ARRL EComms Messaging System...WinLink?

[David R. Wilson]

It is not a matter of expertise so much as it is finding someone that
can spare the time and effort to tackle this project.  I think it is
important to have software that works on other platforms.  I for one
don't have a Windows machine running at the house (out of six or so
boxes).  Linux, FreeBSD, or OSX as an alternative would work, if you had
things working on any one of those porting it to the other two would not
be terribly difficult.

I don't know what license the development crew would be agreeable to
someone using to re implement the programs, or for that matter if that
is possible at all.  That would be one subject that needs to be tackled
before considering using their code.

Dave
WB4LHO 


On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 12:50, Rick Williams wrote:
> Many of us do not have any expertise or for that matter ability or else we
> would help develop software. But some of us are trying to do some
> experimenting with Linux (not always good experiences though:(
> 
> The WinLink project claims that they tried to get some Linux programmers
> involved in the past, but the Linux programmers never followed through.
> They had mentioned in posts on the WinLink reflector that it was a college
> student in one case who did not have the time. Is the WDT willing or not to
> give out the source code on the entire program for a Linux development? They
> indicated that they would share code but maybe they only meant for Telpac
> and Paclink? Not for the main system?
> 
> With the upcoming WinLink server system, they will have up to 8 redundant
> servers world wide so it seems as if it is a good system. And it can be used
> for certain EmComm applications. But maybe not all that many?
> 
> To spend the person years to reinvent the code seems a nearly impossible
> task based on the difficulty it is to get anyone from the Linux community to
> do amateur radio programming. From reading here on WETNET, am I correct that
> the LinLink team is going to attempt to duplicate WinLink or is the topology
> that much different?
> 
> What I fail to understand, is that after all these years, we still do not
> have a good solution for tying a regional system together via ARQ HF and
> VHF/UHF , that would enable a robust, distributed system to automate the
> sending of messages within that region (such as our state ARES/RACES). Then
> the messages could be routed out from that region if there was no other
> communication link available via normal internet connections.
> 
> We have voice and CW nets, and some "digital" traffic nets, but they are
> very inefficient modes of operation in actually sending out large amounts of
> traffic and are mainly useful (especially voice) for immediate tactical use.
> 
> Is there any solution for setting up a more regional system that can also
> reach out from the region?
> 
> 73,
> 
> Rick, KV9U
> Wisconsin ARES/RACES
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linlink-bounces at wetnet.net [mailto:linlink-bounces at wetnet.net]On
> Behalf Of dubose at texas.net
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:28 AM
> To: David R. Wilson
> Cc: linlink at wetnet.net
> Subject: Re: ARRL EComms Messaging System...WinLink?
> 
> 
> David,
> 
> The call has gone out to more than just on this list...with the original
> call
> being made back in April 2004.
> 
> The three things that the ARRL needs to settle are the code requirment for
> licensing, bandwidth limits and this problem...without settling these, I
> fear
>  hamradio is in for a rough time.
> 
> I do realize that the BPL problem is important, but that's an external
> problem.  These are internal problems...something the League can do
> something
> about.
> 
> Walt/K5YFW
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Linlink mailing list
> Linlink at wetnet.net
> http://wetnet.net/mailman/listinfo/linlink