i have an idea but i d'ont know how to implement it

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

i have an idea but i d'ont know how to implement it

Jean-Philippe Piers
Hello all,

when OM comming from EchoLink network they offen think they are on skype ,
and mobile radio station can't speak ...

i would like to found how to do do : on ModuleEcholink.tcl

when the EchoLink is "RX" from a network client it start a counter , for
exemple 240 or 300 s

at 180s a text message "don't speak too long you will be disconnected
!!!!" is sent

at 238 or 298 an other text message "you are disconnected you have speak
too long"

at the end of the counter time  ( 240 or 330s ) it is disconnect

any idea to how to do that ?

it will be verry useful !


thanks in advance








--
Jean-Philippe Piers
"7 rue du guic"
22810 Belle isle en terre
skype: jppiers
Tel: 02.36.56.78.79
Gsm: 06.71.78.37.93


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: i have an idea but i d'ont know how to implement it

F5VMR Orange
Hi JP,
I think what you intend can only be done before compilation in the ModuleEchoLink.so. You mention Skype but I think you may mean something else, as there cannot be any connection with EchoLink that by-passes the tight regulation that is afforded to this application to permit licenced amateurs on the radio. There have been some changes by others on the SVXLink forum in relation to announcements and text transmissions.
There has been recent discussion about ModuleFRN for free radio and PMR, but I think you would agree that use of this module with amateur radio would not be appropriate as it would permit access by non-licenced users to amateur bands.
When I have used EchoLink from my devices, they have not been duplex in nature, so receiving a text while transmitting seems impossible. However I'm no expert. Most of the devices use vox on the microphone despite being locked in tx for the duration of the transmission period. I wish you well in the search. However on f5zgm-r, RF transmissions can override network transmissions so i wonder about your set up.

Regards,
Chris.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 22 Dec 2015, at 18:15, Jean-Philippe Piers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> when OM comming from EchoLink network they offen think they are on skype ,
> and mobile radio station can't speak ...
>
> i would like to found how to do do : on ModuleEcholink.tcl
>
> when the EchoLink is "RX" from a network client it start a counter , for
> exemple 240 or 300 s
>
> at 180s a text message "don't speak too long you will be disconnected
> !!!!" is sent
>
> at 238 or 298 an other text message "you are disconnected you have speak
> too long"
>
> at the end of the counter time  ( 240 or 330s ) it is disconnect
>
> any idea to how to do that ?
>
> it will be verry useful !
>
>
> thanks in advance
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Philippe Piers
> "7 rue du guic"
> 22810 Belle isle en terre
> skype: jppiers
> Tel: 02.36.56.78.79
> Gsm: 06.71.78.37.93
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Svxlink-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: i have an idea but i d'ont know how to implement it

Rob Janssen
When using Qtel as the EchoLink client, and with a computer with fullduplex soundcard (most of them allow this, I think) in
fact you can work break-in on EchoLink.   When you are transmitting and talking on EchoLink, and someone transmits on
the radio, you hear them from your computer speaker.  But you do not hear your own voice back from the speaker!

However, I don't think this works with the standard Windows EchoLink client.

What Jean-Philippe is looking for is some timeout on EchoLink transmission.
It does not appear that this exists, but you could maybe program it in TCL.

Rob

F5VMR wrote:

