Date   

Re: Towards open-source infrastructure for DMR repost from OpenDV

Randy AA6RH
 

G4KLX is saying what I've been thinking for at least a year now. The fact that BM and to a lesser extent DMR-MARC, DCI, TGIF and others have created a closed-source, walled-garden approach to interlinking leaves the individual repeater operators at the relative mercy of these networks. The recent UK master server crash is a clear indicator that the centralized technique needs some refactoring.

It's not original, sadly. Other analog-based interlinking tech has the same problems (I'm looking at IRLP and AllStarLink as two easy examples). Hams generally like the interconnection to be plug-and-play. A new approach would require people to actually do things like RTFM and test their changes in isolation before unleashing it on the network, possibly wreaking havoc.

I'm all for an open and decentralized approach to interlinking. The obvious downsides is that it moves more of the work to the repeater operators to be on the lookout for bad actors, or at least LIDS. Some of what I'm getting at is that there needs to be tools to help a sysop/control op check that their configuration changes are going to do what they think it will. That's a tall order.

I'd say that philosophically speaking, HBLink is aligned with this particular view of interlinking and interconnection. I think we have some real architectural challenges (not to mention devops, developer community, and all the rest) to become a robust contributor to this new approach. I also think that IPSC_Bridge and HB_Bridge (to a lesser extent) need to be brought up-to-date to Python 3 through a focus on creating a testable code base and then evolving it from there.

I love this manifesto. I hope we can build something from it.

--R
--
Randy Hall AA6RH (not K7AGE, quit asking) 😁


Re: metadata management

Patrick Perdue
 

OK, so things are pretty much as I thought they were. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything should I decide to redesign this system. I'll probably keep things as-is for now, then add another private node for P25.

Thanks.

On 11/25/2020 7:51 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
So,
you have D-Star, DMR and AllStar.
If you used AllStar to mix you could keep the number of vocoders to two and only have one transcoder. For the audio, you would have 2 private nodes. The first node would be DMR and pointed at TGIF. The second node would be D-Star and pointed at XLX.  As you said in your first message, you issue would then be metadata.

Steve


On 11/25/20 7:32 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
I'm not great at writing out flows.

My setup currently doesn't use ircDDBGateway, since that's all handled at the XLX reflector end. So, it goes like this.

Allstar <-> AB <-> HBLink <-> MB <-> XLXD (DMR, since XLX is also handling a BM interlink and YSF traffic) <-> ambed (connected to the XLX reflector) <-> TGIF.

I'm sure I screwed that up.

So basically, native AMBE traffic is transcoded to analog using the MD380-emu vocoder back to Allstar. DStar is transcoded through the pair of ThumnDV's on the reflector, which is then sent to MD380emu and then Allstar. Between DMR or YSF and DStar, this is fine, but from Allstar to DStar, it's going through another AMBE transcode before A_B sees it, so more latency and lower quality audio.

If I connect to the reflector directly as DStar, then use ASL to connect to the other modes, perhaps on another module of the reflector and HBLink, then DMR-YSF would only see the call specified in A_B, correct?


On 11/25/2020 7:18 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
I don't see how there are 2 vocoders to get from AllStar to D-Star. The flow would be:
AllStar <-> AB <-> MB <-> ircDDBGateway <-> XLX for D-Star.
You could drop the ircDDBGateway and go to XLX DMR.

Steve

On 11/25/20 7:14 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Sure, but I'm currently going through two of them to get from Allstar to DStar.

I'm just wondering if there's a way to drop one of them out and still maintain metadata. I could directly connect A_B and MMDVM_Bridge to the XLX reflector and only direct DStar traffic to the module, and audio between DStar and the other digital modes should be about the same as it is now, but audio from Allstar to DStar has one less generation of vocoding, but then I lose metadata between the digital modes. At least, this is how I understand it.


On 11/25/2020 6:55 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
Patrick,
Either way, you have to go through a vocoder to go from analog to D-Star Same for P25, you still have to go through a vocoder.

Steve

On 11/25/20 6:28 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.
























Re: pyUC P25 "not linked"

Steve N4IRS
 

You want to add it in 2 places.
Add the reflector TG, IP and port in private_P25Hosts.txt

Add the Name and TG in pyUC.ini in the P25 section.

Steve N4IRS

On 11/25/20 9:45 PM, Scotty 2543G KD2LWH wrote:
It seems to have fixed itself after a few times of opening and closing the application. Now I'm wondering how to add my private reflector to the list on USRP Client for P25. I have added it to the P25Hosts.txt file on the DV_Switch Server, but it doesn't show in the list on the client. Any ideas?


