QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/tcp/930291.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 21KB

Date: Tue,  9 Nov 93 04:30:02 PST
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #291
To: tcp-group-digest


TCP-Group Digest            Tue,  9 Nov 93       Volume 93 : Issue  291

Today's Topics:
                           campus and ka9q
                         Campus Net (2 msgs)
           Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now (6 msgs)
                     NOS FTP breaks 3B2 (2 msgs)
                   Re- TCP broadcast storm (2 msgs)
                      TCP-Group Digest V93 #286

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>.
Subscription requests to <[e-mail]>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 10:51:42 -0600 (CST)
From: "Bill Walker" <[e-mail]>
Subject: campus and ka9q
To: [e-mail]

Many thanks for all of the really helpful and thoughtful
notes that I received concerning our campus networking problems.

To summarize, most respondents suggested:

 qvtnet in some form
   or
 NCSA stuff

As a uucp site (no off-campus FTP!) we have managed to find all of this stuff
on uunet, and copy it via uucp.  We'll test it and let folks
know how it worked out.

I really appreciate the help!

73 de Bill W5GFE

--
Bill Walker Ph.D.
Chairman, Dept. of Computer Science
East Central University
Ada, Oklahoma 74820-6899

e-mail:  [e-mail]
phone:   [phone] ext. 594
FAX:     [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 07:15:52 -0600 (CST)
From: Steve Sampson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Campus Net
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] says:

> If you are searching for a program with telnet and ftp clients working
> in Microsoft Windows try WinQVTNet,

I tried this program at version 3, don't know what it is now,
but the screen writing on telnet was excrutiatingly (sp?) slow.
Other than that it looked pretty promising.
---
Steve

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 14:31:47 EST
From: "Ashok Aiyar" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Campus Net
To: [e-mail]

On Mon, 8 Nov 1993 07:15:52 -0600 (CST, Steve Sampson wrote:

>
>[e-mail] says:
>
>> If you are searching for a program with telnet and ftp clients working
>> in Microsoft Windows try WinQVTNet,
>
>I tried this program at version 3, don't know what it is now,
>but the screen writing on telnet was excrutiatingly (sp?) slow.
>Other than that it looked pretty promising.
>---
>Steve


Later versions of WinQVT/net have included Asynchronous scrolling,
which makes things somewhat faster.  The latest version of
WinQVTnet is 3.94, and it is available in Winsock-16, Winsock-32,
and packet driver versions.

QVTnet is archived at:

biochemistry.bioc.cwru.edu (129.22.152.44) in /pub/qvtnet

Chloe Carter of QPC Software ([e-mail]) is
kind enough to upload updates there directly.

Best wishes,
Ashok

--
Ashok Aiyar                        Email: [e-mail]
Department of Biochemistry           Tel: [phone]
CWRU School of Medicine              Fax: [phone]
MIME Enclosures OK

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 09:11:37 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Bob Van Valzah, ke9yq)
Subject: Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now
To: [e-mail]

Let's take Phil's comments a few steps further for a moment:

>I've seen how PacTel builds cell sites in California, and
>quite frankly I would sooner place my money on them staying operational
>after a major earthquake than on the average ham repeater.

Ten or twenty years from now, Moto's Iridum satellites (or some equivalent)
will be up.  With a "phone" that costs less than an HT, anyone will be able
to pass traffic out of a disaster site from battery power with a
self-contained, hand-held device.  How will amateur emergency service then
be distinguished from that provided by Red Cross volunteers holding these
phones?

I'm a strong advocate Amateur to Internet links (I've been running one for
2-1/2 years) and digital communication in general.  Emergency power for
amateur packet systems is a good idea for now.

However, I ask the above question because I think that in the long term,
the emphasis on emergency service in amateur radio will diminish.  That'll
leave the "experimental" and "advancing the state of the radio art"
emphases.

Maybe there's something I'm missing here (and if so, you can probably
convince me I'm all wet).


73, Bob, ke9yq

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

Date: Mon, 08 Nov 93 16:08:17 EST
From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now
To: [e-mail]

>  With a "phone" that costs less than an HT, anyone will be able
> to pass traffic out of a disaster site from battery power with a
> self-contained, hand-held device.  How will amateur emergency service then
> be distinguished from that provided by Red Cross volunteers holding these
> phones?