> Hi JP,
> I think what you intend can only be done before compilation in the ModuleEchoLink.so. You mention Skype but I think you may mean something else, as there cannot be any connection with EchoLink that by-passes the tight regulation that is afforded to this application to permit licenced amateurs on the radio. There have been some changes by others on the SVXLink forum in relation to announcements and text transmissions.
> There has been recent discussion about ModuleFRN for free radio and PMR, but I think you would agree that use of this module with amateur radio would not be appropriate as it would permit access by non-licenced users to amateur bands.
> When I have used EchoLink from my devices, they have not been duplex in nature, so receiving a text while transmitting seems impossible. However I'm no expert. Most of the devices use vox on the microphone despite being locked in tx for the duration of the transmission period. I wish you well in the search. However on f5zgm-r, RF transmissions can override network transmissions so i wonder about your set up.
>
> Regards,
> Chris.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 22 Dec 2015, at 18:15, Jean-Philippe Piers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> when OM comming from EchoLink network they offen think they are on skype ,
>> and mobile radio station can't speak ...
>>
>> i would like to found how to do do : on ModuleEcholink.tcl
>>
>> when the EchoLink is "RX" from a network client it start a counter , for
>> exemple 240 or 300 s
>>
>> at 180s a text message "don't speak too long you will be disconnected
>> !!!!" is sent
>>
>> at 238 or 298 an other text message "you are disconnected you have speak
>> too long"
>>
>> at the end of the counter time  ( 240 or 330s ) it is disconnect
>>
>> any idea to how to do that ?
>>
>> it will be verry useful !
>>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: i have an idea but i d'ont know how to implement it

Tobias Blomberg
In reply to this post by Jean-Philippe Piers
On Tuesday 22 December 2015 19:15:56 Jean-Philippe Piers wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> when OM comming from EchoLink network they offen think they are on skype ,
> and mobile radio station can't speak ...
>
> i would like to found how to do do : on ModuleEcholink.tcl
>
> when the EchoLink is "RX" from a network client it start a counter , for
> exemple 240 or 300 s
>
> at 180s a text message "don't speak too long you will be disconnected
> !!!!" is sent
>
> at 238 or 298 an other text message "you are disconnected you have speak
> too long"
>
> at the end of the counter time  ( 240 or 330s ) it is disconnect
>
> any idea to how to do that ?

That is not possible to implement in TCL. Modification of the C++ code would be
required to accomplish that.

The best you can do right now is to file an issue and maybe some day it will be
implemented by someone.

        https://github.com/sm0svx/svxlink/issues

Also, it seems like it's not guaranteed to work with the Windows EchoLink
client unless it supports full duplex like Qtel does.

73's de SM0SVX / Tobias


> it will be verry useful !
>
>
> thanks in advance


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Volodymyr
Hello all,

maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server on an alternative server?
By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the network - SvxNet.
By analogy with EchoLink network.

Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?

73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

F5VMR Orange
Hi volodomyr.
I have started to do this with two and eventually 4 repeaters. You might get a response from Adi Bier. His inception of svxserver is what we use to join the repeaters with a server running a special version of svxlink called svxserver. 
73 Chris f5vmr/g4nab

Sent from my iPhone

On 25 Dec 2015, at 01:02, Volodymyr <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello all,

maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server on an alternative server?
By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the network - SvxNet.
By analogy with EchoLink network.

Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?

73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Mountain, Peter
I am also very interested in this subject. I have been developing an alternative to EchoLink for a private network of repeaters that I am calling CAPLink.

Peter.

On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 4:00 AM, F5VMR <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi volodomyr.
I have started to do this with two and eventually 4 repeaters. You might get a response from Adi Bier. His inception of svxserver is what we use to join the repeaters with a server running a special version of svxlink called svxserver. 
73 Chris f5vmr/g4nab

Sent from my iPhone

On 25 Dec 2015, at 01:02, Volodymyr <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello all,

maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server on an alternative server?
By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the network - SvxNet.
By analogy with EchoLink network.

Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?

73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Adi Bier-3
In reply to this post by F5VMR Orange

Hi all,

yes, I wrote the svxserver, based on the svxlink's NetTrxMsg protocol.
It is compatible to the well known remotetrx/svxlink-linking and
available on my git repository (dl1hrc).
Unfortunately I still have a bug so see it as experimental at the
moment. I started it as an add-on for smaller repeaters networks (up to
15-20 stations), not as a replacement for EchoLink.

