Topics

Network Speed


Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

Hello Group,

I am wondering if a data rate of  500Kbps will be fast enough to run IRLP? Trying to figure out how to get mountain top repeater site connections.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

--

 

0


David Cameron - IRLP
 

Yes, more than enough.  To run uncompressed audio, it uses less than 100kbps.

Dave Cameron

-------- Original message --------
From: "Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)" <tarra@...>
Date: 8/4/20 7:37 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Subject: [IRLP] Network Speed

Hello Group,

I am wondering if a data rate of  500Kbps will be fast enough to run IRLP? Trying to figure out how to get mountain top repeater site connections.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

--

 

0


Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

Dave, thank you for the quick response. And that is what I was hoping to hear.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

----- Original Message -----
From: David Cameron - IRLP
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 08:39:51 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed

> Yes, more than enough.  To run uncompressed audio, it uses less than 100kbps.Dave Cameron
> -------- Original message --------From: "Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)" Date: 8/4/20 7:37 AM (GMT-08:00) To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io Subject: [IRLP] Network Speed
> Hello Group,
>
> I am wondering if a data rate of  500Kbps will be fast enough to
> run IRLP? Trying to figure out how to get mountain top repeater
> site connections.
>
> Mick - W7CAT
> Node 3464
>
>
>
>
--

 

0


k9dc
 

If it is solid with a consistent ping time (minimal jitter), 500 kbps is plenty, but you need it in both directions. When IRLP is talking, it consumes less than 100 kbps.

Back in the day, I used to have DSL service to my repeater, which provided a whopping 384 kbps in the upstream direction. It worked fine. My current cellular connection (AT&T) gives me 20-25 Mbps, up and down, very solid. AT&T cell site on the same tower. I actually have three nodes at the same site sharing the cell service.

There is a CLI version of Speedtest you can install on your node to test.
apt-get install speedtest-cli

It produces output like this…

repeater@stn4733:~/$ speedtest --server 10135
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from University of California, San Diego (44.48.26.6)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by CenturyLink (Chicago, IL) [977.12 km]: 128.591 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 24.09 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed....................................................................................................
Upload: 26.95 Mbit/s

I specified server 10135, because it is close to the IRLP VPN Hub in Chicago. The natural selection for our 44-net addresses would be somewhere in SoCal.

-k9dc

On Aug 4, 2020, at 10:37, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...> wrote:

Hello Group,

I am wondering if a data rate of 500Kbps will be fast enough to run IRLP? Trying to figure out how to get mountain top repeater site connections.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

--


Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

Hello Dave,

Thank you for the information. Still working on trying to get internet to the site that you visited.

Here is what I am getting on my home cellular connection with AT&T. It will go up once all the people go home. Sadly, here are the results:

Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Choopa, LLC (45.76.244.170)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by CenturyLink (Seattle, WA) [1.31 km]: 199.382 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 11.30 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 1.03 Mbit/s

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

----- Original Message -----
From: k9dc
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 09:04:07 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed

>
> If it is solid with a consistent ping time (minimal jitter), 500 kbps is plenty, but you need it in both directions. When IRLP is talking, it consumes less than 100 kbps.
>
> Back in the day, I used to have DSL service to my repeater, which provided a whopping 384 kbps in the upstream direction. It worked fine. My current cellular connection (AT&T) gives me 20-25 Mbps, up and down, very solid. AT&T cell site on the same tower. I actually have three nodes at the same site sharing the cell service.
>
> There is a CLI version of Speedtest you can install on your node to test.
> apt-get install speedtest-cli
>
> It produces output like this…
>
> repeater@stn4733:~/$ speedtest --server 10135
> Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
> Testing from University of California, San Diego (44.48.26.6)...
> Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
> Selecting best server based on ping...
> Hosted by CenturyLink (Chicago, IL) [977.12 km]: 128.591 ms
> Testing download speed................................................................................
> Download: 24.09 Mbit/s
> Testing upload speed....................................................................................................
> Upload: 26.95 Mbit/s
>
> I specified server 10135, because it is close to the IRLP VPN Hub in Chicago. The natural selection for our 44-net addresses would be somewhere in SoCal.
>
> -k9dc
>
>
> > On Aug 4, 2020, at 10:37, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) wrote:
> >
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > I am wondering if a data rate of 500Kbps will be fast enough to run IRLP? Trying to figure out how to get mountain top repeater site connections.
> >
> > Mick - W7CAT
> > Node 3464
> >
> > --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--

 

0


Ramon Gandia
 

Mick, am I not seeing something? Those numbers look fine.

