I set up for 7QP this morning, set STATION to ROVER, entered COUNTYLINE in the call sign field of the DI window, and entered the county abbreviations preceded by WY as they were invalid without the WY prefix, put COUNTYLINE in curly braces in my F2 message and tested it.  The sent exchange is NOT the compressed format allowed by the rules at ws7n.net/7QP.  Instead it is the format for county line operations on a state border; the state, WY is sent preceding each county with slant bar separators.  
I exited N1MM, restarted and tried to enter WY for the first county and just the county abbreviations for the other counties.  This was rejected as invalid input.

Next, I changed the set up EXCH inside OPEN LOG IN DATABASE to what I want sent like WYwas/hot/par.  I replaced COUNTYLINE with EXCH in my function key messages.  I know that I must still do the COUNYLINE set up each time I restart N1MM so logging is done properly.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN
From: "ve3ki" <ve3iay@...>
Date: Thu, April 30, 2020 7:09 pm
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io

Yes, but...if the rule in 4.1 doesn't apply to class E, then the "General Rules for all ARRL Contests" take over, don't they? General rule 3.7 says "All transmitters and receivers must be located within a 500-meter diameter circle, excluding antennas."

73,
Rich VE3KI


On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 04:21 PM, Jamie WW3S wrote:

Reread his email....look for A and then look for E.....I think you’ll see the difference.....

 

On Apr 30, 2020, at 4:15 PM, Diane Saunders <k0dslae@...> wrote:

There is just one problem with N8SBE's statement that you can use the (or a) club's call sign while operating in a distributed multi-operator environment - "Use the club call (with the permission of the call trustee), and coordinate your operation so you remain within the max number of signals you wish to enter under." 

 

The FD Rules, paragraph 4.1 specifically, says ALL equipment and antennas must be within that 1,000' diameter circle (see below).  You cannot do it as class A and use a club call when your operators are all outside of that circle operating via a WAN.  A club can use a LAN inside the circle to connect all of the operating positions to log under one call.  But for distributed multi-operator where the operators are outside of the circle, the only way this works is to go as an individual and all those individual operators connect via the distributed framework.  Then you can do it using a common call sign; it just can't be a club call.  Otherwise, you will have to operate your own and using your own call sign.

 

 

 

"4.1. (Class A) Club / non-club portable: Club or a non-club group of three or more persons set up
specifically for Field Day. Such stations must be located in places that are not regular station locations and must not
use facilities installed for permanent station use, or use any structure installed permanently for Field Day. A single
licensee or trustee for the entry is responsible for the group entry. All equipment (including antennas) must lie
within a circle whose diameter does not exceed 300 meters (1000 feet). To be listed as Class A, all contacts must be
made with transmitter(s) and receiver(s) operating independent of commercial power mains. Entrants whom for any
reason operate a transmitter or receiver from a commercial main for one or more contacts will be listed separately as
Class A-Commercial."

 

This is how I see it.  Maybe the ARRL could comment on this.

 

Diane K0DSL

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:50 AM Dave New, N8SBE <n8sbe@...> wrote:

Folks,

 

In my mind, a pandemic is also a valid emergency situation, one which we don't even have to simulate these days. 

 

A pandemic has the peculiar feature of leaving the infrastructure largely intact (power, water, Internet, etc) while crippling all direct face-to-face interoperability, including the ability to put together classical multi-multi or multi-single operations.

 

That is where the adapting comes in.  And it turns out that no change in the FD rules are needed, either.  Operate as class 4E, for example, with multiple locations.  There is nothing in the FD rules prohibiting this.  Only class A stations need be located within a 1000 ft. circle.  Class E (and most others) have no such restriction.

 

So, run your distributed multi-multi under class E with a single callsign and claim the number of simultaneous transmitter/modes you have on the air, and Bob's your Uncle.  No need to qualify your entry.  Use the club call (with the permission of the call trustee), and coordinate your operation so you remain within the max number of signals you wish to enter under.  The only issue is keeping your neighbors sane while running a generator all night in a quiet neighborhood.  Maybe you can run from batteries all night?  Think outside the box.

