Date   

Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

 

On 9/8/20 3:19 am, k9dc wrote:
Sorry you are having problems, sounds like mostly user problems. But there are a few countermeasures you could deploy.

You certainly could configure a prefix if you want to. Circulate its existence to any trusted users. I had to do exactly that a few years ago for a while. Its success largely depends on whether DTMF is passed across your repeater, in my case DTMF is muted. I also can remotely change the tone squelch configuration on my repeaters. I am normally operate requiring either DCS 043 or PL 94.8. But I can change that on the fly, and not tell anyone. You can get pretty clever with the Kenwood repeaters (TKR-750/850).

I have not had any “feral politics” problems (I love that term), Covid around here has just damped all activity to almost nothing. I have to admit, I have gone for days and never even turned on a radio.
That's odd, covid here has increased activity, and most hams have been
pretty good, but we do have a self appointed radio cop who insists that
certain things are illegal and has caused enough problems to cause a
major link system here to be temporarily shut down. :(

--
73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

 

On 9/8/20 2:06 am, Frederick R. Vobbe wrote:

If a node owner is expected to monitor the kids, would it not be wise
to have an access code like a pin?  I know we can do access codes,
because we had to have one on our repeater due to the local LIDS
connecting and wandering away.

The problem is that codes get shared, and then the friends not IRLP
savvy are the abusers.   Having the ability to set access for a user
with unique number would help, because when you get a complaint you
can revoke that person's access and not affect other "honest" hams.
If you're handy with Bash scripting, it should be possible to script a
user access system, on a per user basis (and you could even have it
managed via a web app).  Possibly even a challenge/response system, if
you really wanted to lock it down.  I haven't attempted this, but Bash
scripting is very versatile, and it's not too hard to interface to
databases or other data sources. :)

I'm about to take my node down.  I don't know if it's the Covid,
effects of lockdown, or feral politics, but I've had a few people who
were outright rude and argumentative to other users who were simply
minding their business.  It's to the point where some people look for
things to disagree with just to start a fight.

That's unfortunate. :(

--
73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com


Re: Echoling on Irlp node 1100

pete damron
 

http://www.echolink.org/faq_validation.htm

You can retrieve your info here and reset your password.

Pete Damron
N5ZLW

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020, 12:48 AM Tony via groups.io <ynotssor=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Easily found at http://echolink.org/logins.jsp and http://status.irlp.net/index.php?nodeid=1100

On 8/9/20 12:29 PM, Milt Duquette via groups.io wrote:
Good afternoon.

Im trying to find my echo link number but cant.
Trying to connect to other echo link users and cant connect.
Where do you find this info?
Im running IRLP node 1100
Thanks
 
VE6MLD
Milt Duquette

1 (403) 928-1000 (cell)

Web:  http://www.photosbymilt.ca

Emails:

miltduquette@...

Twitter: @milt_duquette





Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Tony
 

On 8/4/20 4:21 AM, k9dc wrote:
...
If you happen to set up an EXPerimental reflector, and that reflector also had a presence in the Echolink and Allstar network (or anything else), you could achieve the same objective. Side benefit, you could get rid of the hardware repeater controller entirely.
Sounds strangely similar to the policy controversy with http://hamvoip.org that obviated the 1990s hardware card.


Re: Echoling on Irlp node 1100

Tony
 

On 8/9/20 12:29 PM, Milt Duquette via groups.io wrote:
Good afternoon.

Im trying to find my echo link number but cant.
Trying to connect to other echo link users and cant connect.
Where do you find this info?
Im running IRLP node 1100
Thanks
 
VE6MLD
Milt Duquette

1 (403) 928-1000 (cell)

Web:  http://www.photosbymilt.ca

Emails:

miltduquette@...

Twitter: @milt_duquette





Re: Echoling on Irlp node 1100

Dave Schultheis
 

Milt MLD wrote:


Good afternoon.
Im trying to find my echo link number but cant.
Trying to connect to other echo link users and cant connect.
Where do you find this info?
Im running IRLP node 1100

I looked at the Echolink program on my desktop computer, searched for VE6MLD and found

VE6MLD-L 266909

And we just concluded an Echolink connection, so he has the information.

--

Dave Schultheis
WB6KHP San Jose
Echolink 525494


Echoling on Irlp node 1100

Milt Duquette
 

Good afternoon.


Im trying to find my echo link number but cant.
Trying to connect to other echo link users and cant connect.
Where do you find this info?
Im running IRLP node 1100
Thanks
 
VE6MLD
Milt Duquette

1 (403) 928-1000 (cell)

Web:  http://www.photosbymilt.ca

Emails:

miltduquette@...

