Emergency Communications

A stereo/binaural tactical headset

One thing I hate doing when I’m taking down notes at a radio comms event is juggling a hand-microphone and pen/paper/tablet/computer simultaneously. So I tend to prefer a headset for my radios rather than a hand-microphone. Some models (especially Kenwood) have lots of selections available, but some are very much restricted. In particular, I prefer a binaural headset as I find it more difficult to hear a voice on one side than via both sides — particularly in noisy conditions. The only options I could find for Yaesu/Alinco sets were big chunky earmuff headsets — great in those noisy situations, but not so great if you need situational awareness.

The plan thus is to cobble together my own binaural tactical headset. Stereo using my standard headset connection, so I can re-use it elsewhere.

I did have a Kenwood TH-D72A — a good solid performer… but sadly no longer manufactured (neither is its successor, not that Kenwood ever sold that here), and my particular specimen now refuses to have anything to do with the internal battery. I bought an Alinco DJ-G7T as a back-up hand-held for pure voice comms, and more recently a Yaesu FT5DR. I had made my own Kenwood headset adaptor to use with my headsets, but I had nothing equivalent for the Alinco or Yaesu sets.

As it happens, the headset pin-out of the Alinco is nearly identical to that of the earlier Yaesu VX-6/VX-7: 3.5mm threaded TRRS. Both radios put the speaker on the tip, microphone+PTT (in series) on the sleeve-most ring and 0V on the sleeve. Alinco use the tip-most ring for a 3.3V rail, whereas Yaesu use this same ring for a data/clone connection. Maybe it’s a UART which “idles” at 3.3V on Yaesu rigs, but I wouldn’t bet on all Yaesu accessories working on Alinco and vice-versa — however headsets rarely need a 3.3V rail. (Maybe the VOX ones do… not sure.)

The FT5DR is actually compatible with the earlier VX-6/VX-7, however the connector is on the side of the radio, and while the threaded 3.5mm connectors fit, they stick out the side like a sore thumb: a right-angled 3.5mm TRRS is a better “fit”.

Luckily, Amazon have quite a few options that convert these radios to a U94 “Nexus” military-style connector. I managed to pick up a U94 adaptor that works quite well with the Alinco, and does work with the Yaesu (although is mechanically not optimal due to the “straight” style of the plug and side-mounting of the socket).

Tactical headsets come in a few varieties:

  • ear-tube covert-style headsets
  • D-loop style
  • throat-mic headsets
  • “bowman”-style headband headsets
  • earmuff-style headsets
  • motorcycle headsets

The only ones of this list that are binaural out-of-the-box are the earmuff headsets and the motorcycle headsets. I figured I’d pick up a couple of cheap “bowman”-style ones and see if I can cobble two mono headsets into one stereo set. I looked around, and bought two of these.

The adaptor turned up a week or so ago, and the headsets turned up today. There’s two different varieties of pin-out for the U94 connector — the “NATO” standard interleaves the speaker and microphone pins, whereas the “civilian” standard puts the speaker on the sleeve/sleeve-most ring and microphone on the tip-most ring/tip. Both adaptor and headset turned out to be “civilian” standard, so the first hurdle was cleared.

I tested both headsets and confirmed they both worked. I tried the headsets both with voice comms, then tried tuning to a local FM broadcast station to assess audio quality. They work, but audio quality is not what I’d call wonderful. Very tinny, fine for voice comms, but maybe telephone quality at best. Ookay, so using these as a stereo headset can be done — but if I wanted to use them for anything but straight voice comms, I’d want to swap the speakers out for something decent. Tear-down time!

I picked a “victim” and attempted to disassemble it. These units appear to be glued together, so you wind up partially destroying them to get at the speaker:

The speaker is a conventional 8ohm 500mW jobbie, nothing remarkable… and a frequency response that’s truly awful for anything other than voice comms. Fine for the intended task, but as I say, not really sufficient for what I was after.

