Date   

Node PTT Lockup

Ted Maczulat <tmaczulat@...>
 

On several occasions I have observed that the Node PTT locks on for a period of time with no incoming internet packet data stream.
 
On several occasions when a station has connected to a remote node the PTT remains keyed long after the connect message is played.
 
if there is no incoming packets the PTT has remained keyed until the node times out.
on several occasions while this was occurring a station on the distant node keyed up and called and this incoming data stream restored the PTT at the end of the "remote" transmission. 
 
I have to log onto the local console and issue a decode or end command to terminate the connection.
several times I have reconnected to the same node and everything is fine.  There does not appear to be any one particular node/time of day/other parameter to suggest a pattern.
 
Interconnecting cables are shielded and filtered with ferrite beads.  We are using a UHF transceiver to link the IRLP node to the repeater site.  If the link radio is transmitting (PTT locked) there is no way for the local station to shut down the node. 
 
Any Idea why this is happening??
 
Thanks...
 
Ted, VE7TFM
NodeOp Node 112


Re: Node PTT Lockup

FredList <fredlist@...>
 

oh here we go if yahoo can't spam me directly they put it on a trailer at the end of email.. Fred
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 3:09 AM
Subject: [irlp] Node PTT Lockup

On several occasions I have observed that the Node PTT locks on for a period of time with no incoming internet packet data stream.
 
On several occasions when a station has connected to a remote node the PTT remains keyed long after the connect message is played.
 
if there is no incoming packets the PTT has remained keyed until the node times out.
on several occasions while this was occurring a station on the distant node keyed up and called and this incoming data stream restored the PTT at the end of the "remote" transmission. 
 
I have to log onto the local console and issue a decode or end command to terminate the connection.
several times I have reconnected to the same node and everything is fine.  There does not appear to be any one particular node/time of day/other parameter to suggest a pattern.
 
Interconnecting cables are shielded and filtered with ferrite beads.  We are using a UHF transceiver to link the IRLP node to the repeater site.  If the link radio is transmitting (PTT locked) there is no way for the local station to shut down the node. 
 
Any Idea why this is happening??
 
Thanks...
 
Ted, VE7TFM
NodeOp Node 112


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


Re: @Home

Tony Langdon, VK3JED <vk3jed@...>
 

Also consider that the Code Red situation is probably causing
significant additional loading on their network and blocking port 80 is
one way to minimize that.
True. If our firewall logs are anything to go by, Code Red is really causing a bit of traffic, and any filtering of cable networks is going to save a heap of bandwidth.

The other thing is that they may be using Code Red as an excuse to block
port 80 and cause problems with people running servers.
Quite true...


Re: @Home

Tony Langdon, VK3JED <vk3jed@...>
 

At 13:30 22/08/2001 -0400, you wrote:
Hello!

Most likely the majority of Broadband ISP's really don't like servers
in general. In fact my ISP (Cable) in the Metro NYC area forbids ANY
type of server. Mail, FTP, WWW you name it... not to mention only one
computer per MODEM/Gateway... (ie. no routers/proxy servers/ no nutt'n)
This is the case here with Optus, though they do allow LANs behind a proxy or NAT gateway. But they don't like servers at all, and block http and smtp among other (mostly SMB) ports.

One that really does promote having a home webserver or one provided by
them and provides DNS services for a domain on your home system etc.
was Telocity (xDSL) I don't know if they will continue this with the
DirectTV merger or not. If you are close enough to a CO, (and can wait
for the process to get it installed) I think DSL is the way to go...
albeit a little slower than Cable, at least the bandwidth is yours and
they are in the data/ISP biz.
I think the xDSL providers here don't mind you having servers, but the cable ones don't like it.


Re: @Home

Ray Vaughan
 

Something I just noticed...

Is the @home you guys are talking about the same as www.home.net and or www.home.com?

If so, that company is refusing to receive spam complaints from spamcop.net. In other words, they harbor spammers and don't care to hear complaints about it. I've had quite a few spams tracked to home.net and home.com in the last week.

So, running personal web sites: Bad
Sending thousands of spams: No problem.

It may be a sign of an ISP on it's last breath. When you're drowning, you'll take anyone's money. My advice, don't do business with spammer friendly ISPs. Get something else ASAP.