One difference is that telephone-like devices are point-to-point,
while your usual amateur or public safety operations are multipoint,
either by simplex transmissions, duplex repeaters or trunked-radio
"talk groups".

I mention this because of a comment that I read in a news story on the
train accident that occured a few weeks ago.  One worker on the scene
bemoaned the fact that while they had cell phones in use, no on know
what was really going on because they had no way of monitoring the
other communications!

It may be that commercial systems of the future will be able to handle
"conference" calls like this.

Louis A. Mamakos    [e-mail]
UUNET Technologies, Inc.   uunet!louie
3110 Fairview Park Dr., Suite 570  Voice) [phone]
Falls Church, Va 22042    Fax)   [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 21:02:25 GMT
From: John Trickey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now
To: Bob Van Valzah <[e-mail]>

Bob,

I know this is getting off line for the group but you've touched a subject
close to my heart as I am a group controller for the service here in the
UK (Raynet).

In "Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now" ( 9:11, Mon Nov 8, 1993)
  Bob Van Valzah <[e-mail]>, ke9yq) wrote
>
> >I've seen how PacTel builds cell sites in California, and
> >quite frankly I would sooner place my money on them staying operational
> >after a major earthquake than on the average ham repeater.
>
> Ten or twenty years from now, Moto's Iridum satellites (or some equivalent)
> will be up.  With a "phone" that costs less than an HT, anyone will be able
> to pass traffic out of a disaster site from battery power with a
> self-contained, hand-held device.  How will amateur emergency service then
> be distinguished from that provided by Red Cross volunteers holding these
> phones?

This is always the argument for why amateur emergency comms are doomed.
In truth, you are looking at the wrong problem. A not too distant example
highlighted this. I refer to Lockerbie where Raynet was called into assist
in comms. It was not because the the normal infrastructure had been destroyed.
OK, some work had to be done to repair damage but Cellphones and PMR were all
available and the PTT quickly installed new links. But Raynet were still
needed...Why, because no matter what capacity was installed, it was just
not sufficient to cope with the traffic. Its not the bandwidth which amateurs
supply that is important, its the way in which its used. Public channels are
just that and every man and his dog will try to use them. Hams carried
essential messages because the regulated net provided an environment in
which transmission was guaranteed. In 20 years time, I don't think things
will be that much different. We just will not have enough ironmongery/bandwidth
in the sky to cope with that sort of load.

That leads me also to conclude that amprnet<->internet gateways are a
good thing as we can regulate the traffic we pass. I suppose its a case of
any port in a storm (pun intended).

With apologies to tcpip-ers....
73, John

--

+------------------------------------+------------------------------------+
+                Work                +             Play                   +
+ Internet:  [e-mail]        + Internet: [e-mail]        +
+                                    + Amprnet:  [e-mail]      +
+                                    + BBS:      G4REV@GB7LOB.#11.GBR.EU  +
+------------------------------------+------------------------------------+
+                             Intel free zone                             +
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 17:35:37 -0500
From: [e-mail] (C. Harald Koch)
Subject: Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now
To: [e-mail] (Bob Van Valzah ke9yq)

> Ten or twenty years from now, Moto's Iridum satellites (or some equivalent)
> will be up.  With a "phone" that costs less than an HT, anyone will be able
> to pass traffic out of a disaster site from battery power with a
> self-contained, hand-held device.  How will amateur emergency service then
> be distinguished from that provided by Red Cross volunteers holding these
> phones?

And just like the existing wire-based phone system, it'll break under load
during an Emergency.

The phone system doesn't (usually) break because it's physically damaged;
the Phone Companies are very good at building failsafes. Instead, the phone
system collapses under the load of every person trying to use their phone at
the same time during an emergency.

Iridium will suffer exactly the same load problems, and so will be useless
for the same reasons.

--
C. Harald Koch, Network Analyst | "Cable is not a luxury, since many areas have
Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON | poor TV reception".  - Mayor, Tucson AZ, 1989
[e-mail]                   |    [ apparently, good TV reception is a basic
[e-mail]            |        necessity -- at least in Tucson  -kl ]

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 18:35:56 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now
To: "[e-mail]"[e-mail]

Just imagine 20,000 people trying to access Iridium simultaneously! :-}

Also, how many of these cellular sites are linked via light pipe?  They
tend to break just like water and gas pipes.

