From: dug@kd4nc.uucp (Doug Drye KD4NC)
Subject: Re: High Speed Backbones?
Organization: KD4NC HAM Packet Radio Gateway
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 20:40:25 GMT

<PJC130@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>We are looking to install a backbone system around the SW Pa area.  What
>I've seen of the TexNet system is OK, but we would like to go > 9600 for the
>backbone.  (19200 is OK, 56K is preferred).
			  ^^^^
Paul, I certainly agree.. especially on the 56K idea... 
it's enough trouble to build
networks without taking baby steps... If I could buy
1.5 MBS systems and make them work over the distances that
we have to here in the foothills of N. Ga.. I would buy
them... as it is, we have 56KB, so we use it...

>One of the ideas that we have is that each point to point link is on its own
>channel (multiple transceivers), another is that there is only one
>transmitter per site, but multiple receivers.  In either case, we certainly
>need more than two ports per node.

Technically, I agree with the second approach.. 
we probably should make the 56K modems
available as receive or transmit only kits... it's designed
that way, we have never advertised a price.. it causes certain
problems in stocking, etc... but it's certainly "do-able"...

Back in 87 or so when we were planning out the GRAPES network.. I proposed
essentially what you have proposed.. I was "yelled down" by the rest
of the networking committee suggesting that my solution was too
expensive (both in time and money).. they wanted to go simplex initially... 

I have to admit that looking back now in 1993, I must agree with them....
we have progressed... but it was hard enough to accomplish
even with this simplest of implementations . But we have participation
from Augusta, Ga Across N. Ga to Alabama and into Tennessee.. most of
it is up and running at 56K.. It's been a hard road... but every step
we've taken has been to make whatever we do permanent..., supported by a
group...

I still believe "HEXNET" (or single transmitter at each site and
multiple receivers, one for each transmitter in range ) is the 
correct technical solution. Practically, I believe that it would
have held us back .. also, it's not impossible to migrate to
the "HEXNET" (I think that's what someone was calling it a few years
ago) concept from Simplex... you just have to make up your own mind
what you want:... 

1) shortest implementation plan with lowest risk
	that you will not get it implemented before patience runs out 

or

2) Best technical solution (or if you can't do it the best way, don't start...)

>As ease of use (user transparency) is very important, a multiple NET/ROM or
>TheNet hookup is not acceptable.

interesting... I thought that many packeteers wanted a user interface
that hid the topology of the network from the users... (as well as
the capability to override it).. which the GRAPES network gives them...

>Any ideas?

Lay the groundwork for a simple to implement network.. then build on it...
stick to funding network nodes  that are maintained by local groups... not
individuals (they burn out and leave you cut off)... Don't forget
that there are limits to propagation at the higher freqs... especially
in hilly country (like the foothills of N. Ga) and very limited allocations
for packet radio at the lower freqs... it's a tradeoff all the way...

If you are trying to build a temporary network for play... you can get
away with a lot more focus on technology and "flash in the pan" type
of planning... if you wish for your network to last.. people are more important
than technology... Brian Kantor said it very well in his posting about
working together being tough for Hams... Hams work together well within
a local organization.. that's why there are so many repeaters... but
the linking between organizations requires cooperation over a long
distance..  THAT'S TOUGH!!!!!!

Publishing is important... Newsletters, etc are the lifeblood of an
organization... We've fallen down in that area.. it has hurt us...
If we didn't have funding (56k modem sales) we would have long since failed...
I believe that publishing can do a lot to offset lack of internal funding. 
(wish we had a someone willing to do a newsletter).

Sorry for the soap box.. you touched a soft spot in my head... .. Packet Radio
Networking.

and.... we had a "KILLER" GRAPES networking committee meeting yesterday here 
in Georgia...
16 networkers showed up from as far away as Augusta, Ga,  Auburn, Alabama and 
Nashville, Tenn...  These were "hard core" do'ers, not users...

It was AWESOME!!!...

Hope to see some of you guys/gals at the ARRL National Convention this August
in Huntsville, Ala..  ALANET and GRAPES are cooperating to set up the
packet radio forums and demos... CU there...

Doug

>          ***********************************************
>          **     Although the above address is OK,     **
>          **  my home address is paul@n3eop.pgh.pa.us  **
>          ***********************************************
-- 
Doug Drye KD4NC