Twitter: @milt_duquette




Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

larry_n7fm
 

Dave, Going to make this my final comment.

Yeah! shouts everyone!!!

I am not advocating anything.
I merrily state AUDIO is AUDIO. Why Panic?.

The IRLP stance, of it's not, if it came from a polluted source, is fine. A policing or filtering of Audio to determine if it came from a so called polluted source is not achievable if coming from RF.

Should people choose to join an IRLP connected conversation from the RF end of any IRLP broadcast. You, Me nor anyone has the means to detect when a so called IRLP infraction occurs.

It happens silently and unless told, there is no knee jerk reaction alerting the IRLP police. Life just goes on.

Dave Cameron's RF to RF philosophy is a good one. I have no qualms with his wishes.

Until recently when different VOIP platforms growth came to be putting their signals on RF
more and more. IRLP had very few issues to contend with from the RF End only Internet Network issues.

Some of the self imposed or dictated policies by some are just as Tony put it "a cultural thing". Technology and different VOIP platforms is forcing a culture change.

Be it ... Good or bad... Like it or not.
IT IS HAPPENING. You either adapt or use all your Amateur Hardware for TARGET Practice before junking it.

73 ...& AR
Larry - N7FM

On 8/8/20 5:59 AM, k9dc wrote:
We do expect all node operators to monitor all operation of their repeater(s) and take reasonable steps to correct or disconnect when their node is malfunctioning or someone is abusing/misusing the access you have generously provided your community. If you cannot do that, we expect you to turn the system off. After all, you are personally responsible for all traffic that enters the network from your node.
This is a much higher standard than simply being compliant with federal rules and regulations. IRLP rules actually apply to your RECEIVER and your entire system. We also have significant limitations on the traffic that is allowed.
Even when something bad happens that is not your direct personal fault, we expect you, the node owner, to take care of it. At the point a signal enters your receiver, you own it. It becomes your fault when something bad happens. IRLP reflector managers have a suite of tools that can be used to prevent your repeater from impairing the larger network. But it is preferable that you take of the problem at your end.
-k9dc

On Aug 8, 2020, at 03:06, larry_n7fm <larry@...> wrote:

I do my best to comply with the IRLP guidelines. However if a user joins in a conversation on my repeater I don't fingerprint, run background checks or require people to prove to me that they have no equipment turned on that's capable of running another mode that could put the paranoid people into cardiac arrest.

This user's transmissions are no different than any other person of the group that may be chatting. He does not interfere in any way. Converses via RF and My system repeats it locally. If someone connects to my IRLP Node during that time. The AUDIO from him or anyone else using my repeater is going to be heard.

My previous point... Should someone on his transceiver from his Allstar/Echolink happen to connect/talk while he is using my repeater no one would ever know the additional user wasn't a local RF user if not told differently. This does and will continue to happen as technology changes. A fact of life that is beyond your or my control. Mostly people just want to chat. They could care less about what platform their audio originates on. It's a hey there's Joe thing. Wonder where he's been.

I am glad to say I'm not part of the culture that thinks everyone needs to keep all radio gear segregated and locked in different parts of the basement to be taken out one piece at a time and must be returned before playing with another.

I do try to follow the IRLP guidelines but I'm never going to get Paranoid about someones AUDIO. Enough said

Bye for now Tony
Larry -N7FM


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Bob Dengler
 

At 8/8/2020 12:06 AM, you wrote:

My previous point... Should someone on his transceiver from his
Allstar/Echolink happen to connect/talk while he is using my repeater no
one would ever know the additional user wasn't a local RF user if not
told differently. This does and will continue to happen as technology
changes. A fact of life that is beyond your or my control. Mostly people
just want to chat. They could care less about what platform their audio
originates on. It's a hey there's Joe thing. Wonder where he's been.
I've been following this thread for a while, so my comment:

I help maintain an IRLP node that's been serving the greater Los Angeles area on an open repeater for 18 years, & in all that time not once have we ever had someone backfeed Echolink, Allstar or any other VoIP service into our repeater. If someone did do that, it would be immediately obvious to my ears.

In light of the above, it seems to me that this all sounds like someone trying to make a case for open RoIP access without network restrictions based on misbehaving users. Believe you me, SoCal is a hotbed of the latter yet we've never had it happen. So this whole thread is moot.

