HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mwp@iconix.oz.au (Michael Paddon)
Subject: AUUG 1993 Melbourne Summer Conference
Organization: Iconix Pty Ltd (World Headquarters)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:55:37 GMT


                     Melbourne Summer AUUG 1993
                     **************************

             Preliminary Announcment and Call For Papers
             *******************************************

This is a formal announcement of the AUUG 1993 Melbourne Summer Conference.

This is the fourth year an AUUG summer conference has been held in
Melbourne, and it has proved to be an extrememly popular and informative
event. The major focus is to provide an informal and technically
oriented forum, with presentations relevant to programmers, systems
administrators and experienced users.


Registration:
=============

Provisional registration costs are:
    AUUG members:            $50.00
    non members:             $70.00
    students (AUUG member):  $30.00
    students (non member):   $40.00

Further registration information will follow shortly.


Papers:
=======

Technically oriented papers in all areas of Unix research, development
and application are invited for inclusion in this year's programme.
Speakers will recieve free conference registration, lunch and undying
fame. Submitted papers will also be considered for presentation interstate
and at the winter conference.


Programme Committee:
====================

Papers will be selected by the programme committee comprised of:
	John Carey             john@labtam.oz.au            587 1444
	Jon Eaves              jon@tusc.oz.au               840 2222
    Michael Paddon         mwp@iconix.oz.au             571 4244


Dates:
======

Deadline for submission of abstracts:               4/12/92
Deadline for final papers:                          29/1/93
Conference:                                         26/2/93


Further Information:
====================

Further details will follow; both in aus.auug and by snail mail.
If you have any queries please feel free to contact me:

            Michael Paddon
            mwp@iconix.oz.au
            Phone: 571 4244
            Fax:   571 5346
Newsgroups: aus.auug,wa.waug
From: glenn@cs.uwa.oz.au (Glenn Huxtable)
Subject: November WAUG meeting
Organization: Dept. Computer Science, University of Western Australia.
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:04:34 GMT

	      Western Australian UNIX Systems User Group
				   
			   November Meeting
				   
			    Manhattan Room
			  Leederville Hotel
		    742 Newcastle St, Leederville
				   
			6pm, November 18, 1992
				   
		     QPSX and Broadband Services
				   
			   Dr Dean Economou
			       QPSX Ltd

The interconnection of UNIX machines at high speed over a wide area
needs technology such as QPSX DQDB. Dr Econonou will discuss this
technology and its relationship to Fastpac (Telecom's 10 MBs wide area
network service), IEEE 802.6, SMDS and B-ISDN. He will explain how
these ATM technologies fit into the existing communications
environment.
-- 
Email  - glenn@cs.uwa.edu.au	  ,-_|\ 			 glenn huxtable
phone  - +61 9 380 2878 	 /     \ 	       dept of computer science
fax    - +61 9 380 1089   	 *_,-._/	university of western australia
                                      v
Newsgroups: aus.conserve
From: J.Crowcroft@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Jon Crowcroft)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re: IETF meeting audio/video multicast
Date: 12 Nov 1992 21:08:21 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au



 >     I would like to add to Erik's request if I can.
 >     There are a number of people here in Europe that do not have the time
 >     or funding to keep travelling to the US.  However, we would be very
 >     interested to listen if the meeting could be broadcast.
 >Ditto for Australia too :-)
 
yes indeedy for uk too - this is what this tech is for!

 jon
From: CASNER@ISI.EDU (Stephen Casner)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re: IETF meeting audio/video multicast
Date: 11 Nov 1992 21:35:16 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au

Erik,

I would be happy to honor your request if we can, but there are a
few complications:

- In July, Japan was on for a short time, but their 64K ISDN link was
  really overloaded, and I think someone there may have taken some
  flak for allowing the audio traffic on the link.  You'd have to
  figure out what the path is, and verify that it would work.  This is
  probably the first question to answer.  I don't know of any sites in
  Japan currently on the MBONE.

