the future of Radio Amateurs.
 
Vy 73,
John, K8OCL
 
 "The doctrines of democracy deal with the aspirations of men's souls, butthe application deals with things. One hand in somebody else's pocket andone on your gun, and you are highly civilized...Desire enough for your ownuse only, and you are a heathen. Civilized people have things to show totheir neighbors."  Autobiography of Zora Neale Hurston. > From: ham-80211-request at lists.tapr.org> Subject: ham-80211 Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2> To: ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:28:45 -0800> > Send ham-80211 mailing list submissions to> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to> ham-80211-request at lists.tapr.org> > You can reach the person managing the list at> ham-80211-owner at lists.tapr.org> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific> than "Re: Contents of ham-80211 digest..."> > > Today's Topics:> > 1. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Bob Keyes)> 2. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Doug Ferrell)> 3. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Jim Tarvid)> 4. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Alex Fraser)> 5. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Kilgore)> 6. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Bob Keyes)> 7. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Jim Tarvid)> 8. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Bill Vodall WA7NWP)> 9. Re: Activity - what is the data world doing? (Gerry Creager)> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > Message: 1> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:30:20 -0500 (EST)> From: Bob Keyes <bob at sinister.com>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800 at dark.sinister.com>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII> > Pretty sleepy around here> > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:> > > Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?> >> > ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ> >> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 2> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:51:57 -0500 (EST)> From: Doug Ferrell <kd4moj at kd4moj.org>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID:> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0801281451300.9419-100000 at www.ferrellsecurity.com>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII> > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Bob Keyes wrote:> > > Pretty sleepy around here> > ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz {yawn}> > > > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:> > > > > Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?> > >> > > ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ> > > > -- > ...DOUG> KD4MOJ> > > > > > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 3> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:01:48 -0500> From: "Jim Tarvid" <tarvid at ls.net>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID:> <41acbd2a0801281201i25279f87wabba2f3f3e7e8bec at mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types - (paraphrased)> > Spread Spectrum is permitted on the following bands (over the entire> band unless otherwise indicated):> > UHF: 70 cm (420-450 MHz), ...> > Any hardware that might make that easy?> > up/down converters to 13cm?> > Jim> > > On 1/28/08, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 <ooe at odessaoffice.com> wrote:> >> >> > Been pretty quiet here lately.> >> > Marlon> > (509) 982-2181> > (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services> > 42846865 (icq) WISP> > Operator since 1999!> > ooe at odessaoffice.com> > www.odessaoffice.com/wireless> > www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam> >> >> >> >> > ----- Original Message -----> > From: Naber, Benjamin L. SPC> > To: ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 7:14 AM> > Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> >> >> > Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?> >> > ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ> >> > ________________________________> >> >> > _______________________________________________> > ham-80211 mailing list> > ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________> > ham-80211 mailing list> > ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211> >> >> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 4> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:13:14 -0500> From: Alex Fraser <beatnic at comcast.net>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID: <479E375A.8050600 at comcast.net>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...> URL: http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/541c3465/attachment-0001.htm> > ------------------------------> > Message: 5> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:44:41 -0600> From: Kilgore <kilgore1317 at sbcglobal.net>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID: <479E3EB9.6000703 at sbcglobal.net>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...> URL: http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/c58ef11a/attachment-0001.htm> > ------------------------------> > Message: 6> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:55:15 -0500 (EST)> From: Bob Keyes <bob at sinister.com>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281553240.13744 at dark.sinister.com>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII> > > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Jim Tarvid wrote:> > > Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types - (paraphrased)> >> > Spread Spectrum is permitted on the following bands (over the entire> > band unless otherwise indicated):> >> > UHF: 70 cm (420-450 MHz), ...> >> > Any hardware that might make that easy?> >> > up/down converters to 13cm?> > Are you sayong you want to operate on 13cm? Because that equipment is easy> to come by.> > I am not so sure that operating SS at 70cm is a great idea. Maybe OFDM?> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 7> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:16:09 -0500> From: "Jim Tarvid" <tarvid at ls.net>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID:> <41acbd2a0801281316n78dd40d0y2fb0ad2b1f4d3e3d at mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > What do you have against SS? I was looking for OTS hardware such as> the Ubiquiti SR9 but 70 cm. The 700 MHZ is out before the auction and> more than a year before the spectrum is available.> > On 1/28/08, Bob Keyes <bob at sinister.com> wrote:> >> >> > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Jim Tarvid wrote:> >> > > Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types - (paraphrased)> > >> > > Spread Spectrum is permitted on the following bands (over the entire> > > band unless otherwise indicated):> > >> > > UHF: 70 cm (420-450 MHz), ...> > >> > > Any hardware that might make that easy?> > >> > > up/down converters to 13cm?> >> > Are you sayong you want to operate on 13cm? Because that equipment is easy> > to come by.> >> > I am not so sure that operating SS at 70cm is a great idea. Maybe OFDM?> >> > _______________________________________________> > ham-80211 mailing list> > ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211> >> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 8> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:21:40 +0000> From: "Bill Vodall WA7NWP" <wa7nwp at jnos.org>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID:> <5abd436b0801281421n4783fe46ue1a81bf8cc1d79fe at mail.gmail.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > > > Pretty sleepy around here> >> > ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz {yawn}> > Sleep? Who has time to sleep??> > With the N800, XO, meraki's, CB-3, NSLU2, JNOS and basic Linux IP over> Packet (and Packet over UDP) I'm lucky to get 4 hours a night. The> list of interesting, educational and sometimes even useful projects> just keeps growing.> > 73> Bill - WA7NWP> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 9> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:24:37 -0600> From: Gerry Creager <gerry.creager at tamu.edu>> Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?> To: "TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11"> <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>> Message-ID: <479E5625.8050006 at tamu.edu>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed> > 4 hrs a night? Back when I was still doing medical research, anything > OVER 4 hrs sleep/night was charged against vacation!> > Bill Vodall WA7NWP wrote:> >>> Pretty sleepy around here> >> ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz {yawn}> > > > Sleep? Who has time to sleep??> > > > With the N800, XO, meraki's, CB-3, NSLU2, JNOS and basic Linux IP over> > Packet (and Packet over UDP) I'm lucky to get 4 hours a night. The> > list of interesting, educational and sometimes even useful projects> > just keeps growing.> > > > 73> > Bill - WA7NWP> > > > _______________________________________________> > ham-80211 mailing list> > ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211> > -- > Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu> Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University> Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.862.3982 FAX: 979.862.3983> Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843> > > > > ------------------------------> > _______________________________________________> ham-80211 mailing list> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211> > > End of ham-80211 Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2> ****************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080128/b75ed1f5/attachment.htm 

