Hi All, Reviewing the notes, I noticed the comment about the new modes. MFSK64 was tested here to allow another dimension to the modes available and that was a higher data speed than psk250. In practical terms, the wide bandwidth I agree is an issue as a) it goes against the initial objectives of Pskmail of narrow bandwidth and b) it prevents the used of a narrow filter that is useful for the performance of the server. On the other hand I can use Thor22 with a 500Hz filter quite successfully. So in summary, since I am the one who made the original proposal for Thor22 and Mfsk64 to be integrated in the code, i would recommend that we remove Mfsk64. Comments welcomed. I am happy to take the latest clients and servers codes and perform the change if agreed. 73s, John (VK2ETA) On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Sven <sven98de@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi all, > DAMA could provide a solution to collisions, but I > don't see how DAMA > would work on HF, because to keep control, routes must > be stable, and HF isn't. > > 73 > Sven > > > --- Pär Crusefalk <per@xxxxxxxxxxxx> schrieb: > > > Hi, > > > > I have not received any updates, apart from Thomas > > (thank you), on the > > meeting notes from the participants so I figured I > > may as well post them > > on the mailing list. I know there are lots of > > subjects discussed that > > didn't make it into these notes but it was all I > > wrote down (note to > > self and others: its good to elect a secretary at > > the beginning of the > > meeting). > > > > The attached odt file contains the notes. For those > > using pc's where you > > are unable to read that format there is a badly > > formatted text version > > here: > > > > A few notes from the Zweibrücken meeting 20-Sep-08. > > > > Present were: > > Rein, PA0R > > Roberto, IS0GRB > > Pär, SM0RWO ("elected" secretary of the > > session) > > Rolf, DL0IMA > > Thomas, DJ4WL > > Franz-Josef, DB3CF > > Jörg, DL9YCS > > > > Matters discussed: > > > > Before taking notes (and being appointed secretary) > > Rolf and Thomas gave > > a presentation about Intermar and their activities. > > They also described > > the need for and use of a windows version of the > > client. A gui design > > idea was presented and the aim of that was to create > > a client that would > > run on windows and be custom made for sailing > > yachts. We had a rather > > lenghty discussion about this windows client and > > neither yours truly or > > Rein were very interested in taking on the job of > > forking and building a > > client for windows only. Personally, your secretary > > here again, I would > > rather see a platform independent client and I can > > have a look at that > > (perhaps run by cygwin on windows). But, the gui > > design ideas that Rolf > > and Thomas presented were very interesting and I can > > see why they would > > want a windows version. We should definitely > > consider this and see what > > can be done. > > > > Beacon policy > > > > There are now several servers with active beacons. > > If a client should > > try to connect during the first five minutes of the > > hour then that > > client will have a hard time, especially so on 30 > > mtrs (10.148) as there > > are several servers transmitting beacons. > > > > The meeting agreed that servers should only beacon > > once per frequency > > and hour. There may be concerns for servers using > > several modes on the > > same frequency, no decision was made on that. > > > > Note from the secretary: > > The beacon was added when there was just one server > > (sm0rwo) and one > > client (pa0r). It was then a good way to let the > > client see that the > > server was active and what exact frequency it was > > using. Now the traffic > > intensity is much higher, with aprs beacons and > > message handling, with > > more servers and clients so the need for the beacon > > is less obvious. The > > total beacon amount should be in inverse proportion > > to the amount of > > other traffic on the frequency. > > > > QSY and common frequency on 30 meters > > > > Rolf expressed that it would be good for a client to > > have a world wide > > frequency for pskmail aprs. A sailing yacht crossing > > the atlantic was > > mentioned, it would be good to have a common > > frequency so as not have to > > hunt for servers on different frequencies there. > > The meeting decided that we should move the current > > european common 30 > > meter frequency to 10.148 instead of 10.148,25 > > (center frequency). Also, > > it was decided that the frequency should be used > > mainly for aprs/pskaprs > > and connected sessions should be handled on other > > frequencies. > > Connecting on the frequency should be fine however, > > the client should > > then use the QSY command and move to the servers > > traffic channel. Or, if > > the server is scanning, the client should connect > > when the server is on > > the traffic channel. > > > > Note on Dial frequency and center frequency > > > > This is just a comment by your secretary, Pär. It > > was discussed wether > > frequencies should be written as dial (vfo) or > > center frequencies. By > > center frequency we mean the actual center > > frequency, that is dial fq > > +/- the center audio fq being used. An example is > > 10.147 and USB > > displayed on the rig, if we then use 1000 Hz as > > "sweet spot"/center fq > > then the actual transmission will take place on > > 10.148. > > If we only write dial fq then two stations using > > different offsets > > "sweet spot" will not be able to communicate. As > > pskmail limits the afc > > search range and servers use narrow filters it is > > very important to know > > where the actual traffic should be handled. That is > > why the wiki only > > lists the center frequency for each server, they can > > then use whatever > > sweet spot suits their equipment best (for instance > > I use 900 Hz and > > receive in cw using bfo offset). > > > > Development, client maintenance > > > > Rein declared himself happy with the current status > > of the client. He > > wanted to free himself of the maintenance workload > > and have time to > > develop the next version of the on air protocol. He > > wanted someone to > > step up and take over development, maintenance and > > support of the > > client. > > Pär Crusefalk, sm0rwo, voluntered to handle the > > client. (comment: I > > don't know if we came to any decision here but I'm > > ready to handle this > > (sm0rwo)). > > > > FAQ and WIKI for the client needs to be updated, if > > you see questions > > repeated over and over on the mailing list then they > > and their > > respective answers should be added to the FAQ. > > > > New modes, MFSK-64 and THOR-22 > > > > THOR22 is currently being tested on the 80 meter > > path between Australia > > and New Zealand by John, VK2ETA. Patches has been > > submitted by John and > > those have been worked in to the main development > > tree. > > Of these perhaps Thor-22 is the most interesting, > > its supposedly > > (secretary has not tested yet) about as fast as > > PSK-63 but very robust > > and adapted to the QRN/M on 80 meters. MFSK-64 is 1 > > kHz wide and that in > > itself is a problem. > > > > New modem for pskmail > > > > Franz Josef (DB3CF) has isolated the fldigi mdem and > > has a testable > > version running with pskmail. > > The idea is to fork the modem, make the modem as > > lean as possible and > > integrate it into the pskmail client and server. The > > basic idea is to > > migrate only the necessary controls into the GUI, > > and set most of them > > via a modem config file in ~/.pskmail. This means > > that the modem can run > > without X and can for instance be run as a daemon on > > a server. Franz has > > implemented the current posix pskmail-fldigi > > interface but he has also > > added an IP-based interface to this modem. Here a > > discussion > === message truncated === > > > > > >