Date   

Re: "COM14 not functioning"

Skip
 

No Steve, I don't really like that but it's what I suspected ... the error comes up 3 times early in N1MM+ initialization.  Device Mangler says everything is hunky dory with COM14.  I'm wondering if something has croaked in the RRC1258 that provides those 4 virtual ports.

Plan B will be to operate in 7QP without CAT sensing of frequency.  I've done it before, with any luck, I'll forget to take N1MM+ along with radio frequency changes only once or twice. [:=)  Thanks for the scoop

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


On 4/30/2020 5:56 PM, Steve London wrote:
You won't like this answer, either....

It means N1MM+ got a System.IO.IOException when we asked Microsoft to open the serial port.

According to the MS documentation, it occurs when the serial port is in an invalid state.

73,
Steve, N2IC


Re: icom 7300 ...radio not responding.

Ed Oxer, W8EO
 

Hi Ron and tnx for the reply. It is now working. I tried your suggestion and went through my settings again. After considerable "horsing around", I found that under ci-v the baud rate was set to auto and appraently did not match the baud rate in the program...9600. Now does all its tricks. 73, Ed W8EO


Re: icom 7300 ...radio not responding.

Ron
 

Open device manager, unplug and re plug the USB cable in, verify the Com Port has not changed. If it has, change accordingly in the software. 


On Fri, May 1, 2020, 12:36 PM Ed Oxer, W8EO <oxer@...> wrote:
Hello, 

N1MM was working great and suddenly quit. I get radio not responding and when reset ...nothing changes. I have reset the radio, checked my ports/settings per U tube video which worked previously. Any ideas? In advance, thanks. 

73 

Ed W8EO


icom 7300 ...radio not responding.

Ed Oxer, W8EO
 

Hello, 

N1MM was working great and suddenly quit. I get radio not responding and when reset ...nothing changes. I have reset the radio, checked my ports/settings per U tube video which worked previously. Any ideas? In advance, thanks. 

73 

Ed W8EO


Re: Networking problem

Gordon LaPoint
 

Larry,
    We have it all working now, I setup Hamachi VPN server/client with our own private network.  I would still like to get it working with OpenVPN, looks to be a routing issue.  I don't have time to work on it now, and will use Hamachi for the NEQSO contest this weekend in the Multioperator Single radio mode, with both of us using a single remote that I have setup.
Thanks for the help!
Gordon - N1MGO

On 5/1/2020 8:49 AM, Larry K8UT wrote:
Steve,

>apologies for me having confused the two
Ah... the confusion has just begun, and you are not the only beneficiary. ;-)

After posting my definition, my what-I-thought-were clear-cut delineations became further complicated by hybrid models of both Remote and Distributed contest operations.

It turns out that Gordon N1MGO is operating a remote station - the radio, keyer, microphone, antennas are not at his QTH. He and a friend are time-sharing a single remote station during this weekend's contests. But, he and that friend are also sharing their logs at their QTHs across an N1MM+ plus network and a VPN.

Thus my original definition for DMO is not always accurate. Each contest operator, logging computer and the logging software is together. Other contests operators are similarly equipped in other places (separated by more than FD's 1000 foot radius). The logging results (this contest's logs) are shared between those operators' places. But the radio(s), keyer(s), microphone(s), antennas could be ...anywhere.

Does your brain hurt yet?

-larry (K8UT)




Re: RCC Cup

AB2ZY
 

 

From: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io [mailto:N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io] On Behalf Of Jeff Demers
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2020 11:42 AM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] RCC Cup

 

Thanks Larry -  but I don't see  "RCCCUP"  in my list of contests in version 1.0.837

Am I doing something wrong?

 

 

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 11:29 AM Larry K8UT <K8UT@...> wrote:

The  RCCCUP contest is supported.

 

See the website's >Docs >Supported >Supported Contests List

>File >New Log in Database "RCCCUP"

 

-larry (K8UT)

 

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

From: "Jeff Demers" <jbdemers@...>

Sent: 2020-05-01 11:23:32

Subject: [N1MM+] RCC Cup

 

Hello


Is the RCC Cup supported by N1MM?

 

Their website indicates it is

 

And if so what is the contest name?


Thanks
Jeff N1SNB 


Re: RCC Cup

Jeff Demers
 

Thanks Larry -  but I don't see  "RCCCUP"  in my list of contests in version 1.0.837
Am I doing something wrong?


On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 11:29 AM Larry K8UT <K8UT@...> wrote:
The  RCCCUP contest is supported.