Erich Muschinske
AX.25:   KA6AMD @ WA6YBN.#SOCA.CA.USA.NA
Internet:  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 20:50:05 PST
From: algedi!kb7roe (kb7roe)
Subject: Ham Emergency Service 20 Years From Now
To: [e-mail]

Bob Van Valzah ke9yq writes:


>Let's take Phil's comments a few steps further for a moment:

>>I've seen how PacTel builds cell sites in California, and
>>quite frankly I would sooner place my money on them staying operational
>>after a major earthquake than on the average ham repeater.

>Ten or twenty years from now, Moto's Iridum satellites (or some equivalent)
>will be up.  With a "phone" that costs less than an HT, anyone will be able
>to pass traffic out of a disaster site from battery power with a
>self-contained, hand-held device.  How will amateur emergency service then
>be distinguished from that provided by Red Cross volunteers holding these
>phones?

Bob is both right and somewhat off base with regard to Iridium.
The first Iridium prototypes will fly in about 2 years, and the
satellite constellation will be up in much less than 10 years, more
like 5 or 6.  Ground equipment around the world is another matter.
In areas of dense population, the Iridium handsets will go through the
local cellular net, so if say an earthquake takes down phones in L.A.,
then Iridium could be saturated, and the Red Cross volunteers might
not get through.  So don't imagine that the need for emergency communications
will go away because we will have one or more global communciation
satellite networks in the coming years!

--
De David, KB7ROE (Runs On Electricity)
TCP/IP address: kb7roe.ampr.org
AX.25  address: [e-mail]
also on Internet: [e-mail]
Internet to tcp/ip: algedi![e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 21:13:55 -0600 (CST)
From: Steve Sampson <[e-mail]>
Subject: NOS FTP breaks 3B2
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] writes:
>>On Mon, 8 Nov 1993 07:15:52 -0600 (CST, Steve Sampson wrote:
>>
>>[e-mail] says:
>>
>>> If you are searching for a program with telnet and ftp clients working
>>> in Microsoft Windows try WinQVTNet,
>>
>>I tried this program at version 3, don't know what it is now,
>>but the screen writing on telnet was excrutiatingly (sp?) slow.
>>Other than that it looked pretty promising.
>
>Later versions of WinQVT/net have included Asynchronous scrolling,
>which makes things somewhat faster.  The latest version of
>WinQVTnet is 3.94, and it is available in Winsock-16, Winsock-32,
>and packet driver versions.
>
>QVTnet is archived at:
>
>biochemistry.bioc.cwru.edu (129.22.152.44) in /pub/qvtnet
>
>Chloe Carter of QPC Software ([e-mail]) is
>kind enough to upload updates there directly.
>
>Best wishes,
>Ashok

OK, I give up. . .  Recently all the NOS versions connected to the
Internet (I've tried) don't FTP with the WIN3B TCP/IP Software on
the 3B2.  It seems to center around the 220 command.  NOS seems to
be sending many of these, where there used to be just one.  The
effect here is that I get an ftp> prompt faster than normal.  If I
do a bunch of "pwd" (null commands) I get to see the many MOTD's that
NOS folks seem proud of; 2 lines at a time.  Maybe there's some default
220 length switch on the 3B2 I haven't found yet.

Then at the end it says to login with USER again.  Since I don't have
source to the 3B2 FTP code, I can't bypass this.  But there must be some
obtuse way of working around this I haven't found yet.  I'm about to
read the RFC and see what NOS is doing that's different from the 3B2,
and maybe resolve the error one way or another.  I also tried BSD Unix
and it seems to just give all the 220's at once, and seems to work.  Your
system merely says it's unavailable during business hours, so I couldn't
check.  Maybe if all this 220 bo-jive was before the login??

Anyway, the result is that the 3b2 can't FTP to NOS anymore.
---
Steve

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 20:45:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <[e-mail]>
Subject: NOS FTP breaks 3B2
To: Steve Sampson <[e-mail]>

The 3B2 networking code is broke, broke, broke.  Get yourself a recent
copy of the BSD FTP client software and port it. You might as well do
telnet, rlogin, and the appropriate servers while you're at it ...

