Internet Repeater Linking

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Tue Sep 03, 2002 6:41 am

I've read a few posts here regarding the linking of repeaters to the Internet. It seems like Ham's have quite a few resources to get their repeaters online, but for those of us that aren't Ham's, we're pretty much on our own. The Internet Repeater Linking Project, IRLP, and EchoLink are two of the programs that I have come across to make this work. Has anyone with a non Ham repeater come up with a way to do this? I have been working on a project for the past couple of weeks and have just about got all the bugs worked out. I have a GMRS repeater setup here in the town I live in. I've been wanting to add an automatic CWID to it for quite some time, since my controller does not have it built in. Instead of buying a CWID device, I wanted to tie a transmitter into my PC that would key up and broadcast the CWID at specified intervals. In my attempts, I came across RigBlaster http://www.westmountainradio.com from West Moutain Radio. I planned to use Echo Station to automatically announce my CWID using the RigBlaster NoMic connected to a Maxtrac. Once I got it all hooked up and working, I began browsing the CDRom that came with the RigBlaster and found an application called SpeakFreely http://www.speakfreely.org. SpeekFreely is a voice-over-ip program designed to allow users to communicate using audio with each other. West Mountain Radio has modified the SpeakFreely program to send/receive PTT commands controlling the RigBlaster. (The version from SpeakFreely's website does not have the PTT settings in it) Through trial and error, I have now successfully linked my repeater to the Internet. I live near Galveston, TX and have had my first remote user (my brother) connect from College Station, TX. Audio settings on the user's PC are critical, and a headset mic seems to work the best.

There is just one problem with the setup, however. I have no control over who connects. There is no security setup, or ban/allow lists. This being so, I am sort of reluctant to publish the IP and settings of my link server for fear that it will be abused. Has anyone else linked their repeater to the Internet? How? What software/hardware? Has it been abused? The source code for SpeakFreely is open source, but I am not a programmer. Is there anyone out there that might be able to modify this program to allow remote enable/disable of the link, or to have a user authentification? Sorry about this being such a long post, but I figure that if there are some other interested individuals out there wishing to do the same thing I have, we could work together to make it happen.

Hope to hear some opinions/thoughts....

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 11:58 am

Wow, I guess noone is interested...

Radio_Cowboy · Post by **Radio_Cowboy** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:54 pm

I'm interested in the idea, just don't know that much about it.....I've looked into the IRLP thing, because then I could talk to my old ham buddies back in Indiana....but there are no IRLP repeater sites here in New Mexico so that ain't gonna work......

-RC-

PRR · Post by **PRR** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 1:41 pm

There is just one problem with the setup, however. I have no control over who connects. There is no security setup, or ban/allow lists.

What about a firewall that permits a list of "allowable" IP addresses to get through? Since you're connected to the internet, a firewall is a prudent investment in any case.

Henry

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 1:45 pm

True, that is one way of limiting access. However, since most of the people that will connect to my setup use DSL or cable with dynamic IP's, that method will be very limited on it's effectiveness.

PRR · Post by **PRR** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 1:58 pm

Require a password to access your PC?

Tom in D.C. · Post by **Tom in D.C.** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 2:03 pm

If there's no IRLP site then try the Echolink URL. All you need is a computer with a sound card and microphone and an internet connection.

Tom, W2NJS
...in D.C.

Salem The Cat · Post by **Salem The Cat** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 2:40 pm

DijitalLee wrote:True, that is one way of limiting access. However, since most of the people that will connect to my setup use DSL or cable with dynamic IP's, that method will be very limited on it's effectiveness.

My, my are we worried about unauthorized access to your radio
infrastructure resources ?

Well you could engineer the equivalent of a "system key" and only
allow authorized personnel to use it. But wait, the "hacker" community
will cry foul and claim they only want to "monitor" and not do any sort
of evil things with your infrastructure.

All of you are so adamant regarding "monitoring" of controlled
trunked systems without permission of the system administrator,
using hacked keys - but yet now, when YOUR own system is at
stake, it suddenly becomes a different issue of limiting access.

tsk, tsk, tsk...hypocrisy at it's finest eh ?

Different, when the shoe is on the other foot, and you happen to
be the sys admin trying to control access to your resources.

Jonathan KC8RYW · Post by **Jonathan KC8RYW** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 2:44 pm

If you use IRLP, it runs on RedHat Linux.