Bob NO6B


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Frederick R. Vobbe
 

It is defiantly a shift in users/hams culture.  When Dave Toth (VE3GYQ) and I ran the machine together it seemed very polite and professional. 

Times and the world circumstances have taken it's toll, and people tend not to be as friendly and polite, so I've been changing the access code once a quarter, and telling it to just a few people.  Problem is, those people tell others, and so on, and eventually the bad actors get the code.  It's a case of IRLP Wack-a-mole.  ((deep sigh)).

Oh well.  As long as there are no fights on reflectors and node connections, I'll count my blessings.

BTW, I took down Lima's DSTAR system because we had several cases of abuse.  Since I really didn't use DSTAR, it was of no value to me.

CUL/73

Fred/W8HDU  


On 8/8/2020 1:19 PM, k9dc wrote:
Sorry you are having problems, sounds like mostly user problems. But there are a few countermeasures you could deploy. 

You certainly could configure a prefix if you want to. Circulate its existence to any trusted users. I had to do exactly that a few years ago for a while. Its success largely depends on whether DTMF is passed across your repeater, in my case DTMF is muted.  I also can remotely change the tone squelch configuration on my repeaters. I am normally operate requiring either DCS 043 or PL 94.8. But I can change that on the fly, and not tell anyone.  You can get pretty clever with the Kenwood repeaters (TKR-750/850). 

I have not had any “feral politics” problems (I love that term), Covid around here has just damped all activity to almost nothing. I have to admit, I have gone for days and never even turned on a radio. 

Good luck!

-k9dc


On Aug 8, 2020, at 12:06, Frederick R. Vobbe <fvobbe@...> wrote:


If a node owner is expected to monitor the kids, would it not be wise to have an access code like a pin?  I know we can do access codes, because we had to have one on our repeater due to the local LIDS connecting and wandering away.

The problem is that codes get shared, and then the friends not IRLP savvy are the abusers.   Having the ability to set access for a user with unique number would help, because when you get a complaint you can revoke that person's access and not affect other "honest" hams.

I'm about to take my node down.  I don't know if it's the Covid, effects of lockdown, or feral politics, but I've had a few people who were outright rude and argumentative to other users who were simply minding their business.  It's to the point where some people look for things to disagree with just to start a fight.

Fred/W8HDU









Avast logo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com



Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Dave Schultheis
 

Mick CAT wrote:


Wondering what they mean by "Deceased" even though I know what that word means.

They mean that he died.

I will contact the family and volunteer to help them unsubscribe from this and other groups to which he was subscribed.

--

Dave Schultheis
WB6KHP San Jose
IRLP 3246


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

Wondering what they mean by "Deceased" even though I know what that word means.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

----- Original Message -----
From: k9dc
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2020 11:30:16 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Multiple Echolink Sessions

>
> At the bottom of every message sent by this list, there is a link “Unsubscribe” Click on that link.
>
> -k9dc
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 2020, at 13:24, Bill Ashby wrote:
> >
> > Please remove from contact list. Deceased.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 00:06, larry_n7fm wrote:
> > Tony,
>
>
>
>
>
>
--


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

k9dc
 

At the bottom of every message sent by this list, there is a link “Unsubscribe” Click on that link.

-k9dc

On Aug 8, 2020, at 13:24, Bill Ashby <n6ffc1954@...> wrote:

Please remove from contact list. Deceased.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 00:06, larry_n7fm <larry@...> wrote:
Tony,


Re: Node 4994 not on status page

k9dc
 

We don’t see it very often these days, but if your ISP happens to route web traffic through a proxy, it may also fail. Most nodes talk to the status page on port 80. But that can be changed to use port 15427 instead. There is a variable in the environment file that can be activated to make that change. Unhash it and restart your node.

#export BEHIND_TRANSPARENT_PROXY=YES

If you want someone to look at it for you, drop a note over to installs@ irlp.net, with your log in information, and one of us will check it out for you.

-k9dc

On Aug 8, 2020, at 12:26, Jim Netwal <w9uum732u@...> wrote:

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 07:39 PM, k9dc wrote:
I am guessing DNS is not set up correctly. The troubleshoot-irlp command tests for that.

-k9dc
I did a DNS test from the troubleshoot page and it passed. The port forwarding passed as well. PGP key also passed. What can I check next?

Thanks, Jim W9UUM


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Bill Ashby <n6ffc1954@...>
 

Please remove from contact list. Deceased.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 00:06, larry_n7fm <larry@...> wrote:
Tony,



I get what the IRLP police want.  We have about beat that to death.