--lyndon

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 08:10:22 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Bob Braden)
Subject: Re- TCP broadcast storm
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]

  *>
  *> Bob:
  *>
  *> The Morris Worm did not bring down the Internet.  The Internet was very
  *> efficient and effective in delivering the Worm attack to numerous end
  *> hosts, many of which became too busy to do useful work, and were re-attacked
  *> when local efforts were made to clear them.  However, neither the Internet
  *> routers, nor the lines were in anyway attacked or out of service due to the
  *> Morris Worm.
  *>
  *> --jon.
  *>

Jon,

Thanks for correcting me.  I know that well, of course.  I was using
"Internet" in the colloquial sense, to mean the service seen by users.
As an Internet user, I was unable to carry on my usual business until
all the worm-caused host knots were untied, perhaps a day of lost
work.  Do broadcast storms caused by faulty host software fall into the
same grey area?

Bob

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 08:43:10 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Jon Postel)
Subject: Re- TCP broadcast storm
To: [e-mail]

Bob:

Well, Ethernet broadcast storms are caused by the hosts misbehaving, but
they behave in a way that overloads the network, so that other traffic
from other hosts does not get through.  In the Morris Worm situation, i
don't think the network was overloaded, and traffic from uninfected hosts
did get transmitted normally.

Certainly from the end users point of view it hardly matters if it is the
network that is broken or it is the hosts that are broken or even if it is
the database (or whatever) services that are broken.  From the end users
point of view, it doesn't work, and the "it" is the Internet.

--jon.

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 17:25:03 -0500
From: [e-mail] (C. Harald Koch)
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #286
To: [e-mail] (Phil Karn)

> Funny you should mention the San Francisco (actually Loma Prieta)
> earthquake. The Internet stayed up the whole time, although a few hosts
> went off due to power failures. And it carried quite a bit of traffic in
> the "health and welfare" category that couldn't be carried on the
> telephone because of call blocking.

There's even a mailing list dedicated to this topic now:

NETWORKS IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ("nets") DIGEST
#1 - 6 May 1993

1)  INTRODUCING "NETS"

I guess you could call this an experiment within an experiment.

The first experiment has to do with the use of data networks in
emergency management.  The California Office of Emergency Services
(OES) has been exploring the power and perils of this medium within
the state's emergency-management system for about a year now.

As part of that experiment, we started a discussion on the subject of
"Networking In Emergency Management."  The participation in that
discussion became so great that we had to shift to a moderated-
forum format.

Making a virtue out of necessity, we decided to open up the discussion
to a wider audience around the Internet.  Our focus in on applications
of networks and networked computers (of all types) in the practice of
emergency management.

We invite you to join our exploration of this important topic.  Please
see the end of this issue for the technical details.

- Art Botterell
  California Office of Emergency Services

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

"Networks In Emergency Management" is a moderated forum on the
use of computer networks and networked computers in the practice of
emergency management.

Opinions and representations are the writers' own, and their
inclusion in this forum does not imply endorsement by the State
of California or the California Office of Emergency Services.

Comments for inclusion in this forum may be mailed to
"[e-mail]".  We'll include appropriate ones, as space
permits, in an upcoming issue.

To join the "nets" mailing list, please send e-mail to
"[e-mail]" with the word "subscribe" in the text
of the message.  To remove yourself from the list, send mail to
that same address with the word "unsubscribe" in the text.

Back issues and other text files are available from our e-mail
server.  For information on how to use the server, send mail to
"[e-mail]" with a message body of "help".  For an
index of available files, send mail to the same address with a
message body of "index".

Please DO NOT send subscription or other server requests to
"[e-mail]"; that address is for submissions to the forum
only.

Off-line comments and suggestions may be addressed to
"[e-mail]" (Art Botterell).  In an emergency, you can reach
us by phone at [phone].

--[END]--

--
C. Harald Koch, Network Analyst | "Cable is not a luxury, since many areas have
Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON | poor TV reception".  - Mayor, Tucson AZ, 1989
[e-mail]                   |    [ apparently, good TV reception is a basic
[e-mail]            |        necessity -- at least in Tucson  -kl ]

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

End of TCP-Group Digest V93 #291
******************************
******************************