hblink BM talkgroups


Jim - K6JWN
 

Greetings,


I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?


Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.


Jim, K6JWN


Cort N0MJS <n0mjs@...>
 

Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Steve N4IRS
 

To piggyback on Cort, one thing to consider is that Masters can go down. It does not happen too often, but it does happen. I can make a case for not putting all your eggs in one basket.

Steve, N4IRS

On 7/20/2018 1:39 PM, Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io wrote:
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206



Cort N0MJS <n0mjs@...>
 

Yep — there are reasons… just wanted to make sure you knew it’s not a “requirement"

On Jul 20, 2018, at 12:42 PM, Steve N4IRS <szingman@...> wrote:

To piggyback on Cort, one thing to consider is that Masters can go down. It does not happen too often, but it does happen. I can make a case for not putting all your eggs in one basket.

Steve, N4IRS

On 7/20/2018 1:39 PM, Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io wrote:
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206



Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Jim - K6JWN
 

Hi Cort,


I am using hb_confbridge.py presently.


My end goal is to have a place to connect several bridges and repeaters that are not tied into BrandMeister, but still have the ability to bring a few BM TGs in and have the ability to route TGs between repeaters/hotspots. etc.  I guess its sort of like doing a cBridge for non motorola repeaters.  I hope that sheds some light on what I am trying to do.


My thinking was to create individual connections to BM and bring a single static TG across each connection, but I wasn't sure if that was frowned upon by BM (or it was the wrong way to do things).


Jim, K6JWN


From: main@DVSwitch.groups.io <main@DVSwitch.groups.io> on behalf of Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io <n0mjs@...>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 10:39:16 AM
To: main@DVSwitch.groups.io
Subject: Re: [DVSwitch] hblink BM talkgroups
 
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Jim - K6JWN
 

I was thinking about spreading connections between masters, but wasn't sure if that was good practice.  Sounds like it's OK 😊



From: main@DVSwitch.groups.io <main@DVSwitch.groups.io> on behalf of Steve N4IRS <szingman@...>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 10:42:11 AM
To: main@DVSwitch.groups.io
Subject: Re: [DVSwitch] hblink BM talkgroups
 
To piggyback on Cort, one thing to consider is that Masters can go down. It does not happen too often, but it does happen. I can make a case for not putting all your eggs in one basket.

Steve, N4IRS

On 7/20/2018 1:39 PM, Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io wrote:
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206



Cort N0MJS <n0mjs@...>
 

hb_confbridge.py is your huckleberry for that goal.

multiple connections is the way to do it. 

On Jul 20, 2018, at 2:52 PM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Hi Cort,

I am using hb_confbridge.py presently.

My end goal is to have a place to connect several bridges and repeaters that are not tied into BrandMeister, but still have the ability to bring a few BM TGs in and have the ability to route TGs between repeaters/hotspots. etc.  I guess its sort of like doing a cBridge for non motorola repeaters.  I hope that sheds some light on what I am trying to do.

My thinking was to create individual connections to BM and bring a single static TG across each connection, but I wasn't sure if that was frowned upon by BM (or it was the wrong way to do things).

Jim, K6JWN


From: main@DVSwitch.groups.io <main@DVSwitch.groups.io> on behalf of Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io <n0mjs@...>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 10:39:16 AM
To: main@DVSwitch.groups.io
Subject: Re: [DVSwitch] hblink BM talkgroups
 
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Cort N0MJS <n0mjs@...>
 

either/or

On Jul 20, 2018, at 2:53 PM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

I was thinking about spreading connections between masters, but wasn't sure if that was good practice.  Sounds like it's OK 😊


From: main@DVSwitch.groups.io <main@DVSwitch.groups.io> on behalf of Steve N4IRS <szingman@...>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 10:42:11 AM
To: main@DVSwitch.groups.io
Subject: Re: [DVSwitch] hblink BM talkgroups
 
To piggyback on Cort, one thing to consider is that Masters can go down. It does not happen too often, but it does happen. I can make a case for not putting all your eggs in one basket.

Steve, N4IRS

On 7/20/2018 1:39 PM, Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io wrote:
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206



Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Jim - K6JWN
 

Excellent, thank you very much for the help!


FYI, got HBmonitor running as well today.  Thanks for creating that, nice to see whats going on behind the scenes!


Jim, K6JWN


From: main@DVSwitch.groups.io <main@DVSwitch.groups.io> on behalf of Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io <n0mjs@...>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 12:56:10 PM
To: main@DVSwitch.groups.io
Subject: Re: [DVSwitch] hblink BM talkgroups
 
hb_confbridge.py is your huckleberry for that goal.

multiple connections is the way to do it. 

On Jul 20, 2018, at 2:52 PM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Hi Cort,

I am using hb_confbridge.py presently.

My end goal is to have a place to connect several bridges and repeaters that are not tied into BrandMeister, but still have the ability to bring a few BM TGs in and have the ability to route TGs between repeaters/hotspots. etc.  I guess its sort of like doing a cBridge for non motorola repeaters.  I hope that sheds some light on what I am trying to do.

My thinking was to create individual connections to BM and bring a single static TG across each connection, but I wasn't sure if that was frowned upon by BM (or it was the wrong way to do things).

Jim, K6JWN


From: main@DVSwitch.groups.io <main@DVSwitch.groups.io> on behalf of Cort N0MJS via Groups.Io <n0mjs@...>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 10:39:16 AM
To: main@DVSwitch.groups.io
Subject: Re: [DVSwitch] hblink BM talkgroups
 
Jim,

You don’t have to connect to multiple different masters to do that (if you don’t want to). You should be able to use a different set of “credentials” and make a 2nd connection to the same one if you want.

As far as what is “best”, it kinda depends on what your goals are — and since you just said “hblink” but didn’t say whether you were using hb_confbridge.py or hb_bridge_all.py… It’s harder to try and surmise what you’re looking to do.

If you’re just looking to make this a “proxy” connection (with local fail-over), then I’d say do it with hb_bridge_all.py and  one BM connection.

But if you’re wanting to potentially connect different downstreams (hotspots & repeaters) to different upstream (BM) TGIDs at the same time, then you’ll find that you need multiple connections to BM with not more than a single static TGID per TS.

Does that help any?

0x49 DE N0MJS

On Jul 20, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Jim K6JWN <nessenj@...> wrote:

Greetings,

I successfully setup hblink yesterday and connected 3 hotspots to it (eventually I will connect a MMDVM repeater into the mix).  Along with the hotspots, I created a client connection to BM 3108 and piped in a static tg (3100 for now to test).  I am interested in bringing 3 static talkgroups in, would it be best to bring them in over the existing client connection, or would it be easier to setup multiple client connections to multiple BM masters and have each one be responsible for a static TG?

Hope my question makes sense, if not let me know.

Jim, K6JWN

Cort Buffington
785-865-7206


Cort Buffington
785-865-7206