Hello Roger,
Interesting line of thought.
Roger P wrote:
> Please forgive me if this is a silly question!
>
> Is it possible to network two W98 PCs via a radio link using TNCs? I
Theoretically, yes. There are two options: 1) "Direct Cable Connection" under
Start/Programs/Accessories/Communications; 2) To create a network adapter under
Start/Settings/Control Panel/Networking and add an adapter type "Infrared com
port or dongle"/"Generic infrared com port or dongle". The first option is not
standard networking and may not be visible/reachable by Writelog. The second
option will work, unless Win98 is looking for special protocal from the adapter
that it thinks will be put on the com port. In the second option Writelog should
be able to see the network after following the remainder of the setup
instructions in the Writelog help text and manual. I have not actually tried
this!
> appreciate that the link would be REALLY slow, and I think that packet radio
Painfully slow! It might be so slow that Win98 may think there is no connection.
The best bet would be to use at least 9600 baud on a quiet channel (above 2m).
That is the slowest speed that I have seen that functions for Dialup Networking
with my company's remote access. Even at 9600 baud it is painfully slow (typical
packet connection is half duplex, subtract overhead....real throughput
~2500-3500 baud.) The only possible functionality over that slow a link with
Writlog would be to pass contacts for a multi radio/op situation. If you expect
to work any significant number of stations (100+) on one machine versus the
other, PRAY that your network connection never fails. Writelog "replicates"
across the network each time the connection re-establishes. This takes only a
few seconds at 10Mb, but at 9600 or less...OH MY!
> uses a form of TCP/IP, but perhaps the protocols are incompatible?
Packet uses AX.25, which is similar but not exactly like tcp/ip. For the lowest
amount of overhead, setup the TNC's manually before establishing the link and
set the mode to "transparent". You might also want to set the TNC to only allow
connections from the other TNC. Check your TNC manual on how. If you are
thinking of using older TNC-1 or TNC-2 technology, check and/or set the maximum
packet length. The maximum packet length that could be sent through a "Tiny-2"
was/is 256 bytes. If a packet longer than this length is recieved, the TNC will
lockup, freeze or simply reboot causing the connection to fail. Maximum packet
length is something that you can set on the TNC. Some TNC's had the ability to
do auto-reconnect, or even auto-connect on powerup. Check the manual.
> I want to set up a remote transmitter (for cw only), and this would be a
> really nice way of doing it if practicable. The best solution from an
> operational point of view would be for the remote transmitter to just be
> another rig on Writelog, and even better for it to be slaved to a local rig,
> but it would be also OK for it to be a network station.
I would not even begin to contemplate remote operation for CW at slow (9600 or
less) speed. Networked Writelog stations won't actually allow you to operate the
remote transmitter, it is only to allow communication and log sharing primarily
in a multi-op situation. (Yes, single ops find it useful, but all the hardware
is typically on one desk or at least at the next table a few feet away.)
What is really sounds like you need is a remotely controllable radio. Writelog
and the logging PC that you use at the control point would simply be local to
the control point. You could also choose to use CT, NA, TR or any other software
at the control point. CW keying, freq control, and recieve audio would need to
all go over your remote base connection.
> Any other possibilities or thoughts?
One off-the-shelf method for doing what you propose is to buy a Kachina HF radio
(add tranverters if you want VHF+) and the remote control hardware that they
sell for it. Find yourself some wireless (license free) networking hardware that
will make the path you want. I am deliberately not specifying the exact hardware
as I have no idea whether or not phone line control is practical in this case,
or what the path length is. What you want to do can get expesive real quick. I
have been daydreaming about doing something similar for quite awhile. I live in
the Atlanta area and my family has a vacation house on Aruba,
http://www.ArubaVista.com/. Sorry, no ham antennas yet. Give a year or so... I
long distance calls were free!
> Many thanks
>
> Roger
> VE3ZI
Oooops! Spent too much time on it this AM....now I rush to work!
Cheers,
Brian
NX9O/P40X
rfacres@akorn.net
http://rfacres.com
--
WWW: http://www.writelog.com/
Submissions: writelog@contesting.com
Administrative requests: writelog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-writelog@contesting.com
|