- Your room assignment would have to be changed in order to be
  where the equipment can go.  The most likely swap would be with BGP
  to get into Columbia-C.  Ask Megan.

- Figure the time difference to Japan and see if the participants
  there are willing (might be OK for your second session).

							-- Steve
-------
From: glenn@aic.co.jp (Glenn Mansfield)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re: SPP docs available by anon. ftp.
Date: 10 Nov 1992 12:25:21 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au

Alan,
	>>I noticed that all .txt files are not to be read by the public. Is this a mistake?
Yes, it is a mistake. Have corrected it. Thanks for pointing it out.

glenn


 *****************************************************************
 * Glenn Mansfield                                               *
 * AIC Systems Laboratory                Phone : +81-22-279-3310 *
 * 6-6-3, Minami Yoshinari               Fax   : +81-22-279-3640 *
 * Sendai, Japan. 989-32                 e-mail: glenn@aic.co.jp *
 *****************************************************************
From: J.Crowcroft@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Jon Crowcroft)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re: Doc Representing IP Info..
Date: 10 Nov 1992 06:25:58 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au



 >> multimedia Conference Name, plus class D address and transport Port used
 >> & > conference member/site id
 >I might be wrong but if your aim is to represent a particular instance
 >of an ongoing  conference  into the DIT, the information is not stable
 >enough  to  be able to  be  represented  in  the  Directory. I  'm not

Sylvain

if a conference is longterm as the ietf one (i.e. 224.2.0.1/3456) then
it is certainly approprtiate to put such info in the directory imho

cheers

 jon
From: glenn@aic.co.jp (Glenn Mansfield)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re. Charting Networks in the Directory
Date: 9 Nov 1992 13:59:46 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au

Hi Folks,

	>>The documents will be available by anonymous ftp from ftp.tohoku.ac.jp in
	>>the ~ftp/pub/spp directory under the following headings:

		>>[1]Charting Networks in the Directory:            nd-draft.ps
		>>[2]Representing IP Information in the Directory:  ip-draft.ps
		>>[3]Representing File Information in the Directory:fn-draft.ps
		>>[4]The SoftPages Project :                        spp-draft.ps

	>>9/11/92 10:00 JST onwards.
	>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I am having problems getting this stuff onto the ftp server. The administrator
can't be contacted. So, I am going to send ascii versions of the stuff by e-mail
to the list. 

glenn


 *****************************************************************
 * Glenn Mansfield                                               *
 * AIC Systems Laboratory                Phone : +81-22-279-3310 *
 * 6-6-3, Minami Yoshinari               Fax   : +81-22-279-3640 *
 * Sendai, Japan. 989-32                 e-mail: glenn@aic.co.jp *
 *****************************************************************
From: Sylvain.Langlois@der.edf.fr (Sylvain Langlois)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re: Schema for Mailing Lists
Date: 10 Nov 1992 03:43:24 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au

>  Has any work been done on a schema for representing mailing lists in
>  the Directory?
Work has been  done in the MHS-DS IETF  WG. Most of the stuff you need
is already in place (I guess).

Sylvain
----------------
Sylvain.Langlois@der.edf.fr
From: Peter.Sylvester@inria.fr
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Re: Doc[1] Charting Networks
Date: 10 Nov 1992 03:37:46 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au

With great interest I have read the "Charting Networks in the Directory"
document from G.M, T.J, and M.K. I would like to provoke some discussion
by presenting some thoughts, ideas, and problems that came up while I was
experimenting with a "representation of EARN network information in x.500"
in the view of this text, and 

  Some directory user agents may not have enough capabilities to 
  work with arbitrary schema.  
  This is not really a problem of hard coded software, but rather
  of unclear methods to distribute schema information. 
 