I’ll see if I can swap this speaker out with one liberated from some headphones and see about replacing the strip of plastic I had to unceremoniously and destructively rip out — this shouldn’t be a difficult job. The other thing that might help is some sound-damping material behind the speaker, which might account for some tinniness.

If I get this headset working acceptably, I’ll do the same mod to the other, then can look at wiring the two together into a stereo set using a DIN-5 matching my other headsets. I can then re-purpose the U94 plug to make an adaptor to convert my other headsets to use with the U94 adaptors.

Thinking about SDR on the bike

So, for close to a decade now, I’ve had a bicycle-mobile station. Originally just restricted to 2m/70cm FM, it expanded to 2m SSB with the FT-290RII, then later all-band using a FT-857D.

It’s remained largely unchanged all this time. The station is able to receive MW/SW stations as well, and with some limitations, FM broadcast as well. My recent radio purchases will expand this a bit, freeing up the FT-857D’s general-coverage receiver to just focus on amateur bands. It’s been a long-term project though to move to SDR for reception.

What I have now

Already acquired is a Raspberry Pi 4 (8GB model) and a NWDR DRAWS interface board. I actually started out with a Raspberry Pi 3 + DRAWS and was waiting for the case for it to fit into. At that stage was the idea that the FT-897D would do much as it does now, no SDR involved, and I’d put a small hand-held with its own antenna as an APRS rig being driven by the second port on the DRAWS.

Since then; I bought the HackRF One for work (I needed something that could give me a view of the 2.4GHz ISM band for development of the WideSky Hub), the SDR bug firmly bit. Initially it was just DAB+ reception, I decided to get a RTL-SDR to do that so my radio listening wouldn’t be interrupted when a colleague needed to borrow the HackRF. That RTL-SDR saw some use receiving UHF CB traffic at horse endurance ride events at Imbil — I stated to consider whether maybe this might be a better option as a receiver for more than just commercial radio broadcasts.

Hence I purchased the Pi4: I figured that’d have enough CPU grunt that it’d still be able to decode a reasonable amount even if the CPU throttled itself for thermal management purposes. A pair of SDR interfaces would allow me to monitor a couple of bands simultaneously, such as 2m and 70cm together, or 2m/70cm and one of the HF bands.

Even the RTL-SDR v3 dongles are wide enough to watch the entire 2m band. With CAT control of the FT-857D, it’d be possible for the Pi4 to switch the FT-857D to the same frequency and possibly manage some antenna switching relays as well.

A rough design

This morning I came up with this:

A rough design of the SDR set-up

A critical design feature is that this must have a “pass-through” option so that in the event the computer crashes/fails, I can bypass all the fancy stuff and still use the FT-857D safely as I do now without all the fancy SDR stuff.

So while in SDR mode: the station pushbuttons on the handlebar go to a small sequencing MCU that can report events to the Pi4, on transmit the Pi4 can then instruct that MCU to connect the antennas into bypass mode, short-out the SDR inputs to protect them, then engage the PTT on the FT-857D, and transmit audio can either be delivered direct via the analogue inputs as they are now, or over USB/WiFi/Bluetooth through the MiniDIN6 DATA port.

The thinking is to have two SDRs, one of which is “agile” between HF/6m and 2m/70cm modes.

The front-end will be handled via the tablet: a Samsung Galaxy Active3 which can connect over WiFi or USB CDC-Ethernet.

I’ve shown gain-blocks between the antennas and the receivers, this is largely for impedance matching as well as to account for the losses involved in antenna sharing. Not sure what these will technically look like.

The two on the HF side should be ideally 0-60MHz devices. If I use the AirSpy HF+ as pictured, the VHF/UHF LNA connected to it only has to concentrate on the VHF band below 260MHz (really 144-148MHz, but let’s widen that to 87-230MHz for FM broadcast, air-band and DAB+) since that’s where the AirSpy stops.

