[WriteLog] Open Letter to Wayne - Networking

Mon Jun 28 23:20:39 EDT 2004

We ran a multi-multi of 5 positions this past contest year at NY4A.  While I
will readily admit that configuring it all required no small measure of
ATTENTION TO DETAIL, especially when mixing, as we did, Win98SE with Win2K
systems, once configured, no failure was due to the network. We had a couple
of boxes decide to help us out by rebooting once or twice without being
asked, but nothing I can attribute to the network.

Watching WL reconnect and resynch the logs is a sight to behold, if you're
coming from TRLog or CT or NA as I had! I concur with Scott that it's more
likely that Field Day was the culprit!

As to the suggestion to use static IP addresses...

I would urge caution with this.  Whenever you give up a symbolic address
such as computer name for a numeric, physical address, you give up alot.
Human factors become more difficult.  Swapping in that spare computer has
additional addressing steps, which when done at 3AM are no longer as trivial
as they should be.  Also, most of us likely run DHCP servers and ignore IP
addresses entirely, and we use our home computers for the contesting.  Do we
really wish to do a home network reconfiguration in order to set up for a
contest?  Only if we're masochists.

For computers used purely for contesting, no sweat. In our case the
computers have "household" duties to perform on a home LAN when not in use
for a contest.  Going back and forth between DHCP and static IP would be a
royal pain.  Managing static IP and just kicking DHCP out of the house
(which I have done in my home) is also somewhat of a problem. When my son
visits, suddenly his laptop no longer just plugs into the switch.

Network configuration will never be easy.  On balance I think WL networking
today is excellent.  I'll trade off some quirks with names/passwords so that
I can continue to have a LAN others can easily plug into (yes we still use
wires now and then).  And, truly, I remember computer names much better than
computer IP addresses!

I'd spend the programming resources elsewhere.

73,

Gary W2CS
Apex, NC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: writelog-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:writelog-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of K7ZO (Scott
> Tuthill)
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 10:07 PM
> To: writelog at 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 at hotmail.com>
> To: <WriteLog at 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=1
> 034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WriteLog mailing list
> > WriteLog at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
> > WriteLog on the web:  http://www.writelog.com/
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
> WriteLog on the web:  http://www.writelog.com/