Samples from Spamcop.net:

Found link:http://by.advertising.com/1/c/43099/27453/87286/87286
by.advertising.com = 209.225.0.6 abuse.net by.advertising.com = abuse@..., postmaster@...
[show] "nslookup by.advertising.com" (checking ip) ip = 209.225.0.6
abuse.net shortcut:abuse@..., postmaster@...
abuse@... refuses to accept SpamCop reports
Using abuse#home.net@... for statistical tracking.

Tracking message source:209.218.32.10:
[show] "nslookup 209.218.32.10" (getting name) no name
Routing details for 209.218.32.10
[refresh/show] Cached whois for 209.218.32.10:noc-abuse@...
noc-abuse@...: abuse.net home.net = abuse@...
abuse.net noc.home.net = abuse@...
Using best abuse.net reporting addresses:abuse@...
abuse@... bounces (169 sent : 85 bounces)
Using abuse#home.com@... for statistical tracking.
Whois found:abuse#home.com@...

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
§97.1(c)-(d)


Re: Node PTT Lockup

Nima Gharavi <Nima@...>
 

You can probably toss this email pretty quick and call it useless.... but
I'm going to venture it say it has something to do with your parallel port.
Of course, there is no way I can guarantee this and there isn't many
solutions I can offer, I just know that I have been having parallel port
issues and have tried external ones, and what you describe sounds all too
familiar.

Sincerely,

Nima Gharavi, WA6SUP

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Maczulat" <tmaczulat@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:09 AM
Subject: [irlp] Node PTT Lockup


On several occasions I have observed that the Node PTT locks on for a period
of time with no incoming internet packet data stream.

On several occasions when a station has connected to a remote node the PTT
remains keyed long after the connect message is played.

if there is no incoming packets the PTT has remained keyed until the node
times out.
on several occasions while this was occurring a station on the distant node
keyed up and called and this incoming data stream restored the PTT at the
end of the "remote" transmission.

I have to log onto the local console and issue a decode or end command to
terminate the connection.
several times I have reconnected to the same node and everything is fine.
There does not appear to be any one particular node/time of day/other
parameter to suggest a pattern.

Interconnecting cables are shielded and filtered with ferrite beads. We are
using a UHF transceiver to link the IRLP node to the repeater site. If the
link radio is transmitting (PTT locked) there is no way for the local
station to shut down the node.

Any Idea why this is happening??

Thanks...

Ted, VE7TFM
NodeOp Node 112


Re: @Home

Nima Gharavi <Nima@...>
 

Yes, that is the company. They've been bought so many times it's impossible
to keep track. Currently their full name is Excite@Home. If I remember
correctly, D. Nate made me aware that they announced chapter 11 in the last
week. I originally has ADSL, but family members put pressure to change to
cable because they were seeing downloads of 500-800 kilobytes per second...
next to our DSL's 140 kilobytes per second. Gee, whoop-dee-doo when you
consider very few sites can actually upload to you at 500-800 KB a second
anyways, not to mention DSL's stability and lack of shared bandwidth make it
a lot more reliable (although it is actually share at the Cloud... not too
many people are aware).

Sincerely,

Nima Gharavi, WA6SUP (#301)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Vaughan" <ray@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Something I just noticed...

Is the @home you guys are talking about the same as www.home.net and or
www.home.com?

If so, that company is refusing to receive spam complaints from
spamcop.net. In other words, they harbor spammers and don't care to hear
complaints about it. I've had quite a few spams tracked to home.net and
home.com in the last week.

So, running personal web sites: Bad
Sending thousands of spams: No problem.

It may be a sign of an ISP on it's last breath. When you're drowning,
you'll take anyone's money. My advice, don't do business with spammer
friendly ISPs. Get something else ASAP.

Samples from Spamcop.net:

Found link:http://by.advertising.com/1/c/43099/27453/87286/87286
by.advertising.com = 209.225.0.6 abuse.net by.advertising.com =
abuse@..., postmaster@...
[show] "nslookup by.advertising.com" (checking ip) ip = 209.225.0.6
abuse.net shortcut:abuse@..., postmaster@...
abuse@... refuses to accept SpamCop reports
Using abuse#home.net@... for statistical tracking.