The other, for now I’m looking at a RTL-SDR since I have one spare, but that could be any VHF/UHF capable SDR including the AirSpy Mini — the LNA on it, as well as the one feeding the FT-857D in receive mode will both need to handle 144-450MHz at a minimum.

It may be these frequency bands are “too wide” for a single device, and so I need to consider band-pass filters + separate band-specific LNAs and additional switching circuitry.

SDR selection

There are a couple of options I’ve considered:

The thing I don’t like about the SDRPlay Duo is the non-free nature of its libraries which seem to be only available for i386 or AMD64. Otherwise on paper it looks like a nice option.

KerberosSDR/KrakenSDR seems like overkill. It’s basically four (or five) RTL-SDRs sharing a common oscillator which is essential for direction-finding, but let’s face it, I’ll never have enough antennas to make such an application feasible on the bicycle. It looks like an echidna now!

BladeRF looks nice, but is pricey and stops short of the HF band so would need an up-converter like the RTL-SDR — not a show-stopper. That said, it’s dual-channel and can transmit as well as receive, so cross-band repeater would be doable.

I should try this with the HackRF One some day, see if I can combine a conventional transceiver + RPi + DRAWS/UDRC + HackRF One to make a cross-band repeater.

The Airspy HF+ is available domestically, and isn’t too badly priced. It doesn’t transmit like the HackRF does, but then again I could stuff one of my Wouxun KG-UVD1Ps in there wired up to the second DRAWS port if I wanted a traditional cross-band set-up.

Next steps

It would seem the LNA / antenna sharing side of things needs consideration next. RF relays will need to be procured that can handle seeing 100W of RF. Where I’ve drawn a single switch, that’ll likely be multiple in reality — when the transmitter is connected to the antenna, the receivers should all be shorted to ground so they don’t get blown up by stray RF.

Maybe the LNAs feeding the FT-857D will need to be connected to a dummy-load to protect them, not sure. Perhaps LNAs aren’t strictly necessary, and I can “cheat” by just connecting receivers in parallel, but I’m not comfortable with this idea right now. So this is the area of research I’m focusing on right now.

6LoWHAM: Thoughts on how to distribute context and applications

So, one evening I was having difficulty sleeping, so like some people count sheep, turned to a different problem…6LoWPAN relies on all nodes sharing a common “context”. This is used as a short-hand to “compress” the rather lengthy IPv6 addresses for allowing two nodes to communicate with one another by substituting particular IPv6 address subnets with a “context number” which can be represented in 4 bits.

Fundamentally, this identifier is a stand-in for the subnet address. This was a sticking-point with earlier thoughts on 6LoWHAM: how do we agree on what the context should be? My thought was, each network should be assigned a 3-bit network ID. Why 3-bit? Well, this means we can reserve some context IDs for other uses. We use SCI/DCI values 0-7 and leave 8-15 reserved; I’ll think of a use for the other half of the contexts.

The node “group” also share a SSID; the “group” SSID. This is a SSID that receives all multicast traffic for the nodes on the immediate network. This might be just a generic MCAST-n SSID, where n is the network ID; or it could be a call-sign for a local network coordinator, e.g. I might decide my network will use VK4MSL-0 for my group SSID (network 0). Probably nodes that are listening on a custom SSID should still listen for MCAST-n traffic, in case a node is attempting to join without knowing the group SSID.

AX.25 allows for 16 SSIDs per call-sign, so what about the other 8? Well, if we have a convention that we reserve SSIDs 0-7 for groups; that leaves 8-15 for stations. This can be adjusted for local requirements where needed, and would not be enforced by the protocol.

Joining a network

How does a new joining node “discover” this network? Firstly, the first node in an area is responsible for “forming” the network — a node which “forms” a network must be manually programmed with the local subnet, group SSID and other details. Ensuring all nodes with “formation” capability for a given network is beyond the scope of 6LoWHAM.

