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.