I do my best to comply with the IRLP guidelines. However if a user joins

in a conversation on my repeater I don't fingerprint, run background

checks or require people to prove to me that they have no equipment

turned on that's capable of running another mode that could put the

paranoid people into cardiac arrest.



This user's transmissions are no different than any other person of the

group that may be chatting. He does not interfere in any way. Converses

via RF and My system repeats it locally. If someone connects to my IRLP

Node during that time. The AUDIO from him or anyone else using my

repeater is going to be heard.



My previous point... Should someone on his transceiver from his

Allstar/Echolink happen to connect/talk while he is using my repeater no

one would ever know the additional user wasn't a local RF user if not

told differently. This does and will continue to happen as technology

changes. A fact of life that is beyond your or my control. Mostly people

just want to chat. They could care less about what platform their audio

originates on. It's a hey there's Joe thing. Wonder where he's been.



I am glad to say I'm not part of the culture that thinks everyone needs

to keep all radio gear segregated and locked in different parts of the

basement to be taken out one piece at a time and must be returned before

playing with  another.



I do try to follow the IRLP guidelines but I'm never going to get

Paranoid about someones AUDIO. Enough said



Bye for now Tony



Larry -N7FM













On 8/6/20 10:52 PM, Tony Langdon wrote:

> On 6/8/20 7:36 pm, larry_n7fm wrote:

>> Hi Tony

>>

>> All the points you make are valid if were in the IRLP Police mode. I

>> am Not. Nor do I have interfering users to deal with. I was just

>> making a comment about AUDIO mixing between different platforms.

>>

>> My station runs according the IRLP RF to RF rules. It has only an IRLP

>> connection and RF.

>>

>> My repeater is an open system and welcomes any licensed RF user. It

>> does utilize CTCSS mode not to restrict anyone from using it but to

>> prevent interference from spectral noise, ducting signals etc.

> And CTCSS is the best tool to keep things sensible.  And this also flies

> in the face of "RF is RF - the only RF that matters is the RF that

> carries the tone your system is listening for.  The rest is sophistry

> that confuses the discussion.  Do you actually have users that feed

> other systems to your node on your frequency (with the correct tone)?

> Hmm, I thought not.

>>

>> I am not worried about being punished as I am doing nothing wrong.

>> What made me post in the first place was MY AUDIO is AUDIO comment.

>>

>> My position is (and will remain) the content of any legal RF signal

>> received by my repeater's receiver, when dispersed by me,    has no

>> ownership other than myself.

> Ownership does imply responsibility. ;)

>>

>> Since it came from RF in the sky it was not sent by any physical

>> connection with Echolink or Allstar platforms. I am not hooked to any

>> other networks. My Repeater is passing AUDIO from Me and Nothing more.

>> I am not controlling any system other than my own Transmitter and my

>> IRLP NODE.

>

> As I said, sophistry, since you are already using the most effective

> tool to prevent such accidental operation - CTCSS.  99% (or more) of any

> operators of VoIP systems would rather avoid conflicts with nearby

> nodes, and if they're aware of your system, they will choose a DIFFERENT

> tone, because it serves their purpose too (less chance of QRM to their

> system).

>

>

> In other words, II consider your RF argument to be largely irrelevant,

> because the vast majority of node operators of any system would take

> means to avoid the problem - by using different frequencies and/or CTCSS

> tones.

>

> There is a small chance that a user may relay something from a local

> hotspot, Echolink PC/phone session, AllStar client or something else.

> If that happens, then I do agree with you, it's "incidental" and not

> your concern - some people  might do that for testing or demonstration

> purposes, which wouldn't bother me.  It's only a problem if it's a

> deliberate attempt to cause interference to your node (that does happen

> sometimes, unfortunately).

>







--


-73-
Bill N6FFC
2151 Oakland Road
Space 325
San Jose, CA 95131-1535

Life Member ARRL


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

k9dc
 

Sorry you are having problems, sounds like mostly user problems. But there are a few countermeasures you could deploy.

You certainly could configure a prefix if you want to. Circulate its existence to any trusted users. I had to do exactly that a few years ago for a while. Its success largely depends on whether DTMF is passed across your repeater, in my case DTMF is muted. I also can remotely change the tone squelch configuration on my repeaters. I am normally operate requiring either DCS 043 or PL 94.8. But I can change that on the fly, and not tell anyone. You can get pretty clever with the Kenwood repeaters (TKR-750/850).

I have not had any “feral politics” problems (I love that term), Covid around here has just damped all activity to almost nothing. I have to admit, I have gone for days and never even turned on a radio.