Tracking message source:209.218.32.10:
[show] "nslookup 209.218.32.10" (getting name) no name
Routing details for 209.218.32.10
[refresh/show] Cached whois for 209.218.32.10:noc-abuse@...
noc-abuse@...: abuse.net home.net = abuse@...
abuse.net noc.home.net = abuse@...
Using best abuse.net reporting addresses:abuse@...
abuse@... bounces (169 sent : 85 bounces)
Using abuse#home.com@... for statistical tracking.
Whois found:abuse#home.com@...

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
�97.1(c)-(d)


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: @Home

Nima Gharavi <Nima@...>
 

hehe, that's why I always spell it out to remove ambiguity. Kilo-Bytes...
not bits. Your ISP guarantees 386 Kilo-Bits per second. If it guarantees
386 Kilo-Bytes per second, I'm moving in with you. If you calculate it, 140
Kilobytes per second actually equals a T1 (1.244 Mega-Bits per second [I
think it was.. gosh it's been a while]) if you calculate all the overhead
T1's have and all... they are pretty equal. Now 1.244 Mega-Bytes per second
would be kewl!

*Goes off to visit his friend at Pacific Bell HQ to play with their
experimental OC192*

-Nima

----- Original Message -----
From: "T. Glen Haggard" <glen@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


140k ???? Wow, that is slow for DSL. My DSL provider guarantees a minimum
of
386K with basic DSL service. That is download of course. I have never seen
mine go below 500 unless there is a problem and it usually runs more like
800 to 1000k. I even surge up to 1.5 megs at times. When there have been
troubles I call them and they credit me for that day or days. It doesn't
happen much. With the enhanced DSL I can run servers or anything else I
want
to do.

Glen


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nima Gharavi" <Nima@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Yes, that is the company. They've been bought so many times it's
impossible
to keep track. Currently their full name is Excite@Home. If I remember
correctly, D. Nate made me aware that they announced chapter 11 in the
last
week. I originally has ADSL, but family members put pressure to change
to
cable because they were seeing downloads of 500-800 kilobytes per
second...
next to our DSL's 140 kilobytes per second. Gee, whoop-dee-doo when you
consider very few sites can actually upload to you at 500-800 KB a
second
anyways, not to mention DSL's stability and lack of shared bandwidth
make
it
a lot more reliable (although it is actually share at the Cloud... not
too
many people are aware).

Sincerely,

Nima Gharavi, WA6SUP (#301)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Vaughan" <ray@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Something I just noticed...

Is the @home you guys are talking about the same as www.home.net and
or
www.home.com?

If so, that company is refusing to receive spam complaints from
spamcop.net. In other words, they harbor spammers and don't care to
hear
complaints about it. I've had quite a few spams tracked to home.net and
home.com in the last week.

So, running personal web sites: Bad
Sending thousands of spams: No problem.

It may be a sign of an ISP on it's last breath. When you're
drowning,
you'll take anyone's money. My advice, don't do business with spammer
friendly ISPs. Get something else ASAP.

Samples from Spamcop.net:

Found link:http://by.advertising.com/1/c/43099/27453/87286/87286
by.advertising.com = 209.225.0.6 abuse.net by.advertising.com =
abuse@..., postmaster@...
[show] "nslookup by.advertising.com" (checking ip) ip = 209.225.0.6
abuse.net shortcut:abuse@..., postmaster@...
abuse@... refuses to accept SpamCop reports
Using abuse#home.net@... for statistical tracking.

Tracking message source:209.218.32.10:
[show] "nslookup 209.218.32.10" (getting name) no name
Routing details for 209.218.32.10
[refresh/show] Cached whois for 209.218.32.10:noc-abuse@...
noc-abuse@...: abuse.net home.net = abuse@...
abuse.net noc.home.net = abuse@...
Using best abuse.net reporting addresses:abuse@...
abuse@... bounces (169 sent : 85 bounces)
Using abuse#home.com@... for statistical tracking.
Whois found:abuse#home.com@...

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
�97.1(c)-(d)


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: @Home

T. Glen Haggard <glen@...>
 

140k ???? Wow, that is slow for DSL. My DSL provider guarantees a minimum of
386K with basic DSL service. That is download of course. I have never seen
mine go below 500 unless there is a problem and it usually runs more like
800 to 1000k. I even surge up to 1.5 megs at times. When there have been
troubles I call them and they credit me for that day or days. It doesn't
happen much. With the enhanced DSL I can run servers or anything else I want
to do.