  Trying to define a schema for network information may be an non converging
  process. There may be other "things" (I am avoiding the word attribute) 
  associated to CommunicationObject than just "technical contact person", 
  "adminstrative contact person".
  At least a semantic definition is missing in the text but in
  addition I also see other possible "roles" like "operator". "hotline",
  etc. (I will not give the semantics here either). 

  There is an alternative: Instead of defining attributes for such
  "roles" one could use an object class similar to "organizational role"
  This leave the schema stable while allowing extensions. 
 
  One aspect is is whether one wants to treat certain things just 
  as attributes of some object OR as different objects.
 
  As an example: If the collection of PORTs are treated as separate objects, 
  then a list of persons who (may)perform certain actions on a device
  may also be a list of roles in a subtree under the object.
 
have fun.
Peter Sylvester -- INRIA France
PS: I certainly would like to use the "network schema" also for networks
of message transfer agents and other kinds of distributed applications.
From: J.Crowcroft@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Jon Crowcroft)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: re: Doc Representing IP Info..
Date: 9 Nov 1992 23:57:37 +1030
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au


it would be most useful if you could add :

Class D addresses for multicast (which is now in operational use.)_

and possibly very interesting if you could add...

multimedia Conference Name, plus class D address and transport Port used
&
conference member/site id

i have (unfortunately) no idea how this latter is best represented in
the DIT.

jon 
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: cctec@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Technician)
Subject: Re: Transponder Mania
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 04:16:45 GMT


In article <1992Nov12.133052.165092@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> you write:
>Why no discussion of the CAA's proposal for the mandatory carriage of
>transponders by all aircraft operating above 5000' over most of the east and
>south east of australia?  Are people aware of it?  The proposed requirement
>will apply from 1 July 93 and would appear to be very bad news for sports
>aviation, particularly gliding, hang-gliding and probably ultralights as well.

I believe CAOs relating to hang-gliders and ultralights don't allow them
to operate above 5000'. The main victims would be gliders.

>I understand that the transponder requirements will be set in concrete on 9th
>December, after which there will be no change possible.  
>
>Personally I think that the imposition of a mandatory transponder requirement
>over such a large area is completely unjustified given the low levels of
>traffic.  Does anybody else feel likewise?

Yep! I agree on this point. I can't understand why CAA want to keep our
blips on the screen when we are innocently flying past zones, not
annoying RPTs or the like.

						Ray Belbin (230 hrs)
						RV6A homebuilder
						ex-hang-glider pilot
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin)
Subject: Ultralights
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 22:50:55 GMT


>
>Also, a friend told me that flying hours on ultralights can
>count towards training for light aircraft licenses - fact or
>fiction?
>
FACT! I believe that up to 20 hours of ultralight flying can be counted
towards a PPL.
The Townsville Aero Club takes delivery in January of the first of 2
Jabiru ultralights. These are to be used as primary trainers. 
This is nothing new, I have heard of other aero clubs trying the same
thing.


  ======================================================================
      Ray Belbin (ccrdb@manta.jcu.edu.au)   |   Phone: 077 814 773
      TROPICAL Townsville , Queensland      |          077 814 545
                                            |   Fax:   077 796 371
  Vans RV6A homebuilder ... UPPL ... pissy 230 hours .... 
  ======================================================================
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: Ultralights info wanted - Adelaide
From: sgl@aeg.dsto.gov.au (Simon Langsford)
Date: 5 Nov 92 15:40:39 CST
Reply-To: sgl@aeg.dsto.gov.au
Followup-To: aus.aviation
Distribution: world
Organization: Aeronautical Research Laboratory
Keywords: ultralights 

Hi all

Just wondered is anyone knew much about schools/airfields etc 
in South Australia where ultralight piloting is taught.
If so, what sort of costs are involved?

Also, a friend told me that flying hours on ultralights can
count towards training for light aircraft licenses - fact or
fiction?