From benjamin.naber at 3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL  Tue Jan 29 19:13:05 2008
From: benjamin.naber at 3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL (Naber, Benjamin L. SPC)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:13:05 +0300
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
Message-ID: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>

Sleepy? Wow.
 
That's a real bummer. I'll have to crack my knuckles and figure out how to get the ball rolling again like I did for my club that was about as dead as the old folks walking in. Rough thing to say, but that's the way it was.
 
For one reason or another, a lot of folks were sitting in front of the TV instead of the radio or work bench, and even though this is only my second post, the idiot box is the main problem. I don't know what it is now because I joined the Army and now deployed to the stinky country of Iraq. If you spend more time in front of the TV than you do the work bench, I think you may want to disassemble the problem, or reallocate the asset for something useful.
 
I've been working on a project, just a draft right now, but will be manifesting into the real deal in a little while. I would like to know everyone experiences with different multi-level modulations like QPSK, 8-PSK and the others that are being used. I like the QPSK or 8-PSK as that is what we use for our satellite internet. 
 
What I'm working on is a TCP/IP setup that will have the functionality of a wireless router, but will have the functions amateurs like to see, and also be open source Linux so we can attract more computer people in here. Seeing how this a group with people who are computer oriented, there shouldn't be anyone griping "this is ham radio!" If you are one of them, then pay no mind as I pass you by.
 