Glen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nima Gharavi" <Nima@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Yes, that is the company. They've been bought so many times it's
impossible
to keep track. Currently their full name is Excite@Home. If I remember
correctly, D. Nate made me aware that they announced chapter 11 in the
last
week. I originally has ADSL, but family members put pressure to change to
cable because they were seeing downloads of 500-800 kilobytes per
second...
next to our DSL's 140 kilobytes per second. Gee, whoop-dee-doo when you
consider very few sites can actually upload to you at 500-800 KB a second
anyways, not to mention DSL's stability and lack of shared bandwidth make
it
a lot more reliable (although it is actually share at the Cloud... not too
many people are aware).

Sincerely,

Nima Gharavi, WA6SUP (#301)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Vaughan" <ray@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Something I just noticed...

Is the @home you guys are talking about the same as www.home.net and or
www.home.com?

If so, that company is refusing to receive spam complaints from
spamcop.net. In other words, they harbor spammers and don't care to hear
complaints about it. I've had quite a few spams tracked to home.net and
home.com in the last week.

So, running personal web sites: Bad
Sending thousands of spams: No problem.

It may be a sign of an ISP on it's last breath. When you're drowning,
you'll take anyone's money. My advice, don't do business with spammer
friendly ISPs. Get something else ASAP.

Samples from Spamcop.net:

Found link:http://by.advertising.com/1/c/43099/27453/87286/87286
by.advertising.com = 209.225.0.6 abuse.net by.advertising.com =
abuse@..., postmaster@...
[show] "nslookup by.advertising.com" (checking ip) ip = 209.225.0.6
abuse.net shortcut:abuse@..., postmaster@...
abuse@... refuses to accept SpamCop reports
Using abuse#home.net@... for statistical tracking.

Tracking message source:209.218.32.10:
[show] "nslookup 209.218.32.10" (getting name) no name
Routing details for 209.218.32.10
[refresh/show] Cached whois for 209.218.32.10:noc-abuse@...
noc-abuse@...: abuse.net home.net = abuse@...
abuse.net noc.home.net = abuse@...
Using best abuse.net reporting addresses:abuse@...
abuse@... bounces (169 sent : 85 bounces)
Using abuse#home.com@... for statistical tracking.
Whois found:abuse#home.com@...

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
�97.1(c)-(d)


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Re: @Home

Nima Gharavi <Nima@...>
 

Wow, that does stink. In that case that would be one of the few situations
where I would actually recommend cable. I would be pretty shocked to hear
that someone in Sacramento wouldn't be served by AT&T@Excite@Home (My new
conjuncted name for the conglomerate).

-Nima, WA6SUP ;-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "T. Glen Haggard" <glen@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


OK, you got me but I just got off work this morning after working a 12
hour
shift last night so it wasn't fair. Sounds like we are getting about the
same thing then. I here folks in the Bay area complain a lot about their
DSL
being slow and having troubles so I assumed that you were getting the same
thing. In fact, there is ham somewhere in the Sacramento Valley area that
pays by the bandwidth on his DSL. He pays for 500K down and 128 up and
that
is it. It does not go over that. In fact, he complains that it rarely gets
much higher than ISDN line on the download. I guess if you live the rural
areas were there is only one choice they can charge what they want. For
him
to get the same download that most of us get on DSL he would pay more than
twice as much. Crazy. We need more choices.

Glen


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nima Gharavi" <Nima@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


hehe, that's why I always spell it out to remove ambiguity.
Kilo-Bytes...
not bits. Your ISP guarantees 386 Kilo-Bits per second. If it
guarantees
386 Kilo-Bytes per second, I'm moving in with you. If you calculate it,
140
Kilobytes per second actually equals a T1 (1.244 Mega-Bits per second [I
think it was.. gosh it's been a while]) if you calculate all the
overhead
T1's have and all... they are pretty equal. Now 1.244 Mega-Bytes per
second
would be kewl!

*Goes off to visit his friend at Pacific Bell HQ to play with their
experimental OC192*

-Nima


----- Original Message -----
From: "T. Glen Haggard" <glen@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


140k ???? Wow, that is slow for DSL. My DSL provider guarantees a
minimum
of
386K with basic DSL service. That is download of course. I have never
seen
mine go below 500 unless there is a problem and it usually runs more
like
800 to 1000k. I even surge up to 1.5 megs at times. When there have
been
troubles I call them and they credit me for that day or days. It
doesn't
happen much. With the enhanced DSL I can run servers or anything else
I
want
to do.

