[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: BBS's versus DIGIPEATERS in space

Again, my 2 cents worth.
For people in remote locations, who have 5 minutes of sharing the PMS only
with 10 thousand square miles of the Pacific ocean (me in Denali in a week)
the PMS is going to be alot of fun!

I do agree that when the PMS is overloaded with connection requests, it bogs
the entire system down.....  But for the reason above, i would hate to just
see it turned off.  The AO-27 turns on and off based on Lat. and Sun position
and weekday and such.....  I know it would make things really complicated...
but I would suggest, if the error and retransmission rate goes over X, turn
off the PMS.  Just an Idea... of coarse made by someone that doesn't have to
design/build it :)
==========You wrote========
I believe the problem is the 280 disconnects you listed below, caused by
poor operators not monitoring the downlink, and not waiting for the
connected station to disconnect.  I have sent questions to MIR crews in
the past, usually without receiving any disconnects.  There is nothing
more thrilling ( besides a voice QSO ) than to connect to the MIR's PBBS,
and have mail waiting, from a cosmonaut!  So I guess to each his own.
TNX & 73, Al / KD4SFF

On Sun, 6 Jun 1999 01:31:40 -0400 (EDT) Bob Bruninga
<bruninga@nadn.navy.mil> writes:
>Compared to the fun we are having with communicating with UI frames 
>MIR in this country, someone just sent me a copy of a MIR pass in 
>What a waste of bandwidth! I analyzed all 350 packets and here are 
>statistics broken down into the successful TEXT packets in 3 
>BBS:   330 packets to transfer 27 useful lines of text = 8%   
>CNCT:   17 packets to transfer  1 useful line  of text = 6%   
>UI:      2 packets to transfer  2 useful lines of text = 100% 
>The two UI stations communicated perfectly in 2 packets
>The two CONNECTED stations communicated 1 line only 1 way with 17 
>31 of the 33 stations attempting to connect to the BBS accomplished
>      nothing!  And still spent 280 packets doing it!
>You may argue that the BBS is for the crew.  EVEN SO, with the right
>software (APRS), these same 350 packets could have exchanged 350 
>of text traffic to and from the crew or anyone else if they had only 
>UI packets!
>Here are the details if you are interesetd:
>350  TOTAL BBS RELATED PACKETS AS FOLLOWS (2 users got logged on):
>     280  DISCONNECT-BUSY packets  150 from just 6 stations!
>      30  Lines of BBS overhead LINES (welcome, command prompts, etc)
>      20  Acks and RETRIES and CHECKS
>      17  lines of HEARD LOG 
>      10  message headers listed (at least 2 times each)
>       0  messages read  (ZERO)
>       1  message line conveyed
>  2  APRS TYPE Position/STATUS packets conveying station position and
>       status
>CONCLUSION:  If we designed Amateur Satellites to be dumb digipeaters 
>UI frames only, then every successful packet CONTAINS USEFUL 
>In this case there would have been 350 lines of data, not just 29.
>de WB4APR, Bob
>Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe sarex" to Majordomo@amsat.org

David M. Ritzenthaler        http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/~ritz
UNIX System Administrator                ritz@eecs.wsu.edu
Washington State University                  (509)335-7301
School of Elect. Engr & Comp Sci. - Pullman, WA 99164-2752
PGPfreeware 5.0i Key: http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/~ritz/pgp.key
Eye halve a spelling chequer It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a word And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite Its rare lea ever wrong.
Eye have run this poem threw it I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh My chequer tolled me sew.
Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe sarex" to Majordomo@amsat.org