If you are familiar with DD-WRT, it may have that setup as I like using that on my linksys and Motorola WRTs.
 
the main thing I like about this idea is that it will NOT require drivers on a computer to work so an old Toshiba Satellite 75MHz Laptop with an PCMCIA Ethernet port and TCP/IP support with Win3.1 will work.
 
~Benjamin, KB9LFZ
 

 
________________________________

From: ham-80211-bounces at lists.tapr.org on behalf of Bob Keyes
Sent: Mon 28-Jan-08 22:30
To: TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11
Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - what is the data world doing?



Pretty sleepy around here

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:

> Haven't seen any activity since I joined, has there been any for a while?
>
> ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ
>

_______________________________________________
ham-80211 mailing list
ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 5881 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080129/30a95db4/attachment.bin 

From dlj at bach.altaphon.com  Tue Jan 29 23:09:02 2008
From: dlj at bach.altaphon.com (David Josephson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:09:02 -0800
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea
In-Reply-To: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
Message-ID: <479FB20E.1080209@bach.altaphon.com>

Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:
>  
> I've been working on a project, just a draft right now, but will be manifesting into the real deal in a little while. I would like to know everyone experiences with different multi-level modulations like QPSK, 8-PSK and the others that are being used. I like the QPSK or 8-PSK as that is what we use for our satellite internet. 
>   
Experiences are one thing, actual parts availability and 
bang-for-the-buck might be different. QPSK and 8PSK work great, and 
gives a pretty good tradeoff between power and bandwidth requirements. 
You will probably end up using off-the-shelf 802.11 chipsets, just 
because they work so well and are ubiquitous. The collection of 
modulation modes in 802.11 a and g (BSPK, QPSK, 16QAM and 64QAM) offer a 
good set of options to choose from. The challenge is getting deep enough 
into the chipset to use the modem directly without having legal access 
to the chip maker's proprietary code.

Historically, 64QAM was what the telephone company settled on as the 
best compromise for long distance microwave hops. Your MILSATCOM stuff 
is mostly 32QAM although some systems go higher. Only if you're really 
short on power, and have excess bandwidth (or very low data rate 
requirements) would you want to choose PSK.
>  
> What I'm working on is a TCP/IP setup that will have the functionality of a wireless router, but will have the functions amateurs like to see, and also be open source Linux so we can attract more computer people in here. Seeing how this a group with people who are computer oriented, there shouldn't be anyone griping "this is ham radio!" If you are one of them, then pay no mind as I pass you by.
>  
> If you are familiar with DD-WRT, it may have that setup as I like using that on my linksys and Motorola WRTs.
That (and its cousins in the open and mostly-open source community) is a 
good start. The snag has always been the hardware abstraction layer that 
the chipsets need.
> the main thing I like about this idea is that it will NOT require drivers on a computer to work so an old Toshiba Satellite 75MHz Laptop with an PCMCIA Ethernet port and TCP/IP support with Win3.1 will work.
>   
That's a good start. But it has to be cheap, too.

73 de WA6NMF



From benjamin.naber at 3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL  Wed Jan 30 03:54:01 2008
From: benjamin.naber at 3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL (Naber, Benjamin L. SPC)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:54:01 +0300
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<479FB20E.1080209@bach.altaphon.com>
Message-ID: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D3@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>

Thats good info to know, thank you.
 
With the bandwidth requirements we have for 2m and 70cm, what modulation method would get the most effective throughput? Does having FEC lower that actual data throughput because more bits are being sent?
 