You can set up Linux to act as a firewall. You can set it up so only certain IP's can connect to certain ports (like the ports used for IRLP's software.) Works nice.

The folks who made the IRLP would probably be glad to help you out with linking GMRS repeaters. Email and ask them. Just don't expect to use their IRLP ham system

.

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 3:39 pm

I'm not worried about any other "radio" user having access to my system. It's a GMRS repeater with a DPL, not very secure to begin with. I'm referring to Joe Blow Internet user coming across the Internet link and abusing the system. There are those out there that would love to just create havok just because they can. I would like to open the link up to fellow GMRS users, and hope that others will do the same in the future. The IRLP system is just for licensed HAM operators, and there is some sort of "verification" system in place that restricts it to just HAMs. I'm wanting to do just the same, but for GMRS license holders. No special handshakes, secret code words, encrypted keys.... just a way to allow licensed users to have access.

I'll email the IRLP people to see what they have to say, good idea!

Josh · Post by **Josh** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 5:47 pm

That'd be awesome. It's just too bad that I don't know anyone from your area!

-Josh
WPTP753

recurry · Post by **recurry** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 6:51 pm

I built an internet link based on the speakeasy software about 6 years ago. I modified the software so it responded to PTT input via the printer port and put out a COR signal as well. This way I could connect the computer to my repeater controller as if it were just another radio. As far as security is concerned, Speakeasy has built-in security capability where you can configure it to accept connections only from hosts you specify. Of course, whatever machine you have accessable to the Internet you should make sure it is fully secure. I would not use any then less than Windows2000 or a late version of Linux.

Of course, you could always get your ham license as well - pretty simple these days. From your writing it sounds like you know a lot more than many hams I know.

Regards,
Ron Curry
ke6wed

Jonathan KC8RYW · Post by **Jonathan KC8RYW** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:05 pm

I second the motion for you studying to take the tech-class ham license.

I became a ham a little over a year ago. I bought a radio scanner, and it opened up a little of knowledge into 2-way. I heard people talking the ham repeaters... so I wanted to talk, too.

"Now You're Talking" from ARRL covers everything you will need to know. Heck, they even have the test questions in the back to study from.

I wish some of my college books were like that, when finals season arrives.

I also bought ARRL's "Tech Question and Answer" book, but I am wondering if it was worth the 12 bucks. I can't say it was useless, though, because it tells the correct answer for a question, and also gives you the section of Part 97 that covers the question, along with the quick answer. You can't fold-over the answers on the edge like in "Now You're Talking," though, so you will have to have someone read the question out to you.

Anyway, go for it! It's only $10 or so to take the test, and is the best $10 you can spend for the amount you get back.

I'd suggest skipping CW, though. Just get the basics down pat first. THEN learn code right, at your own pace, if you decide to.

If you need any help after getting your ticket on what equipment/antennas/etc to get, feel free to ask me, or anyone else on this board. I know when I first got my ticket, I found finding the right gear a little tricky.

Good luck!

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:55 pm

Well, I'm not really interested in getting my HAM license, at this point. The only people I really talk to (family, friends) are on my GMRS repeater. Besides, my girlfriend says I have enough radios already!

recurry: You said you modified the Speakeasy software... Are you into programming?

AngelFire_91 · Post by **AngelFire_91** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 12:18 pm

Josh wrote: That'd be awesome. It's just too bad that I don't know anyone from your area!

-Josh
WPTP753

Think about a BatLabs On-Air board?? Where registered users of BatLabs could use this System to have a chat?? Kind of like a Ham Traffic Net, but only it would be the Batlabs Net.

Just a thought that crossed my mind when reading this.

hfitzgerald · Post by **hfitzgerald** » Sun Sep 08, 2002 2:54 pm

Yaesu has a similar system offered for any of their customers. -but I believe it uses proprietary technology and your non-Yaesu repeater will probably not make them want to help you.

I would try contacting the W8CSO repeater club in Grand Haven, Michigan. They've got 2 meter and 70 centimeter repeaters at NOCH (North Ottawa Community Hospital, pronounced 'notch'). If my memory serves me correct, they ran into this problem last year. The 440 Mhz repeater is linked to the internet and they were doing lots of applications including DX cluster work (I believe) across a national system (I'm out of my league here), etc. And then people started to figure out how to hack into the system... Anybody with a Palm Pilot and a copy of a program could send info across a network that was supposed to require a Ham license. They fixed the problem, but I don't remember how or who. -only that they did have the problem and now they don't. I'll try to remember to ask about it the next time I stop by one of their meetings.

