[GA ARES] Katrina - Missed Signals

[John Kraus KC4ZGQ]

At 02:58 PM 2/17/2006, you wrote:
> >John,
> >
> >The point here is that the internet is what survived. IP connectivity
> >and the optional software that can be utilized is what survived, and
> >what was first to be recovered in certain areas.

True but only in one place.  Telpac extends that outward using readily 
available ham gear.  One question is:  Would an existing ham network 
infrastructure have survived when little else did?  Who will get kicked off 
first if the bandwidth is limited. Echolink or Winlink at 1200 baud? I 
suspect they would not even notice Winlink's periodic connections.

> >WinLink, while a great solution, does not provide last mile
> >connectivity as the rest of the world tends to relate.  For the
> >industry standard definition for last mile I would reference Wikipedia
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile. Enhanced Services (plural)
> >is usually the context.


I beg to differ. Winlink originated as a way to bridge the last mile to 
ships at sea.

 From the Winlink website:


>Winlink 2000 and Emergency Communications.  Winlink 2000 may be very 
>effectively deployed for emergency communications using the Telpac with 
>Paclink  email-based VHF/UHF Packet-to-Winlink 2000 system for "last mile" 
>communications coverage while also using Airmail 
>for  message-based >HF-to-Winlink 2000 as a long-haul  "Internet 
>substitute."   Add a local or regional "hubbing PMBO" and there is a 
>local, regional or even >National SMTP email hubbing capability with or 
>without the Internet.  Should your organization have such a need, please 
>contact the Winlink 2000 Network Administrator, Steve, K4CJX  for more 
>information.

> From Wikipedia:
> >
> >The last mile is the final leg of delivering connectivity from a 
> communications provider to a customer.

The concept of the last mile does not require that the connection be a full 
speed one.  Note the "mixed wireless reference". If I establish a Telpac 
gateway on an existing internet connection and using ham RF to extend that 
connectivity outward to my end user (the EOC or Red cross shelter) I have 
bridged the "Last mile" as described above. The frequency of the RF does 
not matter. I may not be able to provide full internet connectivity for web 
surfing but I most definitely am providing a "mixed wireless network 
connection" to a wire line network.  This is perhaps the single most 
important point to understand about Winlink 2000 in order to comprehend its 
potential.

http://winlink.org/Emergency.htm  On this site view some of the powerpoint 
presentations.  You will see that the whole thing was designed around the 
last mile concept.

 >
>WinLink (telpac) may provides a packet to email bridge, nothing more
> >and nothing less. The winlink system in general is purely an email
> >solution expanded to take advantage of RF paths.

I have never claimed it was anything else.  The simple fact is that email 
is far more than we have now.  To be able to send 600+ pages of data in 4 
hours is a quantum leap from where we are now.  Email is also a universally 
understood format for both hams and non-hams alike. You are a DXer so you 
no doubt have a great deal of experience talking rapidly but clearly via 
SSB.  How long would it take to pass 600 pages of text via phone even under 
ideal conditions.  Even the fastest readers would need about a week just to 
read it much less read it out loud.

As I have stated in the past we need to ask whether we can replace the 
internet for our served agencies.  Some groups like Gwinnett County may be 
able to do this since they have the funding and a limited geographic 
area.  However,  will the small counties along the Georgia coast be able to 
participate in the high-speed all in one solution you seem to favor.  If 
they can not will Gwinnett be able to communicate effectively with them?


>I do agree that for long range communications the Pactor 3 modem is a
> >great option, I wish I could afford one of the ethernet versions.
> >
> >73 - Paul


VHF and UHF both offer longer range than many of the off the shelf 
commercial wireless LAN products.  They are also much more familiar to most 
hams.

By the way most of the people who have the SCS modems prefer the USB 
version since it is easier to utilize in a portable station and supports 
automatic frequency setting within Airmail. You just pick the PMBO and the 
frequency and Airmail will tune the radio via the CAT port if the radio is 
so equipped.  The USB can be shared on a network by using either Paclink or 
Airmail as an POP/SMTP mail server.  I too thought the SCS PTC II-Net was 
the best choice until I began considering the realities of portable 
deployments and the limitations of throughput.  The USB version is also 
cheaper and it has an internal mailbox that the net version lacks.


> From the SCS website:
>
>In the last few months SCS has continued the development of the PIB under 
>the motto TCP/IP everywhere. Once the PIB is installed at the host 
>station, the user can connect to the Internet through the 
>network-installation on any operating system via PTC-II Series modem and 
>HF shortwave radio system. Theoretically, all features are 
>possible:  E-Mail (SMTP-POP3), FTP, HTTP, etc.  The limitation is 
>naturally the speed of the connection. Typical applications that are 
>possible through PIB are the use of E-Mail clients like Outlook, Netscape 
>Mail, Eudora or similar. One navigates through their typical Windows 
>interface and simply uses the new virtual modem to recall their mails.

Note the "Theoretically, all features are possible: and "The limitation is 
naturally the speed of the connection".

The reality is that Pactor will likely never support the type of IP traffic 
that can be done on higher bands and when all is said and done you are 
basically left with email.  The entire Winlink system grew out of the 
desire to maximize the capability of Pactor for HF email.

The most basic question is:

If every ARES member had Airmail and Telpac loaded and knew how to use them 
with basic packet gear would Georgia be better prepared in a disaster?

I think the answer is yes and that is why I promote Winlink.  I have never 
objected to going beyond Winlink at some point but I think Winlink is where 
we need to start.

So far no one has advanced any alternative that demonstrates an advantage 
over Winlink that is more than theoretical.