Before starting further developments, in my opinion the goal should be
defined. What do you want to do with the new kind of linking?
Do you want to connect just 4 or 5 repeaters or you want to have a _new_
global network? With an own new network you will loose a big number of
users. Do you want an open replacement of the EchoLink-directory
structure? I think it is not a good idea to spread the community into
small pieces with a lower number of users. With the DMR, Dstar, C4FM ...
network you can see what happens if people want to force their own
ideas. If you want to talk to others you need up to 8 radios working on
different modes :/
So it could be a good to list the facts and needs at first.

Merry xmas es vy 73s de Adi / DL1HRC

Am 25.12.2015 um 12:00 schrieb F5VMR:

> Hi volodomyr.
> I have started to do this with two and eventually 4 repeaters. You might
> get a response from Adi Bier. His inception of svxserver is what we use
> to join the repeaters with a server running a special version of svxlink
> called svxserver.
> 73 Chris f5vmr/g4nab
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 25 Dec 2015, at 01:02, Volodymyr <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server
>> on an alternative server?
>> By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the
>> network - SvxNet.
>> By analogy with EchoLink network.
>>
>> Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?
>>
>> 73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Svxlink-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Svxlink-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Rob Janssen
Adi Bier wrote:

>
> Before starting further developments, in my opinion the goal should be
> defined. What do you want to do with the new kind of linking?
> Do you want to connect just 4 or 5 repeaters or you want to have a _new_
> global network? With an own new network you will loose a big number of
> users. Do you want an open replacement of the EchoLink-directory
> structure? I think it is not a good idea to spread the community into
> small pieces with a lower number of users. With the DMR, Dstar, C4FM ...
> network you can see what happens if people want to force their own
> ideas. If you want to talk to others you need up to 8 radios working on
> different modes :/
> So it could be a good to list the facts and needs at first.
>

I agree with that, Adi!
At first glance, we are not interested in participating in a specific system that encompasses only
other svxlink repeaters because we are not interested in repeater-repeater linking.  We use
EchoLink to allow USERS to connect to the repeater when they are not within radio reach,
and moving on to a new directory would lose the existing users.

But on the topic of setting up an alternative directory, I think first a universally acceptable
mechanism of authenticating licensed amateurs should be developed. Universally acceptable
means that probably there will have to be several places where authentication can take place,
that mutually trust eachother.    Once there is a good way to authenticate a licensed amateur,
the creation of something like an EchoLink directory will be quite trivial.  But now, in the
EchoLink system the authentication and the directory are combined. Don't underestimate
the effort that EchoLink has to spend on authenticating all those users, by receiving their
scanned license documents and accepting/rejecting them.  Some people even use their
directory to offload the authentication of amateurs for other services.  It would probably
not be wise to upset them as this is a free service that really costs effort (if not money).

There is also the LotW certificate system that can perform a similar role for authentication,
maybe it could be extended to a more independent mechanism or a hierarchy of mechanisms
like that, to have authentication that is acceptable for everyone and which can and
will be handled by sufficient parties that can be trusted to do the work and to do it reliably.
(once someone does a lousy job and lets unlicensed people into the system, the trust will
immediately drop - see what happens in the SSL certificate business in general)

Such a system could be used for quite a lot of purposes within amateur radio internet
applications, and an EchoLink directory is just one of them.
I think it is best when developing a new EchoLink directory to clearly split those authentication
and directory services, to make it easier for users to authenticate once and then take part
in different systems when they like.

Rob

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Volodymyr
In reply to this post by Adi Bier-3
Hi all,
Echolink has long been morally outdated and does not develop.
It also has a set of well-known shortcomings. Among them are not protected by user authentication at login.
In addition, ill-conceived, politics ..., conference servers. Something new will be ..

An alternative may be the new directory server (perhaps regional or European).
Also, a new module for communicating with him - ModuleSvxNet.
For EchoLink, if necessary,  parallel can use - ModuleEchoLink.

