[HamGateNY] Proposed WWconvers Channel Scheme

[Brian Webster]

Let me see if I can throw out a slightly different explanation:

This is a CHAT system that ride on the same connection we use for 44 Net IP, it also runs on the packet networks in place. 

Think if it more like group chats on a smart phone. The term channels is really just different group chats not much unlike you having a group chat going on your phone of Facebook messenger. It all runs on the same network, just splits off the conversations to keep things organized.

The WWConverse system lets us network them together to have the potential for large geographically dispersed people participate in these chat conversations. In the old packet days when we had large area RF only networks, you connected to a chat node (really just software) and issued a help command and looked at the command set. User commands are usually on most chat systems using a forward slash and letter for each command such as /? For help or /U to list users on the chat node. The users on the chat node system are connected on the "channel" of their choice. In reality it's just a thread to conversation. In the old AOL messenger days they were called chat rooms. This organizes things so you don't have to see the conversation from say  weather group or just a rag chew session. You could be logged in to something like your local RACES training, or use it like Net Logger for a voice net as an example. Then it was just text based on a packet terminal window. Now we can also use software such as HexChat or Pidgeon to connect from the internet as well as the packet network over RF. This enables all types of devices such as smart phones and tablets in addition to computers.

The thing Charles is suggesting is more of a way to know which "chat room" you would like to join once you connect to the converse system. Since it is just numbers and not a verbose scheme it makes sense to come up with something logical. To date the whole system has kind of been forgotten about. Since it can be internet enabled along with the packet networks, there is no real reason not to start to put it to better use. Those who are building high speed networks such as AREDN can participate, good old fashioned 1200 baud packets system can participate and those on the go using mobile internet systems can also stay in the conversation with their smart phones too. It becomes a good cross platform technology solution that gives us multiple ways to connect. Learning how to connect using multiple various ways also helps train as an emergency communicator and allows us to establish more than one way to stay connected for information exchanges.

When you realize that so many different ways exist to connect, I am surer you can think of the ways you and your local groups or your geographically disperse groups can make use of the technology

Thank you,
Brian Webster N2KGC
Cooperstown, NY 13326


-----Original Message-----
From: HamGateNY [mailto:hamgateny-bounces at n2nov.net] On Behalf Of Charles J. Hargrove
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2020 9:55 PM
To: hamgateny at n2nov.net
Subject: Re: [HamGateNY] Proposed WWconvers Channel Scheme

If we look at things as internet vs RF, we cab see how it works.
On the internet side, we choose what "channel" we want and that is
what is sent to us.  The servers like Hub_NA keep track of all the
active channels and route them accordingly to who is connected to
each channel.  When we switch to a person using RF to get to their
local packet bbs, they are just the end of the line where the request
gets forwarded to the server that sends them what they want.  If there
was another user, on the same bbs and frequency, the channel they pick
could be different and that would be sent to them while you were getting
the channel that you picked.  It's sort of like multiple streams of data
in the old TNCs.

On 11/28/2020 8:58 PM, Andrew J. McLeod, KB2AJM (ex. KD2PLE) wrote:
> Hi Charles,
> 
> Although I've read your past few emails in the thread, I, like Joe, am 
> new to the WW convers concept and have a question. Forgive me...
> 
> So I understand the purpose - logical allocation, assignment, maximal 
> utilization of space/bandwidth, etc. But in reality/technical 
> functionality, is this "channelizing" a schema that works as you said 
> like AIM or IRC in the sense that it is literally a form of packetized, 
> tagged or multiplexing sort of thing, or is it an RF/split spectrum sort 
> of concept?
> 
> In other words, as we discuss both RF and non-RF mediums here, is this 
> something that would just multiplex (channelize) data over a single RF 
> frequency (sort of like DMR or simar) or would it require a spread 
> spectrum of multiple subfrequencies?
> 
> I assume the former as you say this is over two decades old and already 
> in practice and I doubt the practicality of finding 32768 different 
> frequencies. :) I am just trying to "picture" it as conversations or 
> channel data jump between one medium (internet/TCP/IP traffic) to 
> another (RF) and back across the network...
> 
> Sort of like Brandmeister or a channelized EchoLink, but the AMPRnet 
> version?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> AJM

-- 
Charles J. Hargrove - N2NOV
NYC-ARECS/RACES Citywide Radio Officer/Skywarn Coord.

NYC-ARECS/RACES Nets 147.360/107.2 PL
ARnewsline Broadcast Mon. @ 8:00PM
NYC-ARECS Weekly Net Mon. @ 8:30PM
http://www.nyc-arecs.org

NY-NBEMS Net Saturdays @ 10AM & USeast-NBEMS Net Wednesdays @ 7PM
on 7.036 Mhz USB (alt 3.536)/1500 hz waterfall spot; MFSK-16 or 32

"Information is the oxygen of the modern age. It seeps through the walls 
topped
by barbed wire, it wafts across the electrified borders." - Ronald Reagan

"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus

"Molann an obair an fear" - Irish Saying
(The work praises the man.)

"No matter how big and powerful government gets, and the many services it
provides, it can never take the place of volunteers." - Ronald Reagan