See the website's >Docs >Supported >Supported Contests List
>File >New Log in Database "RCCCUP"

-larry (K8UT)

------ Original Message ------
From: "Jeff Demers" <jbdemers@...>
Sent: 2020-05-01 11:23:32
Subject: [N1MM+] RCC Cup

Hello

Is the RCC Cup supported by N1MM?

Their website indicates it is

And if so what is the contest name?

Thanks
Jeff N1SNB 


Re: RCC Cup

Larry K8UT
 

The  RCCCUP contest is supported.

See the website's >Docs >Supported >Supported Contests List
>File >New Log in Database "RCCCUP"

-larry (K8UT)

------ Original Message ------
From: "Jeff Demers" <jbdemers@...>
Sent: 2020-05-01 11:23:32
Subject: [N1MM+] RCC Cup

Hello

Is the RCC Cup supported by N1MM?

Their website indicates it is

And if so what is the contest name?

Thanks
Jeff N1SNB 


RCC Cup

Jeff Demers
 

Hello

Is the RCC Cup supported by N1MM?

Their website indicates it is

And if so what is the contest name?

Thanks
Jeff N1SNB 


This weekend QSO parties

John Bednar
 

 

If you are operating in one of the 7QP, IN, DE, or New England (NEWE) states, select that option from the state selector.

For those operating outside of these sponsoring states, select the IN7QPNE option.

 

If someone sends you a County line exchange, enter it as received. Examples are:

ORDES/JEF  or  IDFRA/UTCAC 

Shortcut county line entry is supported for all of the above contest selections.

 

When you log a county line QSO, the software will split the entry into separate QSO's. The exchanges are checked during logging and an error message will be displayed if you make a mistake.

 

If you edit a logged QSO, be sure to change all of the fields in the QSO record. Several database fields are used for this contest. You could also log a new contact and delete the incorrect QSO from the log. This may be easiest and simplest method.

 

If you edit a QSO after logging or remove a QSO, you will need to rescore. The rescore button was added at the bottom of the Score window.

 

If you are operating from one of the sponsoring states, be sure to use the new Multipliers, Additional Counties window with the standard in-state Counties window. Right click in the Multiplier windows to select the display of worked or all mults.

 

When configuring the contest the software will download the call history file from the web site and install. After selecting the contest, click the Associated files tab, then click on the Call History file "Change" button. Simply click Yes when the prompt appears asking if you want to download the CH file.

 

The direct link for the call history files is:

https://n1mmwp.hamdocs.com/mmfiles/categories/callhistory/

 

If someone from the New England QSO party sends an exchange with the State abbreviation first, they are not following the approved exchanges and you will need to place the state after the County.  FAICT is correct,  CTFAI is wrong.

 

The last changes to the QSO party code occurred in early September 2019. Thanks to N7EPD for assisting with the several week effort of testing all five QSO parties.

 

Thanks to Claude, VE2FK for providing the call history files.

 

John, K3CT

 


Re: 7QP

John Bednar
 

 

The shorthand notation is only supported for a received exchange.

 

You are correct that the exchanges input by the countyline prompt is tested for valid county abbreviations and you can not use shorthand notation for the user input. I don’t see this changing.

 

You are correct that the {COUNTYLINE} macro will not convert a county line exchange to a shorthand notation. I don’t see this changing.

 

None of this prevents you from editing the function key message to sending whatever shorthand exchange you like.

 

John, K3CT

 

 

From: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io [mailto:N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io] On Behalf Of n7wy via groups.io
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2020 8:24 AM
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] 7QP

 

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.


Re: Networking problem

 

Oh My !

This is fun and will lead to some new cutting edge stuff
of course not everyone will be happy with the new ways some of us find to have fun

But the expansion of our style of operating will lead to some cool places

Many thought the memory CW keyers would be death rays to contesting :)

Of course as we chart new territory, it is a good reminder to send Notes on what we did to the contest sponsors
and allow them to place us as a Check Log
No one wants to be listed as a DQ!

Keep up the great work!

Cheers!
Steve
KG5VK


Re: Networking problem

Larry K8UT
 

Steve,

>apologies for me having confused the two
Ah... the confusion has just begun, and you are not the only beneficiary. ;-)

After posting my definition, my what-I-thought-were clear-cut delineations became further complicated by hybrid models of both Remote and Distributed contest operations.

It turns out that Gordon N1MGO is operating a remote station - the radio, keyer, microphone, antennas are not at his QTH. He and a friend are time-sharing a single remote station during this weekend's contests. But, he and that friend are also sharing their logs at their QTHs across an N1MM+ plus network and a VPN.