73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr

--- Исходное сообщение ---
От кого: "Adi Bier" <[hidden email]>
Дата: 26 декабря 2015, 11:16:16

Hi all,

yes, I wrote the svxserver, based on the svxlink's NetTrxMsg protocol.
It is compatible to the well known remotetrx/svxlink-linking and
available on my git repository (dl1hrc).
Unfortunately I still have a bug so see it as experimental at the
moment. I started it as an add-on for smaller repeaters networks (up to
15-20 stations), not as a replacement for EchoLink.

Before starting further developments, in my opinion the goal should be
defined. What do you want to do with the new kind of linking?
Do you want to connect just 4 or 5 repeaters or you want to have a _new_
global network? With an own new network you will loose a big number of
users. Do you want an open replacement of the EchoLink-directory
structure? I think it is not a good idea to spread the community into
small pieces with a lower number of users. With the DMR, Dstar, C4FM ...
network you can see what happens if people want to force their own
ideas. If you want to talk to others you need up to 8 radios working on
different modes :/
So it could be a good to list the facts and needs at first.

Merry xmas es vy 73s de Adi / DL1HRC

Am 25.12.2015 um 12:00 schrieb F5VMR:
> Hi volodomyr.
> I have started to do this with two and eventually 4 repeaters. You might
> get a response from Adi Bier. His inception of svxserver is what we use
> to join the repeaters with a server running a special version of svxlink
> called svxserver. 
> 73 Chris f5vmr/g4nab
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 25 Dec 2015, at 01:02, Volodymyr <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> 
>> Hello all,
>>
>> maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server
>> on an alternative server?
>> By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the
>> network - SvxNet.
>> By analogy with EchoLink network.
>>
>> Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?
>>
>> 73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Marius Petrescu
In reply to this post by Adi Bier-3
C'mon people, you really want another user split?

Isn't it enough with all the reflectors, modes and groups in the digital
mode world?
Globalization should mean cooperation, not splits!

Marius, YO2LOJ


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Fever Havannah

I'm with Marius (YO2LOJ) on this one ... SvxLink is a good piece of kit ... so is EchoLink ...

Cheers
Danny
ZS6XOZ

On 26 Dec 2015 5:42 PM, "Marius Petrescu" <[hidden email]> wrote:
C'mon people, you really want another user split?

Isn't it enough with all the reflectors, modes and groups in the digital
mode world?
Globalization should mean cooperation, not splits!

Marius, YO2LOJ


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

F5VMR Orange
In reply to this post by Marius Petrescu
I think that the main point is being missed here, that it is possible to link multiple instances of svxlink together by svxserver in a network to provide cover over wider areas, and still have the capability of connection with all the other systems and analogue and digital repeaters currently in use. For example in our network when it is fully established will have two VHF repeaters, the six meter repeater, an HF repeater on 29 MHz and a known UHF repeater, will possibly more UHF repeaters. They will all have the capability of being dialled in or out or the server by DTMF with the default of being "In". One repeater has EchoLink in permanent available connection in and out which will be heard across the whole network but not diallable from the other repeaters.
So this is not a separate network or private network, but an invaluable extension of EchoLink and the other modules in use.
Chris

Sent from my iPhone

> On 26 Dec 2015, at 15:38, "Marius Petrescu" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> C'mon people, you really want another user split?
>
> Isn't it enough with all the reflectors, modes and groups in the digital
> mode world?
> Globalization should mean cooperation, not splits!
>
> Marius, YO2LOJ
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Svxlink-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Marius Petrescu
Chris, I don't think the point is missed.

In my opinion this is a bad move.
If you want to create a repeater network or whatever you like, this is your
choice and your implementation. No problem with that. It is a private
network and each owner can do whatever he wants. If you like to interlink it
with echolink, again, no problem with that. How you manage your user
authentication on acces, this is again a private busines.
But to push a parallel global network wit its own rules, registrations and
directories is another issue, which will complicate the whole
inter-networking stuff.
The moment one will create a new directory/registrar, of which others are
not aware off (speak echolink here), it will create a split between that
network and echolink.
That's all I am saying. Of course no one can stop anyone to do that.