Glen


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nima Gharavi" <Nima@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Yes, that is the company. They've been bought so many times it's
impossible
to keep track. Currently their full name is Excite@Home. If I
remember
correctly, D. Nate made me aware that they announced chapter 11 in
the
last
week. I originally has ADSL, but family members put pressure to
change
to
cable because they were seeing downloads of 500-800 kilobytes per
second...
next to our DSL's 140 kilobytes per second. Gee, whoop-dee-doo when
you
consider very few sites can actually upload to you at 500-800 KB a
second
anyways, not to mention DSL's stability and lack of shared bandwidth
make
it
a lot more reliable (although it is actually share at the Cloud...
not
too
many people are aware).

Sincerely,

Nima Gharavi, WA6SUP (#301)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Vaughan" <ray@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Something I just noticed...

Is the @home you guys are talking about the same as www.home.net
and
or
www.home.com?

If so, that company is refusing to receive spam complaints from
spamcop.net. In other words, they harbor spammers and don't care
to
hear
complaints about it. I've had quite a few spams tracked to home.net
and
home.com in the last week.

So, running personal web sites: Bad
Sending thousands of spams: No problem.

It may be a sign of an ISP on it's last breath. When you're
drowning,
you'll take anyone's money. My advice, don't do business with
spammer
friendly ISPs. Get something else ASAP.

Samples from Spamcop.net:

Found link:http://by.advertising.com/1/c/43099/27453/87286/87286
by.advertising.com = 209.225.0.6 abuse.net by.advertising.com =
abuse@..., postmaster@...
[show] "nslookup by.advertising.com" (checking ip) ip =
209.225.0.6
abuse.net shortcut:abuse@..., postmaster@...
abuse@... refuses to accept SpamCop reports
Using abuse#home.net@... for statistical tracking.

Tracking message source:209.218.32.10:
[show] "nslookup 209.218.32.10" (getting name) no name
Routing details for 209.218.32.10
[refresh/show] Cached whois for
209.218.32.10:noc-abuse@...
noc-abuse@...: abuse.net home.net = abuse@...
abuse.net noc.home.net = abuse@...
Using best abuse.net reporting addresses:abuse@...
abuse@... bounces (169 sent : 85 bounces)
Using abuse#home.com@... for statistical tracking.
Whois found:abuse#home.com@...

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
�97.1(c)-(d)


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: @Home

Nima Gharavi <Nima@...>
 

Darn, that's what I thought! But then I said that would be too much faster
than DSL.. and I for some reason remember them being near equals when I had
all the numbers fresh in my head... back in the day :P

-Nima

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Vaughan" <ray@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


At 11:28 AM 8/23/01 -0600, you wrote:

If you calculate it, 140 Kilobytes per second actually equals a T1
(1.244 Mega-Bits per second [I think it was.. gosh it's been a while]) if
you calculate all the overhead T1's have and all... they are pretty equal.
Now 1.244 Mega-Bytes per second would be kewl!

You were close. A T1 is 1.544 Mega bits per second.

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
�97.1(c)-(d)


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: @Home

Ray Vaughan
 

At 11:28 AM 8/23/01 -0600, you wrote:

If you calculate it, 140 Kilobytes per second actually equals a T1 (1.244 Mega-Bits per second [I think it was.. gosh it's been a while]) if you calculate all the overhead T1's have and all... they are pretty equal. Now 1.244 Mega-Bytes per second would be kewl!
You were close. A T1 is 1.544 Mega bits per second.

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
§97.1(c)-(d)


Gurus? (Off topic for IRLP)

Ken Arck <ph@...>
 

Any Apache/Perl/Linux guru want to take a stab at a wierd problem with cgi?

Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Owner and Founder - Arcom Communications
http://www.ah6le.net
Amateur Radio Station AH6LE
http://oregonbarnstormers.rcclubs.com
http://pegasus.rcplanet.com
Ph's Hawaiian Stables
palace://ph.scherza.com:9997


Re: @Home

T. Glen Haggard <glen@...>
 

OK, you got me but I just got off work this morning after working a 12 hour
shift last night so it wasn't fair. Sounds like we are getting about the
same thing then. I here folks in the Bay area complain a lot about their DSL
being slow and having troubles so I assumed that you were getting the same
thing. In fact, there is ham somewhere in the Sacramento Valley area that
pays by the bandwidth on his DSL. He pays for 500K down and 128 up and that
is it. It does not go over that. In fact, he complains that it rarely gets
much higher than ISDN line on the download. I guess if you live the rural
areas were there is only one choice they can charge what they want. For him
to get the same download that most of us get on DSL he would pay more than
twice as much. Crazy. We need more choices.

Glen

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nima Gharavi" <Nima@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


hehe, that's why I always spell it out to remove ambiguity. Kilo-Bytes...
not bits. Your ISP guarantees 386 Kilo-Bits per second. If it guarantees
386 Kilo-Bytes per second, I'm moving in with you. If you calculate it,
140
Kilobytes per second actually equals a T1 (1.244 Mega-Bits per second [I
think it was.. gosh it's been a while]) if you calculate all the overhead
T1's have and all... they are pretty equal. Now 1.244 Mega-Bytes per
second
would be kewl!

*Goes off to visit his friend at Pacific Bell HQ to play with their
experimental OC192*

-Nima


----- Original Message -----
From: "T. Glen Haggard" <glen@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


140k ???? Wow, that is slow for DSL. My DSL provider guarantees a
minimum
of
386K with basic DSL service. That is download of course. I have never
seen
mine go below 500 unless there is a problem and it usually runs more
like
800 to 1000k. I even surge up to 1.5 megs at times. When there have been
troubles I call them and they credit me for that day or days. It doesn't
happen much. With the enhanced DSL I can run servers or anything else I
want
to do.

Glen


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nima Gharavi" <Nima@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Yes, that is the company. They've been bought so many times it's
impossible
to keep track. Currently their full name is Excite@Home. If I
remember
correctly, D. Nate made me aware that they announced chapter 11 in the
last
week. I originally has ADSL, but family members put pressure to
change
to
cable because they were seeing downloads of 500-800 kilobytes per
second...
next to our DSL's 140 kilobytes per second. Gee, whoop-dee-doo when
you
consider very few sites can actually upload to you at 500-800 KB a
second
anyways, not to mention DSL's stability and lack of shared bandwidth
make
it
a lot more reliable (although it is actually share at the Cloud... not
too
many people are aware).

Sincerely,

Nima Gharavi, WA6SUP (#301)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Vaughan" <ray@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [irlp] Re: @Home


Something I just noticed...

Is the @home you guys are talking about the same as www.home.net and
or
www.home.com?

If so, that company is refusing to receive spam complaints from
spamcop.net. In other words, they harbor spammers and don't care to
hear
complaints about it. I've had quite a few spams tracked to home.net
and
home.com in the last week.

So, running personal web sites: Bad
Sending thousands of spams: No problem.

It may be a sign of an ISP on it's last breath. When you're
drowning,
you'll take anyone's money. My advice, don't do business with
spammer
friendly ISPs. Get something else ASAP.

Samples from Spamcop.net:

Found link:http://by.advertising.com/1/c/43099/27453/87286/87286
by.advertising.com = 209.225.0.6 abuse.net by.advertising.com =
abuse@..., postmaster@...
[show] "nslookup by.advertising.com" (checking ip) ip = 209.225.0.6
abuse.net shortcut:abuse@..., postmaster@...
abuse@... refuses to accept SpamCop reports
Using abuse#home.net@... for statistical tracking.

Tracking message source:209.218.32.10:
[show] "nslookup 209.218.32.10" (getting name) no name
Routing details for 209.218.32.10
[refresh/show] Cached whois for 209.218.32.10:noc-abuse@...
noc-abuse@...: abuse.net home.net = abuse@...
abuse.net noc.home.net = abuse@...
Using best abuse.net reporting addresses:abuse@...
abuse@... bounces (169 sent : 85 bounces)
Using abuse#home.com@... for statistical tracking.
Whois found:abuse#home.com@...