Re: pyUC P25 "not linked"

Mike Zingman - N4IRR
 

The app uses the configuration file pyUC.ini


Re: pyUC P25 "not linked"

Steve N4IRS
 

Add it to pyUC.ini

On 11/25/20 9:45 PM, Scotty 2543G KD2LWH wrote:
It seems to have fixed itself after a few times of opening and closing the application. Now I'm wondering how to add my private reflector to the list on USRP Client for P25. I have added it to the P25Hosts.txt file on the DV_Switch Server, but it doesn't show in the list on the client. Any ideas?


Re: pyUC P25 "not linked"

Scotty 2543G KD2LWH
 

It seems to have fixed itself after a few times of opening and closing the application. Now I'm wondering how to add my private reflector to the list on USRP Client for P25. I have added it to the P25Hosts.txt file on the DV_Switch Server, but it doesn't show in the list on the client. Any ideas?


pyUC P25 "not linked"

Scotty 2543G KD2LWH
 

Hey guys,
The first time I started pyUC and switched modes to P25 it worked, no issues. Everytime after, I try to switch modes and it says "not linked" when I hit P25 and goes back to DMR. Any ideas why? I didn't ever "link or unlink" anything. Thanks in advance.


Re: metadata management

Steve N4IRS
 

So,
you have D-Star, DMR and AllStar.
If you used AllStar to mix you could keep the number of vocoders to two and only have one transcoder. For the audio, you would have 2 private nodes. The first node would be DMR and pointed at TGIF. The second node would be D-Star and pointed at XLX.  As you said in your first message, you issue would then be metadata.

Steve

On 11/25/20 7:32 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
I'm not great at writing out flows.

My setup currently doesn't use ircDDBGateway, since that's all handled at the XLX reflector end. So, it goes like this.

Allstar <-> AB <-> HBLink <-> MB <-> XLXD (DMR, since XLX is also handling a BM interlink and YSF traffic) <-> ambed (connected to the XLX reflector) <-> TGIF.

I'm sure I screwed that up.

So basically, native AMBE traffic is transcoded to analog using the MD380-emu vocoder back to Allstar. DStar is transcoded through the pair of ThumnDV's on the reflector, which is then sent to MD380emu and then Allstar. Between DMR or YSF and DStar, this is fine, but from Allstar to DStar, it's going through another AMBE transcode before A_B sees it, so more latency and lower quality audio.

If I connect to the reflector directly as DStar, then use ASL to connect to the other modes, perhaps on another module of the reflector and HBLink, then DMR-YSF would only see the call specified in A_B, correct?


On 11/25/2020 7:18 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
I don't see how there are 2 vocoders to get from AllStar to D-Star. The flow would be:
AllStar <-> AB <-> MB <-> ircDDBGateway <-> XLX for D-Star.
You could drop the ircDDBGateway and go to XLX DMR.

Steve

On 11/25/20 7:14 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Sure, but I'm currently going through two of them to get from Allstar to DStar.

I'm just wondering if there's a way to drop one of them out and still maintain metadata. I could directly connect A_B and MMDVM_Bridge to the XLX reflector and only direct DStar traffic to the module, and audio between DStar and the other digital modes should be about the same as it is now, but audio from Allstar to DStar has one less generation of vocoding, but then I lose metadata between the digital modes. At least, this is how I understand it.


On 11/25/2020 6:55 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
Patrick,
Either way, you have to go through a vocoder to go from analog to D-Star Same for P25, you still have to go through a vocoder.

Steve

On 11/25/20 6:28 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.




















Re: metadata management

Patrick Perdue
 

I'm not great at writing out flows.

My setup currently doesn't use ircDDBGateway, since that's all handled at the XLX reflector end. So, it goes like this.

Allstar <-> AB <-> HBLink <-> MB <-> XLXD (DMR, since XLX is also handling a BM interlink and YSF traffic) <-> ambed (connected to the XLX reflector) <-> TGIF.

I'm sure I screwed that up.

So basically, native AMBE traffic is transcoded to analog using the MD380-emu vocoder back to Allstar. DStar is transcoded through the pair of ThumnDV's on the reflector, which is then sent to MD380emu and then Allstar. Between DMR or YSF and DStar, this is fine, but from Allstar to DStar, it's going through another AMBE transcode before A_B sees it, so more latency and lower quality audio.

If I connect to the reflector directly as DStar, then use ASL to connect to the other modes, perhaps on another module of the reflector and HBLink, then DMR-YSF would only see the call specified in A_B, correct?