Marius, YO2LOJ

-----Original Message-----
From: F5VMR
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 18:22
To: Discussions about development issues
Subject: Re: [Svxlink-devel] Alternative directory server EchoLink.

I think that the main point is being missed here, that it is possible to
link multiple instances of svxlink together by svxserver in a network to
provide cover over wider areas, and still have the capability of connection
with all the other systems and analogue and digital repeaters currently in
use. For example in our network when it is fully established will have two
VHF repeaters, the six meter repeater, an HF repeater on 29 MHz and a known
UHF repeater, will possibly more UHF repeaters. They will all have the
capability of being dialled in or out or the server by DTMF with the default
of being "In". One repeater has EchoLink in permanent available connection
in and out which will be heard across the whole network but not diallable
from the other repeaters.
So this is not a separate network or private network, but an invaluable
extension of EchoLink and the other modules in use.
Chris

Sent from my iPhone

> On 26 Dec 2015, at 15:38, "Marius Petrescu" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> C'mon people, you really want another user split?
>
> Isn't it enough with all the reflectors, modes and groups in the digital
> mode world?
> Globalization should mean cooperation, not splits!
>
> Marius, YO2LOJ
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Svxlink-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

F5VMR Orange
No I agree totally that provided that rules of registration with EchoLink are adhered to, I would not wish a further network requiring separate registration to grow. EQSO went away, because EchoLink was a superior product in comparison. EchoLink is an effective tool, just like jt65, mmsstv, CW, psk31 and provides diversity of interest in our pastime. Long live EchoLink and svxlink for the fm section.
Chris

Sent from my iPhone

> On 26 Dec 2015, at 16:50, "Marius Petrescu" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Chris, I don't think the point is missed.
>
> In my opinion this is a bad move.
> If you want to create a repeater network or whatever you like, this is your
> choice and your implementation. No problem with that. It is a private
> network and each owner can do whatever he wants. If you like to interlink it
> with echolink, again, no problem with that. How you manage your user
> authentication on acces, this is again a private busines.
> But to push a parallel global network wit its own rules, registrations and
> directories is another issue, which will complicate the whole
> inter-networking stuff.
> The moment one will create a new directory/registrar, of which others are
> not aware off (speak echolink here), it will create a split between that
> network and echolink.
> That's all I am saying. Of course no one can stop anyone to do that.
>
> Marius, YO2LOJ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: F5VMR
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2015 18:22
> To: Discussions about development issues
> Subject: Re: [Svxlink-devel] Alternative directory server EchoLink.
>
> I think that the main point is being missed here, that it is possible to
> link multiple instances of svxlink together by svxserver in a network to
> provide cover over wider areas, and still have the capability of connection
> with all the other systems and analogue and digital repeaters currently in
> use. For example in our network when it is fully established will have two
> VHF repeaters, the six meter repeater, an HF repeater on 29 MHz and a known
> UHF repeater, will possibly more UHF repeaters. They will all have the
> capability of being dialled in or out or the server by DTMF with the default
> of being "In". One repeater has EchoLink in permanent available connection
> in and out which will be heard across the whole network but not diallable
> from the other repeaters.
> So this is not a separate network or private network, but an invaluable
> extension of EchoLink and the other modules in use.
> Chris
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 26 Dec 2015, at 15:38, "Marius Petrescu" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> C'mon people, you really want another user split?
>>
>> Isn't it enough with all the reflectors, modes and groups in the digital
>> mode world?
>> Globalization should mean cooperation, not splits!
>>
>> Marius, YO2LOJ
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Svxlink-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Svxlink-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel 
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Svxlink-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Volodymyr
In reply to this post by Marius Petrescu
For lovers of EchoLink - nothing should be constantly changing.
This, if you like, EchoLink 2.0. Which is devoid of well-known shortcomings.

