[GA ARES] Missed signals 1

[John Kraus KC4ZGQ]

At 04:59 PM 2/17/2006, you wrote:
>This is an excellent reflection on the breadth of IP applications with the 
>use of Voice Over IP.  Not only can e-mail transverse the IP network, but 
>voice, given adequate bandwdith.  I'm also betting that NetMeeting was 
>another application used by EOC personnel, in conducting conferences with 
>state and federal agencies.  That's an standard application from Microsoft.
>
>There are "soft" telephones that use standard soundcards, etc.  You just 
>have to get to an IP telephone switch.  I tested some of this technology 
>several years ago and took an IP telephone with me on a business 
>trip.  When I connected it to the Internet, I was back in to the office as 
>a local extension with full access to both office telephones and the 
>public telephone network.  This has become more commonplace in the past 
>few years with companies providing IP telephony for your home via a 
>suitable Internet connection.  These are some things I personally want to 
>explore.
>
>73's
>Stan, WA4DYD

I have never had any objection to the exploration of these 
technologies.  Both are inherently broad-band and will need more network 
overhead than will simple email. I see them as adjuncts to Winlink 2000 not 
as replacements for it.  That is why I settled on Winlink as the defacto 
baseline.

They require that parties be present at both ends at the same time which is 
not true of Email.  This requires considerable pre-scheduling and will 
constitute a real issue for busy EOC personnel.

I see VOIP as an attempt to use networking to replace phone nets and I 
think it is a cumbersome solution to deploy where no internet exists. It is 
a viable adjunct where the internet is undamaged.

Even the lowest VOIP solution need about 10kbs 
<http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/index.php?page=Low+Bandwidth+VOIP>See this 
site for more infromation

Net meeting has similar needs. The lowest bandwidth is 14.4kbs. See this 
<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/NetMeeting/Corp/reskit/Chapter7/default.asp>Microsoft 
site for information/

Neither mode is likely to work over HF even with the Pactor Net 
modem.  These modes will not tolerate the speed shifting that will occur as 
band conditions change.

When these technologies can be demonstrated to allow reliable repeatable 
communication with the Georgia coast after a Katrina type event I think 
they will be approaching the point where they might be deployable state 
wide if a robust network that will survive a katrina type event can be 
shown to exist.

Then it needs to demonstrated that they can function in the event that 
internet connectivity is down.  What is the fallback mode?


Do these modes promise more than we can deliver when the chips are down?


73 de John Kraus KC4ZGQ
Georgia DEC for Digital Communications
DIGITAL_COMMS_GA at COX.NET

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gaares.org/pipermail/ares_gaares.org/attachments/20060218/e730b5a0/attachment.htm