When a node joins; at first it only knows how to talk to immediate nodes. It can use MCAST-n to talk to immediate neighbours using the fe80::/64 subnet. Anyone in earshot can potentially reply. Nodes simply need to be listening for traffic on a reserved UDP port (maybe 61631; there’s an optimisation in 6LoWPAN for 61616-61631). The joining node can ask for the network context, maybe authenticate itself if needed (using asymmetric cryptography – digital signatures, no encryption).

The other nodes presumably already know the answer, but for all nodes to reply simultaneously, would lead to a pile-up. Nodes should wait a randomised delay, and if nothing is heard in that period, they then transmit what they know of the context for the given network ID.

The context information sent back should include:

  • Group SSID
  • Subnet prefix
  • (Optional) Authentication data:
    • Public key of the forming network (joining node will need to maintain its own “trust” database)
    • Hash of all earlier data items
    • Digital signature signed with included public key

Once a node knows the context for its chosen network, it is officially “joined”.

Routing to non-local endpoints

So, a node may wish to send a message to another node that’s not directly reachable. This is, after-all, the whole point of using a routing protocol atop AX.25. If we knew a route, we could encode it in the digipeater path, and use conventional AX.25 source routing. Nodes that know a reliable route are encouraged to do exactly that. But what if you don’t know your way around?

APRS uses WIDEN-n to solve this problem: it’s a dumb broadcast, but it achieves this aim beautifully. n just stands for the number of hops, and it gets decremented with each hop. Each digipeater inserts itself into the path as it sends the frame on. APRS specs normally call for everyone to broadcast all at once, pile-up be damned. FM capture effect might help here, but I’m not sure its a good policy. Simple, but in our case, we can do a little better.

We only need to broadcast far enough to reach a node that knows a route. We’ll use ROUTE-n to stand for a digipeater that is no more than n hops away from the station listed in the AX.25 destination field. n must be greater than 0 for a message to be relayed. AX.25 2.0 limits the number of digipeaters to 8 (and 2.2 to 2!), so naturally n cannot be greater than 8.

So we’ll have a two-tier approach.

Routing from a node that knows a viable route

If a node that receives a ROUTE-n destination message, knows it has a good route that is n or less hops away from the target; it picks a randomised delay (maybe 0-5 seconds range), and if no reply is heard from another node; it relays the message: the ROUTE-n is replaced by its own SSID, followed by the required digipeater path to reach the target node.

Routing from a node that does not know a viable route

In the case where a node receives this same ROUTE-n destination message, does not know a route, and hasn’t heard anyone else relay that same message; it should pick a randomised delay (5-10 second range), and if it hasn’t heard the message relayed via a specific path in that time, should do one of the following:

If n is greater than 1:

Substitute ROUTE-n in the digipeater path with its own SSID followed by ROUTE-(n-1) then transmit the message.

If n is 1 (or 0):

Substitute ROUTE-n with its own SSID (do not append ROUTE-0) then transmit the message.

Routing multicast traffic

Discovering multicast listeners

I’ll have to research MLD (RFC-3810 / RFC-4604), but that seems the sensible way forward from here.

Relaying multicast traffic

If a node knows of downstream nodes that ordinarily rely on it to contact the sender of a multicast message, and it knows the downstream nodes are subscribers to the destination multicast group, it should wait a randomised period, and forward the message on (appending its SSID in the digipeater path) to the downstream nodes.

Application thoughts

I think I have done some thoughts on what the applications for this system may be, but the other day I was looking around for “prior art” regarding one-to-many file transfer applications.

One such system that could be employed is UFTP. Yes, it mentions encryption, but that is an optional feature (and could be useful in emcomm situations). That would enable SSTV-style file sharing to all participants within the mesh network. Its ability to be proxied also lends itself to bridging to other networks like AMPRnet, D-Star packet, DMR and other systems.

Phone patching to Zoom

Brisbane Area WICEN Group (Inc) lately has been caught up in this whole COVID-19 situation, unable to meet face-to-face for business meetings. Like a lot of groups, we’ve had to turn to doing things online.