Win95 good program. smile-2
And further, it is possible to use it? Or MS DOS?
Split? Sorry ... Echolink - it eQso. MSDOS. A system that does not develop - is doomed.
The split - is misplaced. UseModuleEchoLink!

73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr


--- Исходное сообщение ---
От кого: "Marius Petrescu" <[hidden email]>
Дата: 26 декабря 2015, 17:41:56

C'mon people, you really want another user split?

Isn't it enough with all the reflectors, modes and groups in the digital 
mode world?
Globalization should mean cooperation, not splits!

Marius, YO2LOJ


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Tony Langdon
In reply to this post by Volodymyr
On 25/12/2015 12:02 PM, Volodymyr wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server
> on an alternative server?
> By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the
> network - SvxNet.
> By analogy with EchoLink network.
>
> Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?

I don't see a place for (yet another) global network.  We already have:

Analogue access:
Echolink
IRLP
AllStar
VKLink (VK regional, Asterisk based)

Digital access:
D-star
 - Callsign routing (native JARL spec)
 - DPlus
 - Dextra
 - DCS
 - CCS7
 - G2/Icom
 - ircDDB
 - STARnet Digital

DMR
 - DMR-MARC
 - Hytera
 - + unknown number of other networks

P25 (doubtless multiple networks and technologies)

Fusion/C4FM
 - WiRES-X
 - DCS based network

NXDN

I'm sure I've missed a heap!  *whew*

Now, I do see a place for a private directory service, running an open
protocol to manage local repeater networks.  This could be used to help
member nodes find and link to each other.  It could also be used for
"off grid" networks (e.g. a handful of nodes on an isolated WiFi
network), but we have too many "global" solutions as it is!

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



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Volodymyr
In reply to this post by Adi Bier-3
The challenge is to combine 20-30 repeaters in its independent regional network. Following the example of  HAMNET DL.
However, each of them can personally connect to the EchoLink in its sole discretion, but be independent of him.


Many thanks to Adi, for SvxServer!
But, I think, vertical solution is not the best with so many nodes.

Thanks all for the discussion!!

73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr

--- Исходное сообщение ---
От кого: "Adi Bier" <[hidden email]>
Дата: 26 декабря 2015, 11:16:16

Hi all,

yes, I wrote the svxserver, based on the svxlink's NetTrxMsg protocol.
It is compatible to the well known remotetrx/svxlink-linking and
available on my git repository (dl1hrc).
Unfortunately I still have a bug so see it as experimental at the
moment. I started it as an add-on for smaller repeaters networks (up to
15-20 stations), not as a replacement for EchoLink.

Before starting further developments, in my opinion the goal should be
defined. What do you want to do with the new kind of linking?
Do you want to connect just 4 or 5 repeaters or you want to have a _new_
global network? With an own new network you will loose a big number of
users. Do you want an open replacement of the EchoLink-directory
structure? I think it is not a good idea to spread the community into
small pieces with a lower number of users. With the DMR, Dstar, C4FM ...
network you can see what happens if people want to force their own
ideas. If you want to talk to others you need up to 8 radios working on
different modes :/
So it could be a good to list the facts and needs at first.

Merry xmas es vy 73s de Adi / DL1HRC

Am 25.12.2015 um 12:00 schrieb F5VMR:
> Hi volodomyr.
> I have started to do this with two and eventually 4 repeaters. You might
> get a response from Adi Bier. His inception of svxserver is what we use
> to join the repeaters with a server running a special version of svxlink
> called svxserver. 
> 73 Chris f5vmr/g4nab
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 25 Dec 2015, at 01:02, Volodymyr <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> 
>> Hello all,
>>
>> maybe someone has thought of replacing the EchoLink directory server
>> on an alternative server?
>> By means which, a group of stations SvxLink can be merged into the
>> network - SvxNet.
>> By analogy with EchoLink network.
>>
>> Maybe someone has practical experience on the subject?
>>
>> 73's de UR3QJW / Volodymyr
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Rob Janssen
In reply to this post by Volodymyr
Volodymyr wrote:
> Hi all,
> Echolink has long been morally outdated and does not develop.
> It also has a set of well-known shortcomings. Among them are not protected by user authentication at login.