On 11/25/2020 7:18 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
I don't see how there are 2 vocoders to get from AllStar to D-Star. The flow would be:
AllStar <-> AB <-> MB <-> ircDDBGateway <-> XLX for D-Star.
You could drop the ircDDBGateway and go to XLX DMR.

Steve

On 11/25/20 7:14 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Sure, but I'm currently going through two of them to get from Allstar to DStar.

I'm just wondering if there's a way to drop one of them out and still maintain metadata. I could directly connect A_B and MMDVM_Bridge to the XLX reflector and only direct DStar traffic to the module, and audio between DStar and the other digital modes should be about the same as it is now, but audio from Allstar to DStar has one less generation of vocoding, but then I lose metadata between the digital modes. At least, this is how I understand it.


On 11/25/2020 6:55 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
Patrick,
Either way, you have to go through a vocoder to go from analog to D-Star Same for P25, you still have to go through a vocoder.

Steve

On 11/25/20 6:28 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.

















Re: metadata management

Steve N4IRS
 

I don't see how there are 2 vocoders to get from AllStar to D-Star. The flow would be:
AllStar <-> AB <-> MB <-> ircDDBGateway <-> XLX for D-Star.
You could drop the ircDDBGateway and go to XLX DMR.

Steve

On 11/25/20 7:14 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Sure, but I'm currently going through two of them to get from Allstar to DStar.

I'm just wondering if there's a way to drop one of them out and still maintain metadata. I could directly connect A_B and MMDVM_Bridge to the XLX reflector and only direct DStar traffic to the module, and audio between DStar and the other digital modes should be about the same as it is now, but audio from Allstar to DStar has one less generation of vocoding, but then I lose metadata between the digital modes. At least, this is how I understand it.


On 11/25/2020 6:55 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
Patrick,
Either way, you have to go through a vocoder to go from analog to D-Star Same for P25, you still have to go through a vocoder.

Steve

On 11/25/20 6:28 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.













Re: metadata management

Patrick Perdue
 

Sure, but I'm currently going through two of them to get from Allstar to DStar.

I'm just wondering if there's a way to drop one of them out and still maintain metadata. I could directly connect A_B and MMDVM_Bridge to the XLX reflector and only direct DStar traffic to the module, and audio between DStar and the other digital modes should be about the same as it is now, but audio from Allstar to DStar has one less generation of vocoding, but then I lose metadata between the digital modes. At least, this is how I understand it.

On 11/25/2020 6:55 PM, Steve N4IRS wrote:
Patrick,
Either way, you have to go through a vocoder to go from analog to D-Star Same for P25, you still have to go through a vocoder.

Steve

On 11/25/20 6:28 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.










Re: metadata management

Steve N4IRS
 

Patrick,
Either way, you have to go through a vocoder to go from analog to D-Star Same for P25, you still have to go through a vocoder.

Steve

On 11/25/20 6:28 PM, Patrick Perdue wrote:
Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.






metadata management

Patrick Perdue
 

Hi:

I have a system that incorporates ASL, XLX, HBLink and DVSwitch. I'm toying with the idea of adding P25.

Currently, DStar is handled by XLX and a pair of transcoders connected to the XLX reflector, not DVSwitch. I would like to connect ASL directly to the XLX reflector in DStar mode, so that the audio to and from DStar to ASL is not transcoded through AMBE, but still pass metadata to DStar from the other digital modes. Is this at all possible? Similar question in regards to P25.

Basically, I want to do the least amount of transcoding possible to and from analog, while maintaining the greatest compatibility across digital modes. What I have now works, but I'd love to get rid of that extra layer of transcoding between analog and DStar without sacrificing metadata.

Thanks.


Re: Coming to a browser near you

Ted Holdahl
 
Edited

Terrific.  I can't wait.  This will be the first time that we can communicate with IOS devices.   I will be glad to help beta test.


Towards open-source infrastructure for DMR repost from OpenDV

Steve N4IRS
 

DMR, after D-Star, is the most political of the digtial voice modes. Unlike the other modes, most DMR systems connect to a centralised server, known as a "master" and that is responsible for all of the talk group routine, personal calls, and position data interpretation and forwarding. There are three main centralised systems: BrandMeister, DMR+ (known as Phoenix in the UK), and TGIF.
 
What these systems have in common is that they are closed source. This is not good for the amateur community. There were mutterings about them having signed NDAs with Hytera and Motorola to get details of their internet connection protocols, which may or may not be true. Even if true, why not make the non-NDA parts of the source code open?
 
