Let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples.
How many of your computers are running Windows XP with all of
its security features that make NetDDE such a royal pain in
the butt? If you are running the wide open spaces (Windows
98 se) then we are not talking about the same thing at all.
The major thing they have in common is that their name starts
Microsoft Windows.
Bob
N4HY
-----Original Message-----
From: writelog-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:writelog-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of K7ZO (Scott
Tuthill)
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 2:07 AM
To: writelog@contesting.com
Subject: Fw: [WriteLog] Open Letter to Wayne - Networking
I am not a networking expert and Steve's ideas are beyond me. But, I have
built and maintained a 5 computer Writelog network setup at NK7U that has
endured many multi-op contests. During that time we have never had a single
problem that I would attribute to networking. I don't understand the
underlying technology. I just know it works. And, when you have a computer
crash as 2AM, swap in a replacement, bring it online and have it sync up the
logs and be ready to run in 5 minutes, then you can appreciate the power of
the Writelog network setup. It is just not the physical link but the
integration of the log management in a networked multi-op environment that
made me switch from CT 5 years ago. Never regretted it.
I have seen the other replies regarding network problems with Writlog during
field day. I wonder if they really are due to networking or just any of the
other usual field day gremlins that are part of the field day experience?
Scott/K7ZO
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Gorecki" <ve3cwj@hotmail.com>
To: <WriteLog@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 8:55 AM
Subject: [WriteLog] Open Letter to Wayne - Networking
> With the power of Writelog and it's networking, I have a suggestion in
> improving the networking flexability of WL.
>
> We have all seen (and many have posted) issues around the networking of
WL,
> and with various O/S, we keep hitting those NetDDE stumbling blocks often
> enough that something needs to be looked at. After a successful Field Day
> here (with some minor network/RF problems), I think now is a good time to
> make some suggestions. These may have been made before (maybe not
> recently...), but I think it is worth another kick at the tires so to
speak.
>
> Now I know Wayne is busy enough, with updates and various new contests,
but
> the power of networking WL successfully is one of its strengths. Let's fix
> or get rid of the problems of passwords, NETDDE, etc. once and for all.
>
> What I am suggesting is to go back to basics and set up WL to use TCP/IP
> addressing and port numbers. I have seen many applications do this, and NT
> security is never an issue (because connection does not use MS security).
In
> fact, following this suggestion may even enable the internet logging of WL
> without the need for a web server running custom Java.
>
> Basically, I would suggest picking a free port number (high number such as
> in the 5000 range, 8000 range, whatever), and have WL connect by IP
address
> only. To register to accept network connections, all WL does is open the
> port and listen on it for incoming connections. The "Link to network" menu
> would require the destination IP address (and same fixed port number) to
> connect. No user ID required, no domain or workgroup model to worry about.
> Now the drawback to this is that we may need to set up fixed IP addresses
> for our WL machines. To overcome this, the "Register to accept network
> connections" menu could have a table of acceptable incoming IP addresses
or
> a range of addresses to accept. For example, register for network,
accepting
> incoming IP range of 192.168.1.100 to 192.168.1.150. By using the port
> number, this ensures that it is another WL computer that we are looking
for.
> Keep the same station ID setup (of course, for logging), but you could now
> drop the station names (no more Netbios). The WL station that is doing the
> "Link to Network" can specify an IP address, or a range of addresses to
scan
> and connect to. Imagine that, connecting to more than one WL station with
> one command (ie: scan range of 192.168.1.100 to 150 as above) and connect
to
> all if accepted.
>
> The benefit of using IP addresses (and port#), is that now we would be
able
> to network across the internet directly to other stations (club stations
> take note...) With proper DSL or cable router configuration, I could
connect
> my WL station to someone in another state (or province in my case). No
need
> for the complicated Tomcat web server setup (and hardware). Most ISPs will
> pass incoming port numbers over 1024 (some allow all). So, if WL could say
> "open port #5xxx and listen for any incoming WL connect", anyone else
> running WL could connect to my station. The WL "register to accept
network"
> menu with a list of "acceptable" addresses would prevent unwanted
> connections. (or use existing WL registration key to verify same callsign
> stations like those found in FD)
>
> Well, that is about it. I hope Wayne will consider this option carefully.
> Why, it would even open the possibility of non-MS O/S participating in a
WL
> network, if WL is ever ported to anything else (listening MAC and Linux
> users?). The main idea here is to ensure that WL would become free of MS
> security issues that will keep coming up, especially as new releases of
> Windows come out with even more security.
>
> Please send reply comments to this newsgroup. Thanks
>
> 73
> Steve
> VE3CWJ
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Premium with Virus Guard and Firewall* from McAfee® Security : 2
months
> FREE*
>
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=htt
p://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
>
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
> WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
>
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
|