Thanks

Simon
sgl@aeg.dsto.gov.au
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: re: transponders in E airspace
From: jrs@aeg.dsto.gov.au (John Stobie)
Date: 13 Nov 92 15:09:57 CST
Reply-To: jrs@aeg.dsto.gov.au
Distribution: world
Organization: Aeronautical Research Laboratory

The GFA is meeting with the CAA on this matter on monday 16 nov
stay tuned for details

---
John  Stobie                                          jrs@aeg.dsto.gov.au
Avionics Technology                                   Ph: +61 8 259 6481
Air Operations Division,DSTO, Salisbury, S.Australia  FAX:   +61 8 259 5507
You've never been really lost until you're lost at Mach 3-Tom Smith SR71 t pilot
From: ilanet@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Date: 06 Nov 92 11:01 EST
Subject: Re: Ultralights info wanted - Adelaide
Nf-ID: #R:1992Nov5.154040.165000@dstos3.ds:326680945:peg:511500007:000:135
Nf-From: peg.pegasus.oz.au!ilanet    Nov  6 11:01:00 1992


Regarding ultralight hours .. yes they certainly can be used to
count towards a private licence .. and are a lot less expensive.

Cait
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: Re: new transponder requirements
From: Geoff Hugo <mt_hugo@fencer.cis.dsto.gov.au>
Date: 13 Nov 92 09:16:19 CST
Distribution: world
Organization: ARL Airframes and Engines Division

In article <1992Nov12.113334.4880@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU>
1058525@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU () writes: 
>These changes to airspace within Australia being introduced to bring round
>worldwide airspace regulations.  Being a hang glider pilot I am interested
>by the changes to airspace regulations.  A mate of mine from Canada, who have
>been using these new regulations for a number of years says that sports
aviation
>is enjoying more freedom.  At the moment Hang gliders are not allowed to
operate
>above 5000 AGL so this will allow Hang Gliders to fly legally to 10000 AGL.
>
But only if you carry a transponder and (big) battery, OR fly outside class E
(radar) airspace, which would put you a long way from civilisation and, I would
think, a long way from the popular hang glider areas!

>These New Laws are explained in the October issue of Aviation Bulletin. 
>In class E and G Airspace "MODE C Transponders are required in CLASS E
airspace
>lower limit 5000 feet and within defined areas around mainland capital city 
>airports and Cairns and Coolangatta.  SPECIAL PROCEDURES ARE AVAILABLE FOR 
>AIRCRAFT WITHOUT AN OPERATING TRANSPONDER".
> 
The main "special procedure" is a  provision to allow aircraft without a
transponder to fly in class E (radar) airspace provided they do not exceed
1000' AGL (October Aviation Bulletin, p.21). I can't see this concession being
much use to sailplanes in particular. I doubt that the other special
procedures, which would be primarily aimed at allowing non-transponder aircraft
access to capital city airports, would be of much use to sports aviation.  

>A Mandetory transponder is unjustified, but my interpretation of the new 
>regulations is that a Mode C transponder is not going to be Manditory for all
>aircraft.
> 
I understand from talking to the GFA, that the CAA definitely wants ALL
aircraft in class E (radar) airspace to carry both radio and a transponder. 
The special procedures are not intended allow non-transponder sports aircraft
routine access to class E (radar) airspace, which covers all of the enormous
red area on p.11 of October's Aviation Bulletin. 

PS. I have been told that in the USA, class E airspace does NOT require the
carriage of a transponder.  If the same applies in Canada, that would explain
why your Canadian friend is enjoying greater freedom for sports aviation.
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: new transponder requirements
From: Geoff Hugo <mt_hugo@fencer.cis.dsto.gov.au>
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:30:50 CST
Distribution: world
Organization: ARL Airframes and Engines Division

Why no discussion of the CAA's proposal for the mandatory carriage of
transponders by all aircraft operating above 5000' over most of the east and
south east of australia?  Are people aware of it?  The proposed requirement
will apply from 1 July 93 and would appear to be very bad news for sports
aviation, particularly gliding, hang-gliding and probably ultralights as well.
I understand that the transponder requirements will be set in concrete on 9th
December, after which there will be no change possible.  