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
�97.1(c)-(d)


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Re: @Home

Ray Vaughan
 

So that we can concentrate on IRLP here, let me strongly recommend a web site about dsl:

http://www.dslreports.com/

There's a ton of great information at this site. Hardware, ISPs, carriers, you name it. Bandwidth tests and tweaks... And, if you need it, quite technical too.

Getting a solid reliable fast connection to the Internet is critical for the IRLP network. We need to get educated on all the high speed technologies and this is a great place to get up to speed. Just be prepared to spend a few hours on this web site. There's that much interesting information there.

At 12:07 PM 8/23/01 -0700, you wrote:
OK, you got me but I just got off work this morning after working a 12 hour
shift last night so it wasn't fair. Sounds like we are getting about the
same thing then. I here folks in the Bay area complain a lot about their DSL
being slow and having troubles so I assumed that you were getting the same
thing. In fact, there is ham somewhere in the Sacramento Valley area that
pays by the bandwidth on his DSL. He pays for 500K down and 128 up and that
is it. It does not go over that. In fact, he complains that it rarely gets
much higher than ISDN line on the download. I guess if you live the rural
areas were there is only one choice they can charge what they want. For him
to get the same download that most of us get on DSL he would pay more than
twice as much. Crazy. We need more choices.

Ray J. Vaughan, MS, CBTE, CERT
KD4BBM PG-7-15266
ray@...
http://www.rayvaughan.com/
§97.1(c)-(d)


Re: IRLP and linux router

Nima Gharavi <Nima@...>
 

Ted,

The file you're looking for is /home/irlp/custom/environment

Good luck,

-Nima

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Maczulat" <tmaczulat@...>
To: <irlp@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 5:23 PM
Subject: [irlp] IRLP and linux router


We are planning to move the IRLP node here behind the firewall.

Dave C. mentioned changing a directive to say

"CANT_RESOLVE_IP_LOCALLY" to YES

Can anyone tell me where this is found in the IRLP configuration?

Thanks...

Ted, VE7TFM
NodeOp VE7KU Node 112


IRLP and linux router

Ted Maczulat <tmaczulat@...>
 

We are planning to move the IRLP node here behind the firewall.
 
Dave C. mentioned changing a directive to say
 
"CANT_RESOLVE_IP_LOCALLY" to YES
 
Can anyone tell me where this is found in the IRLP configuration?
 
Thanks...
 
Ted, VE7TFM
NodeOp  VE7KU  Node 112


Re: IRLP and linux router

Rich Ball
 

Ted,

I beleive its in the /home/irlp/custom/environment file. You need to be
user root

Rich

On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:23:36 -0700 "Ted Maczulat" <tmaczulat@...>
writes:
We are planning to move the IRLP node here behind the firewall.

Dave C. mentioned changing a directive to say

"CANT_RESOLVE_IP_LOCALLY" to YES

Can anyone tell me where this is found in the IRLP configuration?

Thanks...

Ted, VE7TFM
NodeOp VE7KU Node 112
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.


Echo Rflector Problems

Jeff Young <kb3hf@...>
 

My node 444 has worked great before the code red junk and I have received many complements on the audio quality. Since the beginning of August, I have had nothing but echoes and broken audio through the IRLP Echo Reflector when I test the system. Other stations also trying to use the node have echo issues. What else could have changed in my system, other than the bandwidth issues I am experiencing with my @home cable modem traffic hitting me all the time since the beginning of August. At this point it is frustrating not being able to use the system.
 
Any suggestions or help?
 
73,
 
Jeff KB3HF
Node 444


Re: Echo Rflector Problems

Paul Cassel <paul@...>
 

You can always listen to the Streaming audio feed on Live365.  www.live365.com and use IRLP as the keyword.  As the feed is about 30 seconds behind it works well to compare your audio to other nodes.
 
Paul Ve3SY

----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Young
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:09 PM
Subject: [irlp] Echo Rflector Problems

My node 444 has worked great before the code red junk and I have received many complements on the audio quality. Since the beginning of August, I have had nothing but echoes and broken audio through the IRLP Echo Reflector when I test the system. Other stations also trying to use the node have echo issues. What else could have changed in my system, other than the bandwidth issues I am experiencing with my @home cable modem traffic hitting me all the time since the beginning of August. At this point it is frustrating not being able to use the system.
 
Any suggestions or help?
 
73,
 
Jeff KB3HF
Node 444


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
irlp-unsubscribe@...



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.