~Benjamin, KB9LFZ

________________________________

From: ham-80211-bounces at lists.tapr.org on behalf of David Josephson
Sent: Wed 30-Jan-08 02:09
To: TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11
Subject: Re: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea



Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:
> 
> I've been working on a project, just a draft right now, but will be manifesting into the real deal in a little while. I would like to know everyone experiences with different multi-level modulations like QPSK, 8-PSK and the others that are being used. I like the QPSK or 8-PSK as that is what we use for our satellite internet.
>  
Experiences are one thing, actual parts availability and
bang-for-the-buck might be different. QPSK and 8PSK work great, and
gives a pretty good tradeoff between power and bandwidth requirements.
You will probably end up using off-the-shelf 802.11 chipsets, just
because they work so well and are ubiquitous. The collection of
modulation modes in 802.11 a and g (BSPK, QPSK, 16QAM and 64QAM) offer a
good set of options to choose from. The challenge is getting deep enough
into the chipset to use the modem directly without having legal access
to the chip maker's proprietary code.

Historically, 64QAM was what the telephone company settled on as the
best compromise for long distance microwave hops. Your MILSATCOM stuff
is mostly 32QAM although some systems go higher. Only if you're really
short on power, and have excess bandwidth (or very low data rate
requirements) would you want to choose PSK.
> 
> What I'm working on is a TCP/IP setup that will have the functionality of a wireless router, but will have the functions amateurs like to see, and also be open source Linux so we can attract more computer people in here. Seeing how this a group with people who are computer oriented, there shouldn't be anyone griping "this is ham radio!" If you are one of them, then pay no mind as I pass you by.
> 
> If you are familiar with DD-WRT, it may have that setup as I like using that on my linksys and Motorola WRTs.
That (and its cousins in the open and mostly-open source community) is a
good start. The snag has always been the hardware abstraction layer that
the chipsets need.
> the main thing I like about this idea is that it will NOT require drivers on a computer to work so an old Toshiba Satellite 75MHz Laptop with an PCMCIA Ethernet port and TCP/IP support with Win3.1 will work.
>  
That's a good start. But it has to be cheap, too.

73 de WA6NMF

_______________________________________________
ham-80211 mailing list
ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 6077 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/ham-80211/attachments/20080130/9e32e950/attachment.bin 

From dlj at bach.altaphon.com  Wed Jan 30 06:07:05 2008
From: dlj at bach.altaphon.com (David Josephson)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:07:05 -0800
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea
In-Reply-To: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D3@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<479FB20E.1080209@bach.altaphon.com>
	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D3@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
Message-ID: <47A01409.9070509@altaphon.com>

Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:
> Thats good info to know, thank you.
>  
> With the bandwidth requirements we have for 2m and 70cm, what modulation method would get the most effective throughput? Does having FEC lower that actual data throughput because more bits are being sent?
>  
> ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ
>   
The most effective throughput is dependent on too many different 
parameters to throw a dart and say one method is better. What do you 
mean by "bandwidth requirements we have for 2m and 70cm"? What sort of 
traffic do you want to pass?

WA6NMF
>   




From esj at harvee.org  Wed Jan 30 06:13:23 2008
From: esj at harvee.org (Eric S. Johansson)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:13:23 -0500
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea
In-Reply-To: <47A01409.9070509@altaphon.com>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>	<479FB20E.1080209@bach.altaphon.com>	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D3@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<47A01409.9070509@altaphon.com>
Message-ID: <47A01583.40904@harvee.org>

David Josephson wrote:
>>   
> The most effective throughput is dependent on too many different 
> parameters to throw a dart and say one method is better. What do you 
> mean by "bandwidth requirements we have for 2m and 70cm"? What sort of 
> traffic do you want to pass?

why the focus on 2 m and 440.  I know the bands are virtually empty except for a 
brief period around rush hour but most that territory has been claimed.  The 220 
band is almost completely vacant except for empty repeaters  and we have a 
megahertz or so around to 19 specifically for data transmission (channelized, 
100 kHz wide channels).

---eric


-- 
Speech-recognition in use.  It makes mistakes, I correct some.



From bob at sinister.com  Wed Jan 30 06:53:05 2008
From: bob at sinister.com (Bob Keyes)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:53:05 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Ham-80211] Activity - comments and idea
In-Reply-To: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D3@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
References: <61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4CE@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801281430110.5800@dark.sinister.com>
	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D0@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
	<479FB20E.1080209@bach.altaphon.com>
	<61203A2BE9DCBE4699E905E018E6E6FC1CD4D3@3bct3idexch.3BCT3ID.ARMY.MIL>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58L0.0801300056450.18384@dark.sinister.com>



On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Naber, Benjamin L. SPC wrote:

>  With the bandwidth requirements we have for 2m and 70cm, what
> modulation method would get the most effective throughput? Does having
> FEC lower that actual data throughput because more bits are being sent?

