Re: [TenTec] Why N1MM does not support the Tentec file interface

["David W LeJeune, Sr" <lejeuned@centurytel.net>]

That would be a neat idea, Carl.  Would complement some of the stuff I've 
been working on in terms of remote access.  Your memory resident interface 
works fine, but is a bit slow, for what I want to do. I think a direct LAN 
interface would certainly help in this regard.

Dave
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carl Moreschi" <n4py@earthlink.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 6:32 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Why N1MM does not support the Tentec file interface


> One way to send messages from one program to another is to use the LAN
> protocol with socket connections.  This method is very fast and allows
> messages to be sent between any two programs residing on the same LAN.  I
> could easily add an interface to and from all my programs with this type 
> of
> interface.
>
> Carl Moreschi N4PY
> Franklinton, NC
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Duane Grotophorst" <n9dg@yahoo.com>
> To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 11:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Why N1MM does not support the Tentec file interface
>
>
> > --- "Simon Brown, HB9DRV" <simon@hb9drv.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > A common gateway would be a big advantage, and I
> > > think that were a
> > > non-complex solution to be proposed then it would be
> > > taken up quite quickly.
> >
> > Agree, though it should be complicated enough to be
> > able to accomodate things like you've described below
> > and much more.
> >
> > > I have ideas myself in this area, not just for
> > > programs by N4PY and N1MM to
> > > work together but also for programs on computers in
> > > a LAN to work together.
> > > For example one person could be spotting and the
> > > spots come through to the
> > > other members of the LAN.
> >
> > Yupp. And integration with SSTV/PSK/RTTY/WSJT etc.
> > etc. types programs as well. Part of such a spec needs
> > to address the control aspects like frequency, mode,
> > filter, antenna, etc. that most ops are familiar with
> > today and another extension of such a spec to support
> > the network level transfer of mic/audio/data/IF
> > signals. Could probably adapt an existing data
> > audio/video streaming protocol for that end of it
> > without a huge amount of work.
> >
> > My biggest fear is that each and every ham gear
> > manufacturer will start developing thier own
> > specifications and protocols for these kind of
> > features in the near future and we will will have a
> > mess that will make the lack of standardization for
> > power, mic, and the so called "CAT" commands in radios
> > today seem trivial.
> >
> > Duane
> > N9DG
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec