Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/3/85; site ukma.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!david
From: david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover)
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.ham-radio.packet
Subject: Re: Reducing costs to USENET backbone sites, packet radio
Message-ID: <2366@ukma.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 10-Nov-85 11:04:12 EST
Article-I.D.: ukma.2366
Posted: Sun Nov 10 11:04:12 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 11-Nov-85 06:36:15 EST
References: <598@aicchi.UUCP> <838@psivax.UUCP> <534@rti-sel.UUCP>
Reply-To: david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover)
Distribution: net
Organization: Univ. of KY Mathematical Sciences
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.news.group:4446 net.ham-radio.packet:121

In article <534@rti-sel.UUCP> jb@rti-sel.UUCP (Jeff Bartlett) writes:
>Has anyone else noticed the quiet revolution that is happening in
>net.ham-radio.packet?

Yes.  It's almost enough for me to want to become a ham so I can join
in on the fun.  (That d*mn code test bothers me).

>Devices known as Terminal Node Controllers (TNCs) are used to implement
>a packet network, similar to ethernet, using the AX.25 protocol,
>300 baud modems, and radio links.
> ...
>A radio linked USENET would:
>	- not be at the mercy of Ma-Bell.
>	- be very fault-tolerance.
>	- be highly connected.
>	- be able to handle more traffic at almost flat cost.
>	- etc.......
>

Very nice possibility.  But doesn't a packet radio net have the
same problem that StarGate will have?  i.e. respolsibility for
carrying 'libelous' postings?  In fact, I seem to recall a posting
in ham-radio.packet saying just that.
-- 
David Herron,  cbosgd!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET.

English is a second language to me -- Baby talk was my first language.