 

I realize this means shifting the usual class A competition to class E, for this year at least, but it could be a lot worse.  Buck up, and stop whining.  Get out there and make this Field Day a success, using class E stations, instead of class A.  Maybe next year, we can go back to non-pandemic mode.  In the meantime, we will have successfully shown how we adapted to a pandemic situation and still managed to effectively jam the airwaves with signals.

 

73,

 

-- Dave, N8SBE (Joint U of M and ARROW Field Day coordinator)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN
From: "AB2ZY" <akozak@...>
Date: Tue, April 28, 2020 7:56 pm
To: "N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io" <N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io>

OK, that was my penultimate word. This is the ultimate:

 

Instead of operating with a large group, grab your IC-703 (or whatever you have), a  multiband dipole (G5RV or similar) or a multiband vertical (I have one I have been using “temporarily” for 2 years)  stuck in a bucket of sand with 16 radials, a camping generator and a laptop. Go out in your yard. The deck. Drive to a trailhead. Empty parking lot. Anywhere you can maintain social distancing. Operate from there, vying for mainly regional contacts. Operate 1B.  You will have fun. You will not need the internet.

 

Of course, if you go mainly for the food, beverages and company that may be less than satisfying. But still better than operating 1D.

 

Al

AB2ZY

 

From: Al Kozakiewicz
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 7:16 PM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Subject: RE: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

My last word on the subject:

 

I “object” because you can’t simulate preparation for an actual emergency communications situation by assuming that the mainstream technologies that need replacing are fully functional in such an emergency!

 

I thought the ARRL’s suggested adaptations were within the spirit of FD while not turning it into another contest.

 

Al

AB2ZY

 

From: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io [mailto:N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io] On Behalf Of Ted Bryant
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 5:28 PM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

Sorry, Al, you are missing the point.  Distributed or co-located, all the QSOs are made in the traditional way with RF.  When the stations are co-located, the logging computers (instead of paper and pencil) are connected through a local network (LAN).  When “distributed”, the computers are networked through a Wide Area Network (WAN), i.e., the “internet”.  Computer to computer communication is essentially the same in either case, just the distance has changed.

 

I’m sure you know all this but I can’t understand why you would object to how the logging computers communicate with each other.

 

But all this aside, the real point I was making is the irony of the fact that ARRL was saying that we should “adapt” while refusing a request to do just that. And it has nothing to do with whether it’s a contest or not.

 

73, Ted W4NZ

 

 

From: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io [mailto:N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io] On Behalf Of AB2ZY
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 1:26 PM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

I dunno, but Field Day is supposed to be a simulation (perhaps stuck in a 1950s paradigm, but a simulation nonetheless) of using amateur radio to supplement or replace conventional communications infrastructure. So in the 21st century if you have access to a working Internet you have no need for supplemental wireless communications. If you’re going to have people sit home and communicate with radio equipment via the internet, then just conduct the exercise over the internet and dispense with the radios!  I think the ARRL is doing the right thing here. FD ain’t a contest!

 

Al

AB2ZY

 

From: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io [mailto:N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io] On Behalf Of Ted Bryant
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 12:58 PM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

“…we wrote to the ARRL Contest Committee folks suggesting that they adapt to the current situation by including a "distributed multi-op" category for Field Day 2020…”

 

“"The ARRL Board’s Programs & Services Committee has upheld the current Field Day posture of no changes for 2020 ….… the theme of adapting is apropos.”

 

HUH?

73, Ted W4NZ

 

From: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io [mailto:N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io] On Behalf Of Larry K8UT
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 10:45 AM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Cc: wa8efk@...; Jahnke, Bart, W9JJ
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

Considering N1MM+'s recent VPN improvements - and the COVID-19 lockdowns - we wrote to the ARRL Contest Committee folks suggesting that they adapt to the current situation by including a "distributed multi-op" category for Field Day 2020.

 

The response:

"The ARRL Board’s Programs & Services Committee has upheld the current Field Day posture of no changes for 2020. Recognizing that Field Day is not a contest, but instead is an operating exercise, the theme of adapting is apropos."

 

As other contests have begun allowing distributed multi-op, we have heard from clubs that intend to operate Field Day in a similar distributed multi-op architecture. We advise any club that participates using an unsanctioned category to clearly identify their rules violation to the ARRL and in any log submission.

 

-larry (K8UT)

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "Jamie WW3S" <ww3s@...>

To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io

Sent: 2020-04-28 10:15:10

Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

not really MM reflector content, but I read that newletter twice, and I dont see where they added a class 1A....

 

------ Original Message ------

From: "Joe WB9SBD" <nss@...>

To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io

Sent: 4/28/2020 10:08:15 AM

Subject: Re: [N1MM+] N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

 

My first about it came like this,

Dear Central Division Member -  

        There have been many suggestions forchanges to the rules for

Field Day-2020 on account of the present social distancing requirements.

Below is today's message from the ARRL  HQ's Contest Manager,  Paul

Bourque,  N1SFE that explains a change to the listing of club names for

Field Day  participants . ALL participants will have that participant's

club name associated with their listing.

         73, Kermit Carlson W9XA

details followed,,

>From the ARRL NEWS;

04/22/2020

This year, ARRL Field Day promises to be a unique iteration of this

annual event, with many individuals and groups coming up with new and

interesting ways to adjust their approach. As an event, Field Day is

structured to be versatile and can be adapted for any situation.

Many groups have asked how they can adjust their Field Day planning to

address social-distancing guidelines that may be in effect in many areas

of the country, as gathering at their traditional Field Day site may not

be feasible or safe. Instead of participating in a group event this

year, consider operating as a Class B, C, D, or E station, utilizing

your own call sign.

ARRL will include club names for all participating stations in the

published results, so the efforts of your club’s members can be

acknowledged. While we will not publish an aggregate club score, seeing

the name of your club associated with various individual member’s

results is certainly a way to highlight your club’s activity.

Myriad opportunities are possible in this year’s Field Day setting.

These are just a couple.

    Consider having an intra-club competition among members, seeing who

can make the most contacts during the event. You can award prizes or

distribute certificates at a club meeting. This can be a fun way to

bolster the activities of individual club members, even though they

cannot all gather together at the same location this year.

    Set up a Field Day Challenge with rival clubs in neighboring

communities. See how many members of each club get on the air from their

own stations and participate in the event. In addition to “bragging

rights,” perhaps certificates to the top-scoring individual entries in

each category can be presented as part of this inter-club camaraderie.

One club is planning to conduct its Field Day as a 4A club group, with

participants spaced to comply with social distancing guidelines within

the required 1,000-foot diameter circle and operating individual

stations. This club also plans to set up a “Get on the Air” (GOTA)

station. The club’s plan is to have the GOTA coach at the Field Day

site, while GOTA operators participate via remote link.

Another club is planning to set up a remote-controlled station at its

usual Field Day site, with club members taking turns controlling the

station from their homes. The club is developing a schedule that

outlines when each member of the club will be at the helm via the remote

link.

Whatever approach you take to this year’s Field Day, keep up to date

with the current guidelines issued by local and state health agencies

that may impact your proposed operation.

ARRL invites your stories about the interesting and creative ways

you’re planning to use to adapt your Field Day operation. Share these

on the ARRL Field Day Facebook page.

For the latest news and updates, visit the Field Day webpage. —

 Thanks to ARRL Contest Program Manager Paul Bourque, N1SFE

--------------------------------------------------------------------

ARRL Central Division

Director: Kermit A Carlson, W9XA

w9xa@...

 

 

 

--

Diane Saunders

K0DSL

k0dslae@...

763-807-8772

On Fri, 1 May 2020 at 2:45, Skip

<k6dgw@...> wrote:

That's what I thought Steve.  Device Mangler thinks all is well.  This is a new thing.  I don't remote to W7RN often so it just showed up when I was getting ready for 7QP.  I'm fairly certain it is a Windoze problem, there have been a couple of updates since I last operated remote, and each update brings it's own surprises and new "features." [:=(  I'll see if Microbit has any new software for the RRC1258 tomorrow but not holding my breath.  I've still got tomorrow to see if I can track this down or go to Plan B.  Thanks for the info

73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

On 4/30/2020 4:51 PM, Steve London wrote:

That message is generated by the Microsoft serial port handler that N1MM+ uses.

What does Device Manager think of COM14 ?