Initially, Cisco WebEx was trialled, however this had significant compatibility issues, most notably, under Linux — it just straight plain didn’t work. Zoom however, has proven fairly simple to operate and seems to work, so we’ve been using that for a number of “social” meetings and at least one business meeting so far.

A challenge we have though, is that one of our members does not have a computer or smart-phone. Mobile telephony is unreliable in his area (Kelvin Grove), and so yee olde PSTN is the most reliable service. For him to attend meetings, we need some way of patching that PSTN line into the meeting.

The first step is to get something you can patch to. In my case, it was a soft-phone and a SIP VoIP service. I used Twinkle to provide that link. You could also use others like baresip, Linphone or anything else of your choosing. This connects to your sound card at one end, and a Voice Service Provider; in my case it’s my Asterisk server through Internode NodePhone.

The problem is though, while you can certainly make a call outbound whilst in a conference, the person on the phone won’t be able to hear the conference, nor will the conference attendees be able to hear the person on the phone.

Enter JACK

JACK is a audio routing framework for Unix-like operating systems that allows for audio to be routed between applications. It is geared towards multimedia production and professional audio, but since there’s a plug-in in the ALSA framework, it is very handy for linking audio between applications that would otherwise be incompatible.

For this to work, one application has to work either directly with JACK, or via the ALSA plug-in. Many support, and will use, an alternate framework called PulseAudio. Conference applications like Zoom and Jitsi almost universally rely on this as their sound card interface on Linux.

PulseAudio unfortunately is not able to route audio with the same flexibility, but it can route audio to JACK. In particular, JACKv2 and its jackdbus is the path of least resistance. Once JACK starts, PulseAudio detects its presence, and loads a module that connects PulseAudio as a client of JACK.

A limitation with this is PulseAudio will pre-mix all audio streams it receives from its clients into one single monolithic (stereo) feed before presenting that to JACK. I haven’t figured out a work-around for this, but thankfully for this use case, it doesn’t matter. For our purposes, we have just one PulseAudio application: Zoom (or Jitsi), and so long as we keep it that way, things will work.

Software tools

  • jack2: The audio routing daemon.
  • qjackctl: This is a front-end for controlling JACK. It is optional, but if you’re not familiar with JACK, it’s the path of least resistance. It allows you to configure, start and stop JACK, and to control patch-bay configuration.
  • SIP Client, in my case, Twinkle.
  • ALSA JACK Plug-in, part of alsa-plugins.
  • PulseAudio JACK plug-in, part of PulseAudio.

Setting up the JACK ALSA plug-in

To expose JACK to ALSA applications, you’ll need to configure your ${HOME}/.asoundrc file. Now, if your SIP client happens to support JACK natively, you can skip this step, just set it up to talk to JACK and you’re set.

Otherwise, have a look at guides such as this one from the ArchLinux team.

I have the following in my .asoundrc:

pcm.!default {
        type plug
        slave { pcm "jack" }
}

pcm.jack {
        type jack
        playback_ports {
                0 system:playback_1
                1 system:playback_2
        }
        capture_ports {
                0 system:capture_1
                1 system:capture_1
        }
}

The first part sets my default ALSA device to jack, then the second block defines what jack is. You could possibly skip the first block, in which case your SIP client will need to be told to use jack (or maybe plug:jack) as the ALSA audio device for input/output.

Configuring qjackctl

At this point, to test this we need a JACK audio server running, so start qjackctl. You’ll see a window like this:

qjackctl in operation

This shows it actually running, most likely for you this will not be the case. Over on the right you’ll see Setup… — click that, and you’ll get something like this:

Parameters screen

The first tab is the parameters screen. Here, you’ll want to direct this at your audio device that your speakers/microphone are connected to.

The sample rate may be limited by your audio device. In my experience, JACK hates devices that can’t do the same sample rate for input and output.