Personally I think that the imposition of a mandatory transponder requirement
over such a large area is completely unjustified given the low levels of
traffic.  Does anybody else feel likewise?
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: 1058525@hydra.maths.unsw.EDU.AU ()
Subject: Re: new transponder requirements
Organization: school of Mathematics UNSW
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 11:33:34 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.133052.165092@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> Geoff Hugo <mt_hugo@fencer.cis.dsto.gov.au> writes:
>Why no discussion of the CAA's proposal for the mandatory carriage of
>transponders by all aircraft operating above 5000' over most of the east and
>south east of australia?  Are people aware of it?  The proposed requirement
>will apply from 1 July 93 and would appear to be very bad news for sports
>aviation, particularly gliding, hang-gliding and probably ultralights as well.
>I understand that the transponder requirements will be set in concrete on 9th
>December, after which there will be no change possible.  
 
These changes to airspace within Australia being introduced to bring round
worldwide airspace regulations.  Being a hang glider pilot I am interested
by the changes to airspace regulations.  A mate of mine from Canada, who have
been using these new regulations for a number of years says that sports aviation
is enjoying more freedom.  At the moment Hang gliders are not allowed to operate
above 5000 AGL so this will allow Hang Gliders to fly legally to 10000 AGL.
 
These New Laws are explained in the October issue of Aviation Bulletin. 
In class E and G Airspace "MODE C Transponders are required in CLASS E airspace
lower limit 5000 feet and within defined areas around mainland capital city 
airports and Cairns and Coolangatta.  SPECIAL PROCEDURES ARE AVAILABLE FOR 
AIRCRAFT WITHOUT AN OPERATING TRANSPONDER".

>Personally I think that the imposition of a mandatory transponder requirement
>over such a large area is completely unjustified given the low levels of
>traffic.  Does anybody else feel likewise?
 
A Mandetory transponder is unjustified, but my interpretation of the new 
regulations is that a Mode C transponder is not going to be Manditory for all
aircraft.
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
  /|    Neil Glennon                      |
 / |    u1058525@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au   | Mummy look there's an
(  |-   s1058525@spectrum.cs.unsw.edu.au  | aeroplane up in the sky.
 \ |    Glider: Aero (Enterprise Wings)   | Pink Floyd "The Wall"
  \|    Rating: Intermediate (Hang III)   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------
  /|  	Neil Glennon			  |  	
 / |  	u1058525@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au   | Mummy look there's an
(  |- 	s1058525@spectrum.cs.unsw.edu.au  | aeroplane up in the sky.
From: ilanet@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Date: 13 Nov 92 15:38 EST
Subject: Re: new transponder requirements
Nf-ID: #R:1992Nov12.133052.165092@dstos3.d:1656902432:peg:511500008:000:108
Nf-From: peg.pegasus.oz.au!ilanet    Nov 13 15:38:00 1992


Apparently AOPA is expressing its concern about the transponder
requirement. Maybe they will get somewhere.
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: re: transponders in E airspace
From: Geoff Hugo <mt_hugo@fencer.cis.dsto.gov.au>
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:21:14 CST
Distribution: world
Organization: ARL Airframes and Engines Division

Two different US glider pilots have told me that, in the USA, class E airspace
(which includes most of the airspace below 18,000' AMSL) does NOT require a
transponder.  Hence, gliders can operate over the fast majority of the USA upto
18,000' without a transponder.  Given the relative traffic densities in the USA
vs Australia, it makes the proposed transponder requirement for Australia look
a bit laughable.  Furthermore, at wave sites, gliders can go above 18,000'
without transponders within predefined "wave windows", provided they first get
a clearance from ATC.  

It is also worth noting that the big push for mandatory transponders within
enroute class E airspace seems to coming from within the CAA, not from those in
the industry who would stand to benefit (SAL and IFR CHTR).