Bulletins from the Pacific Packet Radio Society - page 035
1. Overlapping domains: If the same frequency is used by all, this is just another extreme case of TDMA with high channel loading. We can allow it as long as channel efficiency remains high. I feel that the LAN should have its own HDLC address so that a terminal node can choose which of several LANs on frequency to make transactions with. .... After all, I may have several phone numbers at home and at work; there's no reason why I can't access several different LAN's by packet radio. The big question here is not the mechanics of TDMA or addressing within an LAN, but of how DX (multihop) traffic is passed in and out of the LAN. This brings up the concept of the "HOME NODE(s)". Something has to establish the terminal node as a member of the LAN(s). I would suggest that all users require a one-time-only login with the LAN in order to establish their addresses (Callsigns) with the LAN service directory.
2. Control stations for repeaters: I'll ask you the question! Can we get away with repeaters that aren't controllable by someone?? After all, how do we establish and maintain routing tables (I'm assuming the table-driven routing scheme)? I think software update of such tables is premature. I would like to see users (terminal nodes) with limited control over the LAN repeater services. For instance, ability to do call forwarding and call waiting, etc.
3,4, & 5. No contention.
6. Direct connections: Why? Why must we have protocols that handle the exceptions? If people want to handle transactions directly, they should probably go off net and off frequency, and use a different protocol (firmware switch). I don't think we should concern ourselves with exceptions like this.
7. No comment
8. Again, why can't we use a uniform exchange locally? If the processing overhead for an IP header (and transmission time) is not significant we should use it always ! (I'm playing the devil's advocate here ) Anyhow, WHO SUPPLIES THE IP HEADER??? The terminal node?? The LAN repeater service??? If you want to keep the TNCs small, you probably don't want to do too much work at this level. On the other hand, even the mightiest micros will be crushed by having to handle the translation from local to IP protocol for a large number of stations with IDX transactions'.
9. Small number of hops, and use of IP versus non-use: In order to get away from the use of a big header for short hops, we have to carefully consider the network hierarchy (NOT TOPOLOGY). I will break here, and prepare a text on HIERARCHY for your perusal - then I'll continue with the commentary.....
73, for now
Steve, W2FPYClick for Original Graphic Image of this page.