73,
Steve, N2IC

Larry,
I have not used this configuration previously.
I am using OpenVPN for both server and client. The server runs on a linux system at the remote site. Each client is running the openvpn GUI client V11.13.0.0
I tried without and with the address of the server in the >Network Status>Actions>Edit address table.
I don't expect each client to see the other client, just the server site.
I did not see the Zoom teleconference about this.
I think you understand our architecture correctly except we are using one radio, remotely, logging at each operators location.
We are operating a remote site using RCForb software, so the same radio operated by each operator, at different times.

I will try again with the version 1.0.8317.

Thanks,
Gordon - N1MGO

On 4/30/2020 20:36 PM, Larry K8UT wrote:

Gordon,

See my reply in this thread to KG5VK. Do I understand your architecture correctly?

Had this configuration been running previously? What remote software are you using? Which VPN client? Are you manually adding the Name and IP Address of your site into the >Network Status >Actions >Edit Computer Addresses table?

If this configuration had not been used previously, or not since updating Windows 10, check the Windows Firewall settings to ensure that you have allowed N1MM+ through the Public firewall. Details on how to do that are in the VPN document here:
https://n1mmwp.hamdocs.com/mmfiles/distributed-multi-op-contesting-using-n1mm-with-a-hamachi-vpn_v1-pdf/

-larry (K8UT)

Finally - the new auto-configure routines added since version 1.0.8317 may have busted your specific software combination. If you are still stuck could you experiment by reverting to 1.0.8317 to see if that connects to your remote site?

-larry (K8UT)

Gordon,

See my reply in this thread to KG5VK. Do I understand your architecture correctly?

Had this configuration been running previously? What remote software are you using? Which VPN client? Are you manually adding the Name and IP Address of your site into the >Network Status >Actions >Edit Computer Addresses table?

If this configuration had not been used previously, or not since updating Windows 10, check the Windows Firewall settings to ensure that you have allowed N1MM+ through the Public firewall. Details on how to do that are in the VPN document here:
https://n1mmwp.hamdocs.com/mmfiles/distributed-multi-op-contesting-using-n1mm-with-a-hamachi-vpn_v1-pdf/

-larry (K8UT)

Finally - the new auto-configure routines added since version 1.0.8317 may have busted your specific software combination. If you are still stuck could you experiment by reverting to 1.0.8317 to see if that connects to your remote site?

-larry (K8UT)

Re your second question, yes you can delete contests with 0 QSOs. In the log selection dialog, select the log in question (if it was the very top log in the list, select another one first and then go back and select the top one, i.e. make it an explicit selection instead of just accepting the default) and then press the Delete key. You will be given one more chance to back out before the contest is actually deleted.

73,
Rich VE3KI


On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 04:15 PM, Pete Smith wrote:

In the latest Morserunner plug-in for MM, the only info you get is the standard Score window.  Any chance of getting a little more detail, a la Morserunner itself - like busted calls, exchanges?  And am I missing something, or will the program not let you delete contests with 0 QSOs from the database?

-- 
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network 
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now 
spotting RTTY activity worldwide. 
For spots, please use your favorite 
"retail" DX cluster.

That message is generated by the Microsoft serial port handler that N1MM+ uses.

What does Device Manager think of COM14 ?

73,
Steve, N2IC

Can someone tell me what this error notice really means?  COM14 is one of the 4 RRC1258 virtual ports, it is RRC COM1 and handles the CAT connection to the remote K3.  The notice comes up the first time right after the N!MM+ splash screen appears, and then comes up two more times as N1MM initializes and the windows appear.
Windows tells me that all the USB COM ports are working fine. I've done all the usual [reboot, remove all the USB-reboot-reinsert USB, try different USB sockets] with no change.  Rebooting the RRC1258 doesn't fix it either.
Usually, when something is wrong with the CAT connection, N1MM+ comes up and eventually gives me the lost radio contact, retry? notice.  That never happens now.
Thanks,
73,
Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW
Sparks NV DM09dn
Washoe County

I'm trying to get multiop contesting setup using my remote site. I have a VPN server running at the site, and we can all VPN in with no problem.

We can ping the server system from our home computers (all Win10) when the vpn link is active. N1MM++ does not see the server site from each home site.

What else should be checked? VNC works fine (with the VPN active)

Gordon - N1MGO