[nos-bbs] Understanding xNOS and other network software

[maiko at pcs.mb.ca]

Finally found some time to try and answer this.

Rick wrote :

> 1. How does JNOS2 compare to other NOS's such as MFNOS?

To me they are almost all the same, with minor differences
here and there. Any *significant* differences are usually because
the particular author or maintainer of the release wanted something
for their own fancy. It's too complicated to list every single
difference, even the big ones.

MFNOS has very meticulous code, compared to the others. That's
a compliment to Barry. MFNOS has not been ported to Linux, it is
meant to run in a DOS only environment. It will of course run
in a DOS window on OS/2, Windows 95,98,NT,2000,XP, or DOSemu
on any linux platform. JNOS is also a DOS product initially,
but has been ported to Linux, so it will run without the
memory constraints imposed in a DOS environment. There is
also TNOS (which I am a cvs developer for, but haven't had
time lately). It's based on JNOS and Brian put his own ideas
and those of others into it the way he thought it should.

Each of the NOS variants have bits and pieces from other
variants. WAMPES is yet another NOS type platform, which
I'm sure Thomas can tell us more about. Thomas are you
there ?

> Is there much difference or is it possible the amateur
> community can come up with one focused xNOS that can maximize
> the limited resources we have ...

If all you want is a TELpac style node, than ANY of the NOS's
will do fine. MFNOS, JNOS, TNOS, Wampes. I don't believe the
differences between the distros will be a big deal here.

> 2. When do you use xNOS and when do you use other networking
> programs, e.g., FPAC ?

FPAC (enhanced ROSE if I am not mistaken), FlexNet, NET/ROM, INP3 (or
super NETROM i suppose) are all networking protocols that ride on top
of AX.25 in one form or another. You use these protocols to build your
basic packet network from one end of your state to the other.

xNOS is more a service provider, that is integrated into the packet
network. It too has packet radio ports, it understands NET/ROM, but it
can provide bulletin board services, TCP/IP services (telnet, ftp, email,
finger, pop3, etc), Internet Gateway services, converse (chat room)
servers. xNOS in many ways allows you to integrate the packet world
with the internet world, although it does not need the internet to
be useful. xNOS is a node, digipeater, bbs, internet gateway, chat
room (on packet), etc - stuff that you normally would not put into
each single node that makes up your packet network.

I hope that kind of explains it. I'm sure Barry and others could
explain it much better than myself, but that's the way I see it.

> 3. Two of those networking programs that seem to be the
> best are FPAC and FlexNet. Can anyone critique these ..

Depends who you talk to. There are advocates for INP3 as well,
and you will still find an abundance of Kantronic NODE units out
there. I'm in no position to critique them, I think it comes to
how comfortable people are with them. I personally like FlexNet,
because I've used it, and I'm not unhappy with it. Some say that
FlexNet is too aggresive with it's network management on slow
frequencies, others say the opposite. One has to be carefull on
how they word things in this department, and you will find that
it's easy for groups to get emotional about this topic :-)

> why use one over the other.

Ask around, read the technical literature, then make a decision.

If you want to setup a TELpac node, you could use xNOS as your
internet gateway (to provide telnet and/or email services), and
have a packet network of digipeaters / nodes running Kantronics
nodes, or the old old TheNet nodes, or FlexNet nodes, or what
ever you choose to build your packet network side with.

In other words, both xNOS and the *other* stuff ...

> 4. For someone who just wants to use a network for mail (perhaps
> h routed mail and internet e-mail), could you just use a program
> such as AirMail and you only need someone else to maintain the
> xNOS part?

Sure, but that's really new and somewhat experimental. Airmail is
a popular (and thee client of choice) for an end user out in the field
or on a boat or whatever to send mail through a winlink server.

>From a technical point of view, xNOS can serve an AirMail user just
as good as a WinLink server. WinLink has the upper hand at this stage,
because it uses more *modern* forwarding protocols, and is designed
for the high speed HF stuff.

I have made JNOS 2.0 forward with an winlink server using an SCS PTC
operating in Pactor III mode. It rocks ! BUT it's still experimental,
as is the Kantronic host mode which I will soon be releasing. I'm using
AMTOR to develop it (because all I have is a KAM version 5.0 firmware),
which can't even do Pactor. But AMTOR will still get through, it's just
a bit slower that's all.

The host mode for Kantronics should have been written for JNOS years
ago !!! I don't understand why nobody did that. The fact that I am
spending ALOT of effort on JNOS means that I still think it has the
potential to be a modern piece of software.

> 5. If you don't really have an emergency digital network anymore,
> like in our area, and you would like to rebuild it, what would be
> a particularly good way to go ?

I'm still struggling with that one, even though I'm a digital DEC,
district emergency coordinator, for our provincial ARES group.

You need to figure out the types of emergencies you think you will
be needing to deal with. Around here it's just flooding, or the *odd*
severe weather. Alot of that is very local to an area, so even if we
had a province wide packet network, it would probably get ignored.

Being that our mandate from a provincial level is infrastructure
support, temporary POINT to POINT high speed links would be setup
to deal with the local issues, instead of using the regular packet
network.

The only other emergency situation we might have to deal with would
be outbreaks or pandemics, and then logistics (available people) would
be the big issue.

I may have gone off on a tangent here, but it came to mind.

73 de Maiko Langelaar / VE4KLM
http://www.langelaar.net