<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1543" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Maiko,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Do you feel the proposed A.IP protocol would
reduce link overhead on HF?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>73 de Jack</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=maiko@pcs.mb.ca href="mailto:maiko@pcs.mb.ca">maiko@pcs.mb.ca</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=nos-bbs@lists.tapr.org
href="mailto:nos-bbs@lists.tapr.org">TAPR xNOS Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 22, 2006 9:40
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [nos-bbs] A.X25 then, A.IP now
??? - thinking outloud (fwd)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>A bit of history first, to give you all an idea of where
I'm leading ...<BR><BR>During the 90's, I designed, developed, and installed
automated banking<BR>machine and point of sale networks, using a software
*switch* to route<BR>transactions to the appropriate authorizing institutions,
etc.<BR><BR>Many of the ATMs (ABMs) used the X25 protocol to communicate to
the<BR>switch. The whole concept of X25 was really cool (still is) and I
got<BR>to really liking it, becoming quite experienced in setting it up,
and<BR>writing/porting comm drivers for a variety of different Unix
flavors.<BR><BR>That probably explains why packet radio (A.X25) grew on
me.<BR><BR>At the tail end of the 90's, our company saw a new breed of ATMs
(ABMs)<BR>coming out in the market. In particular, NCR (NDC), was starting to
ship<BR>units that gave us the option of using TCP or UDP over IP, instead
of<BR>the usual X25 protocol. This was a turning point, and for many of
our<BR>customers that could afford it, X25 was on the way out, IP was
the<BR>new way of doing it.<BR><BR>Warranted, alot of new customers could not
afford to purchase new<BR>ATMs (ABMs), so X25 was still in use here and there,
but then again,<BR>alot of the used atms only had SDLC or BISYNC to offer,
making X25<BR>less popular anyways (from my experience).<BR><BR>Here's the
main point I want to bring up !<BR><BR> In the amateur radio field, A.X25
(packet radio) was created from<BR> the X25 specification. I'm surprised
that no one has come up with<BR> an A.IP (ip over radio) spec to parallel
the industry movement from<BR> the X25 protocol to the IP protocol. Or
has someone brought it up ?<BR><BR>When things settle down, and winter starts,
one of my projects is<BR>to perhaps implement an A.IP protocol (actually
nothing more than<BR>raw IP with a SOURCE CALL and maybe ONE DIGI field). The
nature of<BR>IP really only requires us to id ourselves I would think. That
should<BR>make it legal, right ?<BR><BR>Implementing it would be very easy. I
should think we could continue<BR>to use EXISTING tncs, running either KISS or
SMACK firmware, to make<BR>this work. KISS just delimits the data that the tnc
is putting out or<BR>getting in, right ?<BR><BR>Of course A.IP would have to
be on a dedicated non A.X25 frequency,<BR>unless there was agreement between
the A.X25 spec and A.IP to have<BR>some type of flag at the very first byte of
data.<BR><BR>Anyways, just some thoughts. It would be neat and alot more
usefull<BR>with the modern days apps out there, to have literally raw IP
going<BR>out and coming in a TNC. I think so anyways ...<BR><BR>I'd like to
have comments on this, what do you all think ?<BR><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Maiko
Langelaar / VE4KLM<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>