Echolink has a password per user!

> In addition, ill-conceived, politics ..., conference servers.Something new will be ..

But they do validate licenses before adding a user, something which is a lot of work and not easily replaced.
Other networks often have no formal license validation and it is quite easy for unlis operators to connect to
the repeater and transmit over it - not acceptable in many countries.

>
>
> An alternative may be the new directory server (perhaps regional or European).
> Also, a new module for communicating with him - ModuleSvxNet.
> For EchoLink, if necessary,  parallel can use - ModuleEchoLink.

Unfortunately, it is not as simple as that.
It is not possible to run several modules in parallel in Svxlink.
For example, there now is a new module to connect to FRN, but we cannot use it until that is solved.
(we would have to leave EchoLink)

I think network connection modules should be split in a "user interface" part that interprets the DTMF codes
and of which only one can be active, and "voice routing" part that is active all the time and handles the
actual connections.  Those "voice routing" parts would remain running all the time for each configured module,
so the module system can be used for other purposes while those links remain connected.

Until that is solved, parallel use of different linking systems is not practical.

Rob

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Alternative directory server EchoLink.

Volodymyr
 
 Rob wrote:
Volodymyr wrote:
> Hi all,
> Echolink has long been morally outdated and does not develop.
> It also has a set of well-known shortcomings. Among them are not protected by user authentication at login.

Echolink has a password per user!
Passwords are not protected in EchoLink.
They are not encrypted, sent in not encrypted form!

 > In addition, ill-conceived, politics ..., conference servers.Something new will be ..

But they do validate licenses before adding a user, something which is a lot of work and not easily replaced.
Other networks often have no formal license validation and it is quite easy for unlis operators to connect to
the repeater and transmit over it - not acceptable in many countries.
Quality inspection - mediocre!
They Аdmit - PIRATE OPERATORS!!!

Crimea - it's Ukraine!!!

Administration EchoLink allows access to the system, prefixes callsign:

R*6K*; R*7K* - for Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
R*6R*; R*7R* - for Sevastopol, city of special status.

All these signs shall be treated as ILLEGAL OF PIRATE.

Thus, the administration EchoLink - recognizes issued by the occupation authorities, Russian callsign prefixes.
Breaking many international acts: UN Resolution; ITU-2014 (2015); other...
Ukrainian Amateur Radio League: APPEAL to the international amateur radio community

The only authorized body witch has legitimate rights to manage frequency spectrum as well as issue on air operation licenses is Ukrainian Center of Radio Frequency (UCRF).

Any attempt to contact with the administration of EchoLink - are simply ignored...

> An alternative may be the new directory server (perhaps regional or European).
> Also, a new module for communicating with him - ModuleSvxNet.
> For EchoLink, if necessary,  parallel can use - ModuleEchoLink.

Unfortunately, it is not as simple as that.
It is not possible to run several modules in parallel in Svxlink.
For example, there now is a new module to connect to FRN, but we cannot use it until that is solved.
(we would have to leave EchoLink)

I think network connection modules should be split in a "user interface" part that interprets the DTMF codes
and of which only one can be active, and "voice routing" part that is active all the time and handles the
actual connections.  Those "voice routing" parts would remain running all the time for each configured module,
so the module system can be used for other purposes while those links remain connected.

Until that is solved, parallel use of different linking systems is not practical.

Rob

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Svxlink-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svxlink-devel