My audio device is a Logitech G930 wireless USB headset, and it definitely has this limitation: it can play audio right up to 48kHz, but will only do a meagre 16kHz on capture. JACK thus limits me to both directions running 16kHz. If your device can do 48kHz, that’d be better if you intend to use it for tasks other than audio conferencing. (If your device is also wireless, I’d be interested in knowing where you got it!)

JACK literature seems to recommend 3 periods/buffer for USB devices. The rest is a matter of experiment. 1024 samples/period seems to work fine on my hardware most of the time. Your mileage may vary. Good setups may get away with less, which will decrease latency (mine is 192ms… good enough for me).

The other tab has more settings:

Advanced settings

The things I’ve changed here are:

  • Force 16-bit: since my audio device cannot do anything but 16-bit linear PCM, I force 16-bit mode (rather than the default of 32-bit mode)
  • Channels I/O: output is stereo but input is mono, so I set 1 channel in, two channels out.

Once all is set, Apply then OK.

Now, on qjackctl itself, click the “Start” button. It should report that it has started. You don’t need to click any play buttons to make it work from here. You may have noticed that PulseAudio has detected the JACK server and will now connect to it. If click “Graph”, you’ll see something like this:

qjackctl‘s Graph window

This is the thing you’ll use in qjackctl the most. Here, you can see the “system” boxes represent your audio device, and “PulseAudio JACK Sink”/”PulseAudio JACK Source” represent everything that’s connected to PulseAudio.

You should be able to play sound in PulseAudio, and direct applications there to use the JACK virtual sound card. pavucontrol (normally shipped with PulseAudio) may be handy for moving things onto the JACK virtual device.

Configuring your telephony client

I’ll use Twinkle as the example here. In the preferences, look for a section called Audio. You should see this:

Twinkle audio settings

Here, I’ve set my ringing device to pulse to have that ring PulseAudio. This allows me to direct the audio to my laptop’s on-board sound card so I can hear the phone ring without the headset on.

Since jack was made my default device, I can leave the others as “Default Device”. Otherwise, you’d specify jack or plug:jack as the audio device. This should be set on both Speaker and Microphone settings.

Click OK once you’re done.

Configuring Zoom

I’ll use Zoom here, but the process is similar for Jitsi. In the settings, look for the Audio section.

Zoom audio settings

Set both Speaker and Microphone to JACK (sink and source respectively). Use the “Test Speaker” function to ensure it’s all working.

The patch up

Now, it doesn’t matter whether you call first, then join the meeting, or vice versa. You can even have the PSTN caller call you. The thing is, you want to establish a link to both your PSTN caller and your conference.

The assumption is that you now have a session active in both programs, you’re hearing both the PSTN caller and the conference in your headset, when you speak, both groups hear you. To let them hear each other, do this:

Go to qjackctl‘s patch bay. You’ll see PulseAudio is there, but you’ll also see the instance of the ALSA plug-in connected to JACK. That’s your telephony client. Both will be connected to the system boxes. You need to draw new links between those two new boxes, and the PulseAudio boxes like this:

qjackctl patching Twinkle to Zoom

Here, Zoom is represented by the PulseAudio boxes (since it is using PulseAudio to talk to JACK), and Twinkle is represented by the boxes named alsa-jack… (tip: the number is the PID of the ALSA application if you’re not sure).

Once you draw the connections, the parties should be able to hear each-other. You’ll need to monitor this dialogue from time to time: if either of PulseAudio or the phone client disconnect from JACK momentarily, the connections will need to be re-made. Twinkle will do this if you do a three-way conference, then one person hangs up.

Anyway, that’s the basics covered. There’s more that can be done, for example, recording the audio, or piping audio from something else (e.g. a media player) is just a case of directing it either at JACK directly or via the ALSA plug-in, and drawing connections where you need them.

Pondering audio streaming over LANs

Lately, I’ve been socially distancing a home and so there’s been a few projects that have been considered that otherwise wouldn’t ordinarily get a look in on a count of lