[hpsdr] Call for Comments and Discussion - OzyII

[Henry Vredegoor]

Hi Larry,All,

I like to disagree.

Having for instance your own remote controlled radio's at remote sites
connected via the internet would require a PC at each site.
Not a cheap and keep-it-simple solution.
Also think of power requirements at remote sites or portable/mobile use that
you would like to keep low.

Having to (remote) hassle with routing or configuration setups at remote
sites without having access to the full functionality that TCP/IP/Linux(or
other OS) offers is difficult, not to say a p.i.t.a. 

I think not to implement the possibility of a full TCP/IP stack if it could
be done at a reasonable price would be a missed chance for future (remote)
applications of HPSDR.
And if you don't want to use TCP/IP, you could simply configure the
OzyII/radio to use only Ethernet or just what layers you want.
It should maybe also have one or more USB interfaces for legacy reasons or
peoples preferences for that matter.

I think it won't make that much of a difference in hardware costs once you
decided to use a modern capable processor or maybe even better use/integrate
a ready made small and cheap microprocessor-board.
Like you said there are a bunch of them around, but integration into Ozy and
adapt that combo to the specifics of our HPSDR hardware would make it "more
than the sum of parts" IMHO.

I agree with you and others that OzyII should do the task as a
communications processor only, no other frills and thrills.
Maybe I confused people on this by mentioning the BeagleBoard as an example
for a plug-in microprocessor board for a test setup.

73's,

Henry.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hpsdr-bounces at lists.openhpsdr.org 
> [mailto:hpsdr-bounces at lists.openhpsdr.org] On Behalf Of Larry Gadallah
> Sent: woensdag 22 juli 2009 7:53
> To: hpsdr at lists.openhpsdr.org
> Subject: Re: [hpsdr] Call for Comments and Discussion - OzyII
> 
> 
> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
> 
> 2009/7/21 Paul Cecil <bikerpaul at suscom-maine.net>:
> > As I said there are a lot of great ideas being voiced but I 
> am afraid that
> > OZY II will become infected with "bloat", and the attempt 
> will be made to
> > make it a do everything card. If we make it too complex 
> then that can delay
> > its release, and in the end make it too expensive. And with 
> that thought we
> > need to keep this in mind. If we want to see more people 
> involved with HPSDR
> > then we will need to watch our costs. We have all seen the 
> "HPSDR boards for
> > sale" ads that have popped up. And a number have admitted 
> the additional
> > expense to complete the HPSDR to a usable radio was one of 
> the factors. Just
> > something else to think about.
> >
> > Lets keep OZY II simple!
> >
> 
> I also agree with Paul. There is a famous quote somewhere that goes
> something like "simplicity is the ultimate sophistication...". In my
> humble opinion, a significant detraction from many of the currently
> shipping SDRs is the heavy reliance on a stack of (sometimes unstable)
> USB hardware and software. If there is a faster, cleaner way to get
> data from the ADC/CIC into a user's computer where the interesting
> processing is going to happen, I'm all for it. I also suspect that the
> more complex the FPGA code and logic becomes, the less likely people
> are going to understand it and modify and innovate with it.
> 
> I concur with all of the comments about being able to "remote" the
> receiver "head" using Ethernet, and it is indeed much more flexible to
> be able to do a bunch of TCP/IP plumbing to route data here and there,
> but I don't think the TCP/IP stack needs to be in the radio itself.
> The radio can communicate with the host computer using Ethernet MAC
> frames, and the host computer can talk to the rest of the world via
> TCP/IP (on a separate interface if need be). Computing appliances of
> every kind that speak TCP/IP are now ubiquitous and cheap, and
> available in any imaginable format. We don't need to re-invent another
> one here.
> 
> We would do well to remember the time-tested UNIX philosophy for
> partitioning work amongst modules: Do only one thing, and do it well.
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Larry Gadallah, VE6VQ/W7                          lgadallah 
> AT gmail DOT com
> PGP Sig: 917E DDB7 C911 9EC1 0CD9  C06B 06C4 835F 0BB8 7336
> _______________________________________________
> HPSDR Discussion List
> To post msg: hpsdr at openhpsdr.org
> Subscription help: 
> http://lists.openhpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org
> HPSDR web page: http://openhpsdr.org
> Archives: http://lists.openhpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org/


 1248249310.0