Good luck and God bless.
Fitz Fitzgerald.
KC8KML

jim · Post by **jim** » Sun Sep 08, 2002 7:43 pm

This sounds like a good way to link together a bunch of satellite receivers for a multi-site repaeater provided there is internet access at all locations. Hmmmm.

Lord Velveeta · Post by **Lord Velveeta** » Sun Sep 08, 2002 7:56 pm

Well, as a ham operator here in Canada (ve2vfd) I do occasionally use some of the local IRLP repeater nodes. Mucho fun!

I assume that everyone involved in this discussion has visited the official IRLP website?

http://www.irlp.net/index.htm

Lots of info there and contact emails too. The easiest way to see if this technology can be ported to GMRS repeaters would probably to ask these people nicely. After all, why reinvent the wheel?

Pat

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Mon Sep 09, 2002 8:16 am

Well, I emailed the IRLP to see if they'd be willing to assist in my endeavour. I guess now, we wait...

ve3sy · Post by **ve3sy** » Mon Sep 09, 2002 9:04 am

I just responded to Lee from the Questions list on IRLP. Interesting concept but I was wondering how you get around Part 95-217 regarding remote control operation? Thought I would raise this ugly issue before a lot of people spin wheels.

Putting all of that aside the commercial version of IRLP provides very secure connections and will not allow anyone to hack into your connections.

Here's an overview of my early set-up here near Kitchener
http://www.ve3sy.com/irlp/

Jonathan KC8RYW · Post by **Jonathan KC8RYW** » Mon Sep 09, 2002 9:16 am

ve3sy wrote:I just responded to Lee from the Questions list on IRLP. Interesting concept but I was wondering how you get around Part 95-217 regarding remote control operation? Thought I would raise this ugly issue before a lot of people spin wheels.

Ummm... Part 95.217 only applies to R/C equipment, not GMRS.

Sec. 95.201 (R/C Rule 1) What is the Radio Control (R/C) Radio Service?

Source: 48 FR 24890, June 3, 1983, unless otherwise noted.

General Provisions

The R/C Service is a private, one-way, short distance non-voice
communications service for the operation of devices at remote locations.

PART 95--PERSONAL RADIO SERVICES--Table of Contents

Subpart C--Radio Control (R/C) Radio Service

Sec. 95.217 (R/C Rule 17) May I operate my R/C station transmitter by remote control?

(a) You may not operate an R/C transmitter by radio remote control.
(See R/C Rule 12, Sec. 95.212.)
(b) You may operate an R/C transmitter by wireline remote control if
you obtain specific approval in writing from the FCC. To obtain FCC
approval, you must show why you need to operate your station by wireline
remote control. If you receive FCC approval, you must keep the approval
as part of your station records. See R/C Rule 24, Sec. 95.224.
(c) Remote control means operation of an R/C transmitter from any
place other than the location of the R/C transmitter. Direct mechanical
control or direct electrical control by wire from some point on the same
premises, craft or vehicles as the R/C transmitter is not considered
remote control.

[48 FR 24890, June 3, 1983, as amended at 63 FR 68976, Dec. 14, 1998]

Feel free to keep the wheels spinning on the GMRS use of internet repeater linking.

ve3sy · Post by **ve3sy** » Mon Sep 09, 2002 9:30 am

Ummm... Part 95.217 only applies to R/C equipment, not GMRS.

See what happens when a Canuck tries to interpret the US rules

I think you may have found another good use for the technology

Enjoy IRLP.

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Mon Sep 09, 2002 11:59 am

ve3sy wrote:I just responded to Lee from the Questions list on IRLP.

