From: Terry Dawson (terhi.victor@logonet.com)
Date: Sun Jan 20 2002 - 05:43:51 EET
Riley Williams wrote:
> I can understand your explanation, but have seen too many cases where
> development was hindered by unwarranted assumptions that a particular
> manufacturer's hardware is only compatible with other examples of that
> particular type of hardware produced by the same manufacturer. As an
> example of this, I will point out that the US telephone service once
> propagated that very rumour about its modems, claiming that its modems
> were the standard, and the US Government eventually succeeded in giving
> them a well deserved rap over the knuckles for doing so.
I don't think anyone here doesn't understand that. What I don't understand is
what point you're trying to make? If people wanted to run IP over PACTOR for a
point to point configuration they could do it today very easily, just set the
two ends up for an 8-bit clean connection and run SLIP or PPP over the top. THe
only challenge involved is handover, but there are ways of resolving that. That
isn't the point, isn't what is wanted, isn't what is being talked about, isn't
what SCS have implemented.
What we're talking about here is providing a means of utilising the PTC-II in
such a way that it allows PACTOR users the ability to connect into the Linux
node. The IP comments were sideline.
regards
Terry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
the body of a message to vdpjs.csxdi@roskapostia.tunk.net
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jan 20 2002 - 05:50:26 EET