> ~Benjamin, KB9LFZ

Benjamin,
I believe that the specific bandwidth usage patterns of your area will
greatly affect the appropriateness of an individual protocol. Those hams
in rural ares or areas with little restriction due to military uses will
have much greater freedom than others.

> > I've been working on a project, just a draft right now, but will be
> > manifesting into the real deal in a little while. I would like to know
> > everyone experiences with different multi-level modulations like QPSK,
> > 8-PSK and the others that are being used. I like the QPSK or 8-PSK as
> > that is what we use for our satellite internet.

Even the particular satellite you are using will effect what is the the
most effective modulation scheme. Geosynchronous satellites have a higher
RTT, which affects the applicability of short packets with
acknowledgements. LEO satellites will have less delay, but may be harder
to track, and when they approach horizons of course will suffer distortion
due to more atmosphere to penetrate.

> Experiences are one thing, actual parts availability and
> bang-for-the-buck might be different. QPSK and 8PSK work great, and
> gives a pretty good tradeoff between power and bandwidth requirements.

That, in the end, is what really counts - how much can we get as
'commodity parts' and how much can we bend them to our needs or will?

> You will probably end up using off-the-shelf 802.11 chipsets, just
> because they work so well and are ubiquitous.

But the abilities of the chipsets, and our ability to 'bend' them, vary
greatly.

> The collection of
> modulation modes in 802.11 a and g (BSPK, QPSK, 16QAM and 64QAM) offer a
> good set of options to choose from. The challenge is getting deep enough
> into the chipset to use the modem directly without having legal access
> to the chip maker's proprietary code.

There's much happening with regards to the AR5K driver in Linux. There's a
move from the 'closed' HAL, provided by Atheros, towards the
reverse-engineered OpenHal and its relatives in the BSD and Linux worlds.
There is also much legal uncertainty here, as the US Gov't. requires that
spreading codes are standardized for DSSS, though I am not sure what
restrictions are in place for OFDM.

> Historically, 64QAM was what the telephone company settled on as the
> best compromise for long distance microwave hops. Your MILSATCOM stuff
> is mostly 32QAM although some systems go higher. Only if you're really
> short on power, and have excess bandwidth (or very low data rate
> requirements) would you want to choose PSK.
> >
> > What I'm working on is a TCP/IP setup that will have the functionality
> > of a wireless router, but will have the functions amateurs like to
> > see, and also be open source Linux so we can attract more computer
> > people in here. Seeing how this a group with people who are computer
> > oriented, there shouldn't be anyone griping "this is ham radio!" If
> > you are one of them, then pay no mind as I pass you by.

I think that anything that is not open-source (be it BSD or GPL) is not
ham radio. We have no use for proprietary schemes and they should not be
tolerated or even allowed. Considering this, we should try to move as much
Amateur Radio activity towards FOSS as possible (too much of it is
Microsoft centric, and this is a real problem for me).

> > If you are familiar with DD-WRT, it may have that setup as I like
> > using that on my linksys and Motorola WRTs.

I prefer OpenWRT which is why I develop under it. I believe it has a
greater future than DD-WRT because of its OS redesign from the ground up.
I don't fault you on a philsophical level for using DD-WRT though.

> That (and its cousins in the open and mostly-open source community) is a
> good start. The snag has always been the hardware abstraction layer that
> the chipsets need.
> > the main thing I like about this idea is that it will NOT require
> > drivers on a computer to work so an old Toshiba Satellite 75MHz Laptop
> > with an PCMCIA Ethernet port and TCP/IP support with Win3.1 will work.

Eh, I've got a big stack of such old laptops (I actually just chucked
anything that was less than 90 Mhz!) and I'd like to find uses for them -
but these can be on HF with less demanding protocols.