Ramon AL7X

On 8/4/20 7:18 AM, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) wrote:
Hello Dave,
Thank you for the information. Still working on trying to get internet to the site that you visited.
Here is what I am getting on my home cellular connection with AT&T. It will go up once all the people go home. Sadly, here are the results:
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from Choopa, LLC (45.76.244.170)...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by CenturyLink (Seattle, WA) [1.31 km]: 199.382 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 11.30 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed......................................................................................................
Upload: 1.03 Mbit/s
Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464


Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

Hello Ramon, the upload speed is a little slow. A little behind the scenes with this, is that this is also my home network. And of course those numbers don't indicate packet loss. Although there is some packet loss, it isn't too bad. There was a little during the 45 minute net last night but it wasn't too bad on this end and no one said anything on the other end.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

----- Original Message -----
From: Ramon Gandia
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 10:02:35 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed

> Mick, am I not seeing something? Those numbers look fine.
>
> Ramon AL7X
>
> On 8/4/20 7:18 AM, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) wrote:
> > Hello Dave,
> >
> > Thank you for the information. Still working on trying to get internet
> > to the site that you visited.
> >
> > Here is what I am getting on my home cellular connection with AT&T. It
> > will go up once all the people go home. Sadly, here are the results:
> >
> > Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
> > Testing from Choopa, LLC (45.76.244.170)...
> > Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
> > Selecting best server based on ping...
> > Hosted by CenturyLink (Seattle, WA) [1.31 km]: 199.382 ms
> > Testing download
> > speed................................................................................
> > Download: 11.30 Mbit/s
> > Testing upload
> > speed......................................................................................................
> > Upload: 1.03 Mbit/s
> >
> > Mick - W7CAT
> > Node 3464
>
>
>
>
--

 

0


k9dc
 

You also need to check for jitter. 1 Mbps is plenty of speed on the surface, but it needs to very consistent. Check with a ‘ping irlp.net’ If the round trip time varies wildly, you may begin to notice packet loss by ear. Ideally you would like the difference between the worst case and the best case, to be no more than roughly 100 ms. (ignore the first reply, it is almost always much longer)

From my repeater using IRLP VPN shown below. It varies between 41 to 85, or jitter of 40 odd ms, which is excelent. If yours ends up wildly swinging hundreds of ms, it will not work very well. The precise value doesn’t matter much, as long as it is consistent.

repeater@stn4733:~/$ ping irlp.net [or 1.1.1.1 or 4.2.2.2 or any other destination]
PING irlp.net (159.89.122.231) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=778 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=41.3 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=52.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=41.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=5 ttl=51 time=41.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=69.5 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=7 ttl=51 time=59.0 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=8 ttl=51 time=77.3 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=9 ttl=51 time=65.9 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=10 ttl=51 time=53.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=11 ttl=51 time=73.0 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=12 ttl=51 time=51.9 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=13 ttl=51 time=48.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=14 ttl=51 time=85.5 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=15 ttl=51 time=56.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=16 ttl=51 time=75.8 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=17 ttl=51 time=71.7 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=18 ttl=51 time=71.9 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=19 ttl=51 time=50.9 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=20 ttl=51 time=49.9 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=21 ttl=51 time=69.0 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=22 ttl=51 time=51.7 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=23 ttl=51 time=56.6 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=24 ttl=51 time=51.9 ms

On Aug 4, 2020, at 12:09, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...> wrote:

Hello Ramon, the upload speed is a little slow. A little behind the scenes with this, is that this is also my home network. And of course those numbers don't indicate packet loss. Although there is some packet loss, it isn't too bad. There was a little during the 45 minute net last night but it wasn't too bad on this end and no one said anything on the other end.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464

----- Original Message -----
From: Ramon Gandia
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 10:02:35 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed

Mick, am I not seeing something? Those numbers look fine.

Ramon AL7X


Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

I would say not looking too bad:

repeater@stn3464:~/$ ping irlp.net
PING irlp.net (159.89.122.231) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=180 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=196 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=194 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=170 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=7 ttl=50 time=168 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=8 ttl=50 time=187 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=9 ttl=50 time=186 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=10 ttl=50 time=169 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=11 ttl=50 time=186 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=12 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=13 ttl=50 time=185 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=14 ttl=50 time=185 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=15 ttl=50 time=186 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=16 ttl=50 time=184 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=17 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=18 ttl=50 time=189 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=19 ttl=50 time=176 ms

repeater@stn3464:~/$ ping 1.1.1.1
PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=116 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=158 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=127 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=144 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=143 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=142 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=139 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=138 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=137 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=57 time=136 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=57 time=134 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=57 time=131 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=57 time=145 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=57 time=128 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=57 time=138 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=57 time=117 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=57 time=126 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=57 time=123 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=57 time=122 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=57 time=182 ms

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464


----- Original Message -----
From: k9dc
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 10:28:49 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed

>
> You also need to check for jitter. 1 Mbps is plenty of speed on the surface, but it needs to very consistent. Check with a ‘ping irlp.net’ If the round trip time varies wildly, you may begin to notice packet loss by ear. Ideally you would like the difference between the worst case and the best case, to be no more than roughly 100 ms. (ignore the first reply, it is almost always much longer)
>
> From my repeater using IRLP VPN shown below. It varies between 41 to 85, or jitter of 40 odd ms, which is excelent. If yours ends up wildly swinging hundreds of ms, it will not work very well. The precise value doesn’t matter much, as long as it is consistent.
>
> repeater@stn4733:~/$ ping irlp.net [or 1.1.1.1 or 4.2.2.2 or any other destination]
> PING irlp.net (159.89.122.231) 56(84) bytes of data.
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=778 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=41.3 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=52.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=41.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=5 ttl=51 time=41.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=69.5 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=7 ttl=51 time=59.0 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=8 ttl=51 time=77.3 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=9 ttl=51 time=65.9 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=10 ttl=51 time=53.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=11 ttl=51 time=73.0 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=12 ttl=51 time=51.9 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=13 ttl=51 time=48.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=14 ttl=51 time=85.5 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=15 ttl=51 time=56.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=16 ttl=51 time=75.8 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=17 ttl=51 time=71.7 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=18 ttl=51 time=71.9 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=19 ttl=51 time=50.9 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=20 ttl=51 time=49.9 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=21 ttl=51 time=69.0 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=22 ttl=51 time=51.7 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=23 ttl=51 time=56.6 ms
> 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=24 ttl=51 time=51.9 ms
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 4, 2020, at 12:09, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) wrote:
> >
> > Hello Ramon, the upload speed is a little slow. A little behind the scenes with this, is that this is also my home network. And of course those numbers don't indicate packet loss. Although there is some packet loss, it isn't too bad. There was a little during the 45 minute net last night but it wasn't too bad on this end and no one said anything on the other end.
> >
> > Mick - W7CAT
> > Node 3464
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Ramon Gandia
> > To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 10:02:35 AM
> > Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed
> >
> > > Mick, am I not seeing something? Those numbers look fine.
> > >
> > > Ramon AL7X
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--

 

0


k9dc
 

Correct. That looks very good. Now if it ALWAYS looks like that, you will be fine. But I thought you had a Verizon account with a static public IP?

-k9dc

On Aug 4, 2020, at 12:42, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...> wrote:

I would say not looking too bad:

repeater@stn3464:~/$ ping irlp.net
PING irlp.net (159.89.122.231) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=180 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=196 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=194 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=170 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=7 ttl=50 time=168 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=8 ttl=50 time=187 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=9 ttl=50 time=186 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=10 ttl=50 time=169 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=11 ttl=50 time=186 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=12 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=13 ttl=50 time=185 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=14 ttl=50 time=185 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=15 ttl=50 time=186 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=16 ttl=50 time=184 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=17 ttl=50 time=188 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=18 ttl=50 time=189 ms
64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=19 ttl=50 time=176 ms


Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA)
 

Hello Dave,

Yes, I do have a Verizon account with a static IP up on the mountain. When the SD card for the Pi corrupted, the node didn't work any more. Until I can get up there to swap out the SD card, I setup a node at home with my AT&T hotspot and a radio transmitting on the repeaters link frequency. It has been working well as a back up.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464


----- Original Message -----
From: k9dc
To: IRLP@irlp.groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 10:48:00 AM
Subject: Re: [IRLP] Network Speed

>
> Correct. That looks very good. Now if it ALWAYS looks like that, you will be fine. But I thought you had a Verizon account with a static public IP?
>
> -k9dc
>
> > On Aug 4, 2020, at 12:42, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) wrote:
> >
> > I would say not looking too bad:
> >
> > repeater@stn3464:~/$ ping irlp.net
> > PING irlp.net (159.89.122.231) 56(84) bytes of data.
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=180 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=196 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=194 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=188 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=170 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=188 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=7 ttl=50 time=168 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=8 ttl=50 time=187 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=9 ttl=50 time=186 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=10 ttl=50 time=169 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=11 ttl=50 time=186 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=12 ttl=50 time=188 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=13 ttl=50 time=185 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=14 ttl=50 time=185 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=15 ttl=50 time=186 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=16 ttl=50 time=184 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=17 ttl=50 time=188 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=18 ttl=50 time=189 ms
> > 64 bytes from irlp.net (159.89.122.231): icmp_seq=19 ttl=50 time=176 ms
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--

 

0


k9dc
 

Gotcha

-k9dc

On Aug 4, 2020, at 12:59, Teton Amateur Radio Repeater Association (TARRA) <tarra@...> wrote:

Hello Dave,

Yes, I do have a Verizon account with a static IP up on the mountain. When the SD card for the Pi corrupted, the node didn't work any more. Until I can get up there to swap out the SD card, I setup a node at home with my AT&T hotspot and a radio transmitting on the repeaters link frequency. It has been working well as a back up.

Mick - W7CAT
Node 3464