In the commercial world, digital voice repeaters, be they for DMR, P25, NXDN, or dPMR have limited abilities within themselves for call routing. They do include CPUs of course, but for anything other than simple point-to-point links, they are useless. This limitation is fine for what they were originally designed for, small centrally controlled networks, with or without a dispatching console function. The YCS system for System Fusion is looking to do the same for YSF and that is why I oppose it.
 
This model of a centralised control structure carried through to the amateur DMR networks. In its simplest form, a repeater would simply have a point-to-point network connection to the master and things would be fine. Even with a semi-distributed system, with one or more master per country, there is still some central control of the system with the power to overrule the decisions made at the local level. Such central control is also not conducive to supporting each countries requirements, and leads to much used functionality being arbitrarily removed. In the extereme case the countries master may also be removed. When such things happen you have to ask from where did they derive their authority? Who voted for them? Who made the decision and how do they know that it is correct?
 
In the amateur world we have gone beyond having dumb repeaters. Most MMDVM systems for example have a Raspberry Pi or similar running the system, and have the potential to provide a lot of local processing power which can be used for more complex tasks than simply routing traffic over a point-to-point link. Many sysops expressed the wish to be able to have access to multiple masters, simultaneously, and hence the DMR Gateway was born in 2017. It does complex call routing, and almost everything else, bar the position data interpretation.
 
In some quarters this development was opposed. I believe that the sysop should have the choice on how to route their traffic and so development went ahead and it has been enhanced since. It has been a huge success.
 
I think that the time has come to look at having an open source, non-centralised, DMR network. A network where no one person or group has control. We already have the beginnings of this with the HBLink and with XLX projects. If more people get involved with these projects then they will grow and offer more features as time goes on.
 
Some may say, what about integration of commercial repeaters like Hyteras and Motorolas? There is already a program available that converts the Hytera repeater protocol to the protocol used by the MMDVM, and integration of Motorola repeaters is possible all be it with a number of programs in series. Maybe someone will rationalise this into something simpler.
 
Things are already moving on this, and I hope that in the future we will see such systems appear and then DMR will be free of the tyranny of what we have now. Sysops and their users are sovereign and should not be dictated to by anybody (the same goes for software developers :-) ).
 
Jonathan  G4KLX
 


Re: Coming to a browser near you

rogerd111
 

Great work. Thanks.
Can't wait to try it.


Re: Analog Bridge

Aaron Groover
 

Thanks steve. Now it all makes sense. I was just wondering.

Digging around the forums, Educating my mind with this program.

I guess I’m just fascinated with how simple and straight forward the script is. 

I have tested all 4 modes and just blown away with the ease of it. 


Re: Coming to a browser near you

Mike KB8JNM
 

I want some !   ...LOL...

On 11/23/2020 11:40 PM, Mike Zingman - N4IRR wrote:
First 2 way QSO (Thanks Ken!!!!!)


Re: Coming to a browser near you

Mike Zingman - N4IRR
 

First 2 way QSO (Thanks Ken!!!!!)


Re: Analog Bridge

Steve N4IRS
 

Oh, I forgot.
Yes, for "like to like" AMBE <-> AMBE all you need is MMDVM_Bridge It's a "loop back"
if you take MB apart, it's 5 different modes. All sending data out through UDP ports (TLV)
If you loop the TLV port for DMR to the TLV port for YSF. (TX to RX and RX to TX) You have a bridge.

On 11/23/20 7:42 PM, Aaron Groover wrote:

I just gotta know. How in the world is analog bridge not used for YSF to DMR?

 

How does this communicate?

Where is the PTT going? As in transmission.

I see nothing on MMDVM when I key it up.

The point of analog bridge is to bridge the analog OVER to the DMR/Fusion/Dstar or whatever flavor suits your side right?

Where is the audio exactly coming and going to and from?

 

15 years in radio development, and I still cant understand how or why this is…. NEVER have I seen just a MMDVM bridge running.

 

Because we use the same method to cross over any trunked county radio system to analog aka Berks County, City of Allentown, With an analog bridged system. MMDVM “Bridge” to me is simply just only logging into the networks.

 

I think this a good topic I guess, lets all the curious minds know 😉

 

Thanks for what you do Steve.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--

 

Thank You,

 

Aaron Groover

(610) 379 6148

K3ALG@...

agroover@...

 

The content of this email is confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion, so that we can ensure such a mistake does not occur in the future.

 


1181 - 1200 of 8708