> That's a good start. But it has to be cheap, too.

Cheap is crucial. But how cheap? There should be a sliding scale of
expense that translates to performance. I'd like to think that with a lot
of elbow-grease and $50, a station can be assembled which will share some
compatibility with thousand dollar stations. The reason for this is both
from idea that some people may not have as great an interest or need to
have powerful stations, to those people who do not have the economic means
to afford more expensive hardware.

What bothers me right now, is the separation of the open-source Community
Wifi movement and that of Amateur Radio.  There is a an amazing amount of
enthusiasm and energy in the former, but experience and resources in the
latter.

At my club (Harvard Wireless Club - world's oldest station!), the emphasis
has been for some years on HF and contest operation. Tese are good folks,
but the number of undergraduates involved in the club in reaching
dangerously low levels.  I am told that other clubs are in serious danger,
and we may lose them entirely unless their decline can be stopped. I
believe this can only happen by amateurs seeking out and adopting the new
generation of digital hams. I don't want this to be interpreted as saying
I want to ban AM & SSB on HF, but I believe that digital radio shoudl be
acknowledged as the future of amateur radio and awarded spectrum as such.
But digital hams must make sure that our DSPs can detect analog modes and
operate with the minimal amount of interferences as possible. I think we
can do this. CPU power and DSP methods, along with speech recognition, are
growing by leaps and bounds. But such CPU power does not come cheap, which
is why we continue to need bands which are digital-only, for those
stations which are less sophisticated (because they need to be cheap).

I know I am going on at some length here, please forgive me, as I have had
too much coffee.

I believe that Amateur Radio must continue to justify its existance and
its allocations in light of the vast demand and monetary value of
bandwidth (even though, per radio act of 1934, bandwidth is not to be
sold!).  We must do this in a non-competition basis with commercial
providers, especially as those providers are paying more and more for
spectrum. Greedy governments will be increasingly casting eyes on
underused amateur spectrum in search of money. We must prove that the
spectrum is being used, and is being used wisely. This will involve some
rather introspection by the amateur radio community. These philsopical
arguements can go hand-in-hand with those in the FOSS (Free Open SOurce
Software) community. For instance, is it appropriate for a commercial
entity to utilize amateur radio spectrum when the information they
transmit is freely available to others without charge? How useful to
the public does this information have to be in order to to be a legitimate
use of the spectrum?

I have thought of this issue in relation to sensor networks. I believe
that meteorological information and climatological sensor information is a
legitimately public use of the amateur spectrum. I have done some
preliminary design of some possibly radical changes to sensor networks, as
a result of my involvement with sensor networks projects at Harvard
(CitySense.Net - though I am no longer employed by them). But what about
other information? If I were to say, put a sensor on amateur spectrum
which provided information on the water level of a certain reservoir,
would this not be more appropriate for a commercial or municipal license?
Or what about atmospheric carbon dioxide levels downstream from a
coal-powered utility plant, which would be primarily for the use of the
owners of that plant in proving their compliance with various regulatory
reuirements? But as it could also be used by their critics, and
atmospheric researchers in general, is it still legitimate, even though it
is "boring" to the rest of the amateur radio community? Perhaps these
issues can be addressed by considering how much of the valuable spectrum
they consume, and what benefit they produce - but do we want to make every
sensor transponder open to the bureaucracy and competitive sniping that
such policies might entail?

If fashioned correctly, a new policy might not only protect amateur
spectrum, but to increase it. For instance, I would think that an
automated digital NVIS system would be of great pragmatic value, while
also allowing amateur use and maintenance.

Lastly, I would like to find a way of FUNDING such research an
implementation of this infrastructure which may be useful to both amateur
and scientific use. Consider the advantage of volume-produced digital NVIS
gear, for instance. Of course, as a researcher in digital radio
communications, I;d like to think of some of that funding paying my rent
and an occasional conference, be it formal or a beer-gathering with
friends.

73,
Bob Keyes
N1YRK