[nos-bbs] Re: AXUDP and APRS

[Bill Vodall]

> But you see here is where things are philosophically different between
> the APRS world and the Conventional packet world. APRS allows for blind
> exchanges of data and links between systems, where as the conventional
> packet systems tend to caution on the side of security (ie, AX*P tunnels
> are pre-arranged and there are IP address checks in place, etc). Clients
> do not negotiate for an AX*P tunnel out of the blue.

Ah - that's the point.  APRS is growing and has a substantial following.
Conventional packet is about dead.  Winlink is growing and it is very
similar to APRS with a simple RF or web based authentication system.
The additional caution and security is not needed and is severly
hindering the use of the system.

I've given up on the ampr.org system.  Far too complicated and outdated.
For all that disagree -- send me an Email from an AMPR.ORG system on
RF...   It used to be straight forward.  Today it'll take a week to make
it happen IF YOU'RE LUCKY!

The AX*P system is a good mix.  It's packet - which has the "fun factor"
and interfaces well to the real world (AKA The Internet) and to amateur
RF.  It's a good way for folks to contribute resources from their broadband
home setup with the local and regional communities.

> BUT wait, are we getting ahead of ourselves ?
> 
> What would we use this new AX*P system for ?

Communications.  Experimentation.  Chat.   Everything and anything.

> What's the plan Bill ?

I have a local "plan" and an idea of how it can be universally leveraged.

Locally, I'm active with what's left of the packet and TCP/IP communities.  We're
making a bit of RF noise with packets and a few experimental systems are being
worked on.

On the other hand I'm also talking a lot with the Section Manager
and Section Emergency Coordinator about what hams are doing.  It always
seems we could be doing so much more if we made better use of digital
technologies.

Putting that all together has given me a personal goal of building
a small network of Linux servers for the Section with
a TCP/IP "backbone" and RF ports to local neighborhoods.   My idea is to
use Netrom (to start with) as a "User Friendly" resource identification technology.
Anybody logging in to these servers and bringing up a NODES list would see
all the other servers and resources for the Section.

That's why I'm interested in getting AXUDP working to provide a transport for
the Netrom (or AX25) packets between the servers.

My goal is a small clean "working" network.  Just local and neighboring region
nodes -- that all work.   Not the flood of thousands that usually don't work
from the existing AX*P system.

How's *NOS fit in here?   The backbone servers would be basic Linux
systems with AX25.  *NOS has some unique capabilities that makes it
useful in the layer above the core servers.  I'd imagine some of the
core servers would also be running *NOS and other user clients that
didn't want the battle of a full Linux box would make use of it.

One of the keys to make this successful is that it has to be easier then
it is now.   Any techniques we develop towards that end will help similar
networks elsewhere.

> 

We do have some incredible technology here.  If we can make the initiation
fee a bit lower it'll be a good thing...

> Maiko Langelaar / VE4KLM

Bill - WA7NWP