Good luck!

-k9dc

On Aug 8, 2020, at 12:06, Frederick R. Vobbe <fvobbe@...> wrote:


If a node owner is expected to monitor the kids, would it not be wise to have an access code like a pin? I know we can do access codes, because we had to have one on our repeater due to the local LIDS connecting and wandering away.

The problem is that codes get shared, and then the friends not IRLP savvy are the abusers. Having the ability to set access for a user with unique number would help, because when you get a complaint you can revoke that person's access and not affect other "honest" hams.

I'm about to take my node down. I don't know if it's the Covid, effects of lockdown, or feral politics, but I've had a few people who were outright rude and argumentative to other users who were simply minding their business. It's to the point where some people look for things to disagree with just to start a fight.

Fred/W8HDU


Re: Dropping the message

David Cameron - IRLP
 

There is a link at the bottom of every email from that thread that says "mute this topic". Click on that. 

Dave Cameron 

-------- Original message --------
From: pete damron <Petedamron1955@...>
Date: 8/8/20 9:27 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Subject: [IRLP] Dropping the message

Need a e explanation or instruction on getting out of a thread on here..

Pete Damron
N5ZLW


Dropping the message

pete damron
 

Need a e explanation or instruction on getting out of a thread on here..

Pete Damron
N5ZLW


Re: Node 4994 not on status page

Jim Netwal
 

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 07:39 PM, k9dc wrote:
I am guessing DNS is not set up correctly. The troubleshoot-irlp command tests for that.
 
-k9dc
I did a DNS test from the troubleshoot page and it passed.  The port forwarding passed as well.  PGP key also passed.  What can I check next?

Thanks, Jim W9UUM


Re: Multiple Echolink Sessions

Frederick R. Vobbe
 

If a node owner is expected to monitor the kids, would it not be wise to have an access code like a pin?  I know we can do access codes, because we had to have one on our repeater due to the local LIDS connecting and wandering away.

The problem is that codes get shared, and then the friends not IRLP savvy are the abusers.   Having the ability to set access for a user with unique number would help, because when you get a complaint you can revoke that person's access and not affect other "honest" hams.

I'm about to take my node down.  I don't know if it's the Covid, effects of lockdown, or feral politics, but I've had a few people who were outright rude and argumentative to other users who were simply minding their business.  It's to the point where some people look for things to disagree with just to start a fight.

Fred/W8HDU

On 8/8/2020 8:59 AM, k9dc wrote:
We do expect all node operators to monitor all operation of their repeater(s) and take reasonable steps to correct or disconnect when their node is malfunctioning or someone is abusing/misusing the access you have generously provided your community. If you cannot do that, we expect you to turn the system off. After all, you are personally responsible for all traffic that enters the network from your node.

This is a much higher standard than simply being compliant with federal rules and regulations. IRLP rules actually apply to your RECEIVER and your entire system. We also have significant limitations on the traffic that is allowed.

Even when something bad happens that is not your direct personal fault, we expect you, the node owner, to take care of it. At the point a signal enters your receiver, you own it. It becomes your fault when something bad happens. IRLP reflector managers have a suite of tools that can be used to prevent your repeater from impairing the larger network. But it is preferable that you take of the problem at your end.

-k9dc

On Aug 8, 2020, at 03:06, larry_n7fm <larry@...> wrote:

I do my best to comply with the IRLP guidelines. However if a user joins in a conversation on my repeater I don't fingerprint, run background checks or require people to prove to me that they have no equipment turned on that's capable of running another mode that could put the paranoid people into cardiac arrest.

This user's transmissions are no different than any other person of the group that may be chatting. He does not interfere in any way. Converses via RF and My system repeats it locally. If someone connects to my IRLP Node during that time. The AUDIO from him or anyone else using my repeater is going to be heard.

My previous point... Should someone on his transceiver from his Allstar/Echolink happen to connect/talk while he is using my repeater no one would ever know the additional user wasn't a local RF user if not told differently. This does and will continue to happen as technology changes. A fact of life that is beyond your or my control. Mostly people just want to chat. They could care less about what platform their audio originates on. It's a hey there's Joe thing. Wonder where he's been.

I am glad to say I'm not part of the culture that thinks everyone needs to keep all radio gear segregated and locked in different parts of the basement to be taken out one piece at a time and must be returned before playing with another.

I do try to follow the IRLP guidelines but I'm never going to get Paranoid about someones AUDIO. Enough said

Bye for now Tony
Larry -N7FM



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus