No subject

bureaucracy. From listening on the repeaters,  the local folks
involved with the LWHS group - if that's who's doing it - are far less
enlightened then the legacy Wetnet crew.  I'm pretty sure they'd panic
with just the activity of the old 9k6 UHF Wetnet repeater.

That's a lot of IF's to invest $2k in.

My alternatives are a bit slower but are known and would entail
essentially no additional significant expenditures.  This is using 9k6
or even 1k2 on 147.6,  220 or 440, via key tower or UQA nodes for the
long path and Ricochet for the short links with OpenWRT solutions for
the actual user access.

Bottom line is that to actually see a system on line - the cost has to
fit the goal (use case.)

> Pricey... yeah... but when has REAL geek fun ever been cheap?

Both extremes are fun!

> Steve

Bill

>
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:44, Bill V WA7NWP<
>
>> I know I'm sounding like a broken record but let me play devils
>> advocate here a bit.
>>
>> We need a better Why...
>>
>> Reviving interest in blacksmithing to build horseshoes is a good thing
>> but that's no reason 'why' I should do it.
>>
>>
>> Here's the reasons "why" I'm now working on packet but I can't say
>> that's enough to entice others to join in.
>>
>> 1. TCP/IP packet is fun and educational. =A0It's like CW..
>> Recreational and cool but not generally practical.
>>
>> 2. I want a back door to my home system. =A0Part for the practical
>> applications (reboot darn it...) =A0and part for the "hey look what I
>> can do on my own from my Ipod at work without having to pay the cell
>> companies for the backhaul."
>>
>> 3. There's a dim vision on the horizon of an ad-hoc community network
>> that's independent of 'them' for back haul. =A0A true independent mesh
>> system that's "of by and for the people' =A0 =A0If we had the AXMeraki b=
ox
>> =A0(lunch box with ethernet, power and antenna connectors capable of =A0=
at
>> least near megabit speed for a reasonable - $300 +/- - price) we could
>> prototype it in the Amateur realm. =A0However unless that led to a
>> SIGNIFICANT researgence in interest -- the eventual network would have
>> to be either Part 15 or maybe 15+ (wink wink nudge nudge).
>>
>> So... =A0 Here's my question for the table - for all of you that aren't
>> doing packet now - what 'why' would it take to make it once again
>> viable?
>>
>> Maybe if we can come up with a good 'why' we could get MFJ to build the =
box.
>>