Did you send it to my Hotmail address? If so, I haven't received a reply... Can you resend, please? Thanks.

ve3sy · Post by **ve3sy** » Mon Sep 09, 2002 12:04 pm

Was sent to dijitallee@hotmail.com. We have more problems with freee mailboxes. They get overfilled and mail bounces

email me direct if you want with real address paul@VE3SY.COM

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 11:12 am

I was corresponding with someone by the name of Dave (person who responded to the sales@irlp.net address) last week. I explained my situation to him and he explained how the IRLP was only for amateur radio users. We wrote back and forth several times, and in conclusion he said that he has sold several IRLP type setups for commercial use that are not linked to amateur repeaters. I replied twice requesting to order a commercial version, but have not received a response. My email is working, as I have received other stuff consistently. Does anyone have any other way of contacting someone with IRLP? Or, are they just backed up and busy and haven't gotten to my request? Any help is appreciated. Thanks.

lee@lockwood.net

ve3sy · Post by **ve3sy** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 11:18 am

The Commercial IRLP applications require a server separate from the ham IRLP network. There are numerous applications runing sucessfully including a 911 dispatch system in Alberta Canada.

These systems require sepoarate set-up and maintenace and with Dave in the middle of a major upgrade to the IRLP network it is occupying most of his time so replies to sales at irlp dot net may be spotty.

The designer is David Cameron and the above address is good.

Paul VE3SY

DijitalLee · Post by **DijitalLee** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 2:57 pm

Thanks. I figured it was a reason like that preventing him from replying. I've got a machine that I can dedicate as a server for an IRLP setup, with direct Internet access, and static IP. Now, just waiting to hear back from Dave. Thanks again.

A10382 · Post by **A10382** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 3:40 pm

IRLP, iLink (almost defunct now), EchoLink, and eQSO all provide similar functionality. The real diference is that IRLP has a radio at each end, where the others can use a PC w/soundcard to substitiute for the user interface at one or both ends.

There are also a few other java based radio controller applications. I have seen a few SW receivers that are internet controllable. Basically thay feed the audio out through the sound card (to multiple users) and control the radio with a serial interface from the Java Scripting on the web page. Here's one of interest
http://www.ralabs.com/webradio/

So there may be more apps other than IRLP. Quite a few technically inclined folks have cobbled up their own web controlled radios with Java and Visual basic apps.

One drawback of all of these: In times of real wide-spread disaster the telephone system and the internet will likely be the first to either be down or overwhelmed with traffic. I read in an earlier post of a 911 dispatch system using the internet for part of its link.. huh... duh....huh ...

The long distance phone system is the US cannot even handle the volume of calls on Mother's Day, Father's Day, and Thanksgiving. How is it going to function if a sizable portion of the country is without electricity. Those of you old enough to remember the East Coast blackout in the 1960's know what I mean.. Or the blackout in Eastern Canada from high solar flare (geo storm) activity a few years ago...

That said, I have tried all four of the earlier noted ones. I've had a few very intersting qsos with folks in out-of-the-way places who did not have either the antennas or HF gear for real DX. Israel, Lebanon, Libya, Australia, Hungary, Isle of Man, Ecuador, and Malaysia to name a few... They all operate a bit differently, with eQSO seeming to have best conferencing capability and IRLP the simplest thing to master from the end user's perspective.

ve3sy · Post by **ve3sy** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 3:59 pm

A10382 wrote:One drawback of all of these: In times of real wide-spread disaster the telephone system and the internet will likely be the first to either be down or overwhelmed with traffic. I read in an earlier post of a 911 dispatch system using the internet for part of its link.. huh... duh....huh ...

Sorry to disagree here but during 9/11 the ONLY wired communications that stayed up in downtown Manhattan WAS the Internet. Albeit not to par, email and VoIP remained operational and in fact was the only way many victims had available to communicate with loved ones.

Unlike circuit switched Voice, IP based packets will almost always find a route unless the pipe haws been physically cut.

Having said all of this about IP based telecom, the weak point from the home user is battery backup or lack thereof in manhole DSLAMs and pole/manhole based cable amplifiers.

Paul VE3SY

Tom in D.C. · Post by **Tom in D.C.** » Thu Sep 19, 2002 5:23 pm

Paul:

I read in the media, shortly after 9/11/01, that one of the wireless-based systems which continued to operate in lower Manhattan was the one accessed by the Blackberry handhelds. I suppose that this was due to the repeaters being located on telephone poles rather than on high-rise buildings.

Tom, W2NJS
...in D.C.

Internet Repeater Linking

Internet Repeater Linking

Internet/repeaters/linking

Repeater to Internet

Other remotes apps

Re: Other remotes apps

Comm systems on 9/11...