Thus my original definition for DMO is not always accurate. Each contest operator, logging computer and the logging software is together. Other contests operators are similarly equipped in other places (separated by more than FD's 1000 foot radius). The logging results (this contest's logs) are shared between those operators' places. But the radio(s), keyer(s), microphone(s), antennas could be ...anywhere.

Does your brain hurt yet?

-larry (K8UT)

------ Original Message ------
From: "Steven Lott Smith KG5VK" <lottsphoto@...>
Sent: 2020-05-01 08:21:47
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] Networking problem

Larry

Thank you for setting me straight

apologies for me having confused the two
as they are Two different distinct Operating Categories

Multi Distributed being everyone operates at their own QTH
but shares the operating experience and see's who is where thru watching each others computer logging screen
just everyone is on the same page knowing who is on what band etc
shared experience however everyone is at their own station

Much like ARRL FD with the Big exception that the span of the antenna farm and distance between radios can be much greater
More social distance and therefore a Check Log under the "currently understood rules" of all antennas within @1000

Multi-OP with "virtual butts in the chairs"
is Remote control of One station and antenna farm all at one location
Just the OPS are all at home but working the station from remote
with VPN tools

Multi- Distributed will be very handy for those of us that enjoy helping with Special events and the members of a club help share the
operating time slots over a period of several days or more, each operating from their own shack
No more need to fill out an interactive spread sheet that must be live on the internet at all times
We can see who is on what band at any given moment
by just looking at N1MM+
on our computer in our own shack
provided we maintain a connected status to everyone in the VPN

There will be many other uses for Multi-Distributed


Apologies for the extra bandwidth, thank you and the whole N1MM+ team for the continued support and a great Software tool set !

Steve
KG5VK
Tele 318-470-9806
ARRL NTX Section Manager 
Please note: My Out Going Email address is LottsPhoto@...
KG5VK@... is forwarded to my Gmail address



On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 7:20 PM Larry K8UT <K8UT@...> wrote:
Just to clarify:

The new feature in N1MM+, and the Zoom teleconference this week described Distributed Multi-Op (DMO) contesting over a Virtual Private Network (VPN). In DMO each ham - in his/her own shack - operates his/her computer, radio and antenna, but logs their contacts on an N1MM+ wide area network. In this architecture, everything is distributed and only logging is shared over a network.

Gordon is describing remote contest operation in which each ham connects remotely, via a VPN, using some remote operating software, to co-located computers, radios and antennas. In this architecture, the operators are distributed, everything else is centrally located. 

-larry (K8UT)

[[Unfortunately, the recording of that teleconference was lost. There are more planned and we'll try to get a subsequent Zoom (or a K8UT Video) posted on this topic.]]


------ Original Message ------
From: "Steven Lott Smith KG5VK" <lottsphoto@...>
Sent: 2020-04-30 18:42:43
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] Networking problem

Are you using the latest N1MM+ release ?

Tom N1MM and Larry K8UT
Recently held a Zoom conference 
Only about 8 people attended
Everyone used LogMeIn Hamachi ‘s VPN tool

We should see a recording of that session released 
Soon

-larry (K8UT)

The tool set was easy to use 

Steve
KG5VK 

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:19 PM Gordon LaPoint <gordon.lapoint@...> wrote:
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




--
Steve
KG5VK
Tele 318-470-9806
ARRL NTX Section Manager 
Please note: My Out Going Email address is LottsPhoto@...
KG5VK@... is forwarded to my Gmail address


Re: 7QP

n7wy
 

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.


Re: Networking problem

 

Larry

Thank you for setting me straight

apologies for me having confused the two
as they are Two different distinct Operating Categories

Multi Distributed being everyone operates at their own QTH
but shares the operating experience and see's who is where thru watching each others computer logging screen
just everyone is on the same page knowing who is on what band etc
shared experience however everyone is at their own station

Much like ARRL FD with the Big exception that the span of the antenna farm and distance between radios can be much greater
More social distance and therefore a Check Log under the "currently understood rules" of all antennas within @1000

Multi-OP with "virtual butts in the chairs"
is Remote control of One station and antenna farm all at one location
Just the OPS are all at home but working the station from remote
with VPN tools

Multi- Distributed will be very handy for those of us that enjoy helping with Special events and the members of a club help share the
operating time slots over a period of several days or more, each operating from their own shack
No more need to fill out an interactive spread sheet that must be live on the internet at all times
We can see who is on what band at any given moment
by just looking at N1MM+
on our computer in our own shack
provided we maintain a connected status to everyone in the VPN

There will be many other uses for Multi-Distributed


Apologies for the extra bandwidth, thank you and the whole N1MM+ team for the continued support and a great Software tool set !

Steve
KG5VK
Tele 318-470-9806
ARRL NTX Section Manager 
Please note: My Out Going Email address is LottsPhoto@...
KG5VK@... is forwarded to my Gmail address



On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 7:20 PM Larry K8UT <K8UT@...> wrote:
Just to clarify:

The new feature in N1MM+, and the Zoom teleconference this week described Distributed Multi-Op (DMO) contesting over a Virtual Private Network (VPN). In DMO each ham - in his/her own shack - operates his/her computer, radio and antenna, but logs their contacts on an N1MM+ wide area network. In this architecture, everything is distributed and only logging is shared over a network.

Gordon is describing remote contest operation in which each ham connects remotely, via a VPN, using some remote operating software, to co-located computers, radios and antennas. In this architecture, the operators are distributed, everything else is centrally located. 

-larry (K8UT)

[[Unfortunately, the recording of that teleconference was lost. There are more planned and we'll try to get a subsequent Zoom (or a K8UT Video) posted on this topic.]]


------ Original Message ------
From: "Steven Lott Smith KG5VK" <lottsphoto@...>
Sent: 2020-04-30 18:42:43
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] Networking problem

Are you using the latest N1MM+ release ?

Tom N1MM and Larry K8UT
Recently held a Zoom conference 
Only about 8 people attended
Everyone used LogMeIn Hamachi ‘s VPN tool

We should see a recording of that session released 
Soon

-larry (K8UT)

The tool set was easy to use 

Steve
KG5VK 

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:19 PM Gordon LaPoint <gordon.lapoint@...> wrote:
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




--
Steve
KG5VK
Tele 318-470-9806
ARRL NTX Section Manager 
Please note: My Out Going Email address is LottsPhoto@...
KG5VK@... is forwarded to my Gmail address


Re: N1MM+ Distributed Multi Op LAN+WAN

Dave New, N8SBE
 

Yes, a couple of folks pointed that out to me via private emails.  I have an inquiry in with the ARRL contest branch (so far, no response) asking specifically if rule 3.7 applies to FD, since the ARRL has repeatedly pointed out that "FD is NOT a contest".

73,

-- Dave, N8SBE

-------- 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@...>
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@...>
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
763-807-8772


Re: USB COM14 not working message

Robert Rantin
 

I get the same message "com 4 is not functioning" but in the device manager there is nothing using com port 4...microham microkeyer2 is under serial bus or something like that


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



Re: Networking problem

Larry K8UT
 

gm Gordon

Thanks for that explanation. As clarification of my "remote station" description, the logging software is also local with the contest operator, but the station hardware (radio, keyer, mic, rotor...) is all remote via the RCForb software and an RCForb OpenVPN .

Unless I misunderstand this configuration, there is no requirement for N1MM+ networking and an N1MM VPN - all logging is local to your PC. As such, you should have N1MM+'s >Windows >Network Status >Actions turned OFF. The recent changes to N1MM+ that provide VPN functionality are not involved in RCForb connectivity.

-larry (K8UT)

------ Original Message ------
From: "Gordon LaPoint" <gordon.lapoint@...>
To: N1MMLoggerPlus@groups.io
Sent: 2020-05-01 04:17:23
Subject: Re: [N1MM+] Networking problem

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)



Re: RY OP WDS.udc

Les Elliott
 

Is your computer setup to show all file extensions, if not do so,
then browse to your Users\yourusername\(My )Documents\N1MM Logger+\UserDefinedContests
folder and check that  .txt has not been added to the filename (or replaced  .udc)
So that the file name is  RY_OP_WDS.udc
Les, G4OGB
 

Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 8:01 PM
Subject: [N1MM+] RY OP WDS.udc
 
I tried to work the RY OP WDS.udc with no success today in getting the UDC to setup properly in N1MM as a selectable contest.

I've only tried one other the PCC_MEM and it worked just fine.  But no luck today with this one.

I downloaded the file, saved it in the N1MM User Defined Contests folder.  Same location the PCC_MEM is located, but it just would not appear on the list of contests to select.

I went so far as to restart my computer, no success.

Any suggestions?

Bob/VE1RSM


Re: Networking problem

Gordon LaPoint
 

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)