Scott Honaker and I have moved forward on this project:
1. We have installed a gateway (Linksys BEFSR41) between the ID-1 and
the internal ARES/RACES subnet (not 44.x.x.x) of the DEM.
2. We have installed a Digi "AnywhereUSB" box to give us remote access
to the ID-1's USB port, and thus remote control of the ID-1 radio.
This not only allows multiple use of the ID-1 (which has useful
1.2GHz FM and digital voice modes as well as Ethernet data), but
provides for remote frequency agility and a diagnostic capability.
This works beautifully (eg, to search for and use a low-noise
frequency)!
Unfortunately, what does not work very well, is the RF portion of the
connection. PINGs failed at a rate of over 99% when using the 1.2GHz
antenna at the 70 ft level on the tower, so we swapped the antenna with
the one used for the Icom 1.2GHz repeater (which wasn't seeing any
action anyway) at 100 ft. That made a "dramatic" improvement, as PINGs
now only fail at a 98% rate (depends upon the time of day, etc)!
Antenna comparison between 1.2GHz and 5.9 GHz for the two sites:
1. On 1.2GHz, both antennas are omni-directional.
2. At the DEM, the 1.2GHz antenna is now at the 100' level, whereas the
5.9GHz antenna is at 150'.
3. At my home, the 1.2GHz antenna is about 10' above the 5.9GHz
antenna, and it's on the same line-of-sight path.
Note that voice communication between the two sites using the two ID-1
radios, is fine (there is a slight bit of noise on FM).
The big difference, in my opinion? I'll bet that the wireless protocol
used by the MikroTik radios includes an aggressive error correction and
retry protocol, whereas the ID-1 is like a piece of Ethernet cable, and
thus relies on the standard TCP/IP retry mechanism. The TCP/IP
protocols, while "unreliable" in the technical sense of the term,
require a higher overall reliability than a typical raw wireless connection.
What this says (and I'm a bit surprised to note this), is that sites
considering using ID-1 radios for data communications, may find that
even with the tighter siting requirements of 5.9GHz, that the latter may
be more successful (whether or not part of HamWAN). In addition to
being a lower-cost radio with a much higher data rate, the MikroTik
radios offer a built-in router, which can obviate the need for a
separate router.
-- Dean
ps: The callsign and digital code filtering features of D-Star that we
previously discussed, are not available (greyed out in the software) for
digital *data* mode. Huh? Another fine example of software of the
"seven last words" of poor program design: "Why would you want to do that?"
