[mod.mag.fidonet] FidoNews Replies

pozar@hoptoad.UUCP (02/24/87)

From: Gareth Howell <sun!seismo!mcvax!idec.stc.co.uk!howellg>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 87 09:34:16 GMT
Subject: Re: Response to News

   >Date: Fri, 6 Feb 87 15:56:23 cst
   >From: lll-crg!seismo!uiucdcs!clio.las.uiuc.edu!berger (Mike Berger)
   >Subject: Fido news letter
   >This is in response to your comments about an exam-free amateur radio
   >Finally, I think that complaining about the morse code requirement is
   >a cop-out.  The requirement may be obsolete and stupid, but it's
   >not insurmountable (or even difficult).  The code test for a technician

I don't think that the requirement for Morse proficiency is obsolete.
It is still the case that Morse code is used widely on the hf bands,
also we (radio amateurs that is) are often co-users of the hf bands;
sharing with emergency and point-to-point communications.  The
reasoning behind the continued existence of the Morse test, I believe,
is that it enables amateurs to understand the co-users of the band,
and therefore either avoid interference, or in the case of emergency
channels, alert the appropriate authorities. I view it in a similar
vein as the requirement that all Air Traffic Control procedures take
place in English.
 In the UK Morse is not required on VHF and UHF bands. I haven't passed
the test yet, mainly because I am sufficiently occupied with VHF and
UHF communications and haven't yet felt the need ,or had the money,
for hf equipment.
         73s Gareth
        Gareth Howell  <howellg@idec.stc.co.uk>  G6KVK @ IO91VX
ICL Network Systems, Private Networks Business Centre   
London Road, Stevenage, Herts, England, SG1 1YB    Tel:+44 (0)438 738294
howellg%idec%ukc@mcvax.uucp, idec!howellg@seismo.CSS.GOV

        Tim Pozar
UUCP    pozar@hoptoad.UUCP
Fido    125/406
	77 Maiden Lane
	San Francisco CA 94108
terrorist cryptography DES drugs cipher secret decode NSA CIA NRO IRS
coke crack pot LSD russian missile atom nuclear assassinate libyan RSA

Bob@hoptoad.UUCP (03/10/87)

Date: Mon  9 Mar 87 15:49
From: Bob Hartman, Net 1014 Node 1,  Spark Software,  Nashua NH 
To:   All, Net 125 Node 406, KLOK-FM BBS, San Francisco CA
Subj: 9600 bps modem article

Well, it seems that Thom and I did not coordinate this too 
well.  The article which appeared in this week's FidoNews was 
not the final one that I wrote.  The only sections that were 
incorrect dealt with the Telebit TrailBlazer modem.

In the article that was published, it mentions that this modem 
"raises DCD, then outputs the connect message", and that this 
is incompatible with SEAdog.  The engineering department at 
Telebit heard of this, and sent me new firmware that changed 
that part of the modem, and with this new firmware, the modem 
did in fact work correctly with SEAdog.  That of course also 
changes the answers to a couple of questions that are at the 
end of the article.  In particular, the question about which 
modem should be bought if one had to be bought right now.  The 
article states that the only viable contender is USR, but that 
is no longer true.  The Telebit TrailBlazer will also work 
with SEAdog, and the next release of Opus will also have 
support for the CONNECT FAST message that the TrailBlazer 
generates.  The parts of the article that deal with 
incompatibility with the Telebit TrailBlazer and current 
network software should be revised to read that the modems 
currently shipped exhibit these flaws, but new firmware is 
developed and has been tested and it does work with the 
current network software.

Also left out of the article were network addresses for two of 
the vendors:

 USRobotics - Noah Gregoropolous 115/500
 Telebit    - Bruce Blain        132/101
 Microcom   - not reachable via FidoNet

I am very sorry that the incorrect version of the article was 
sent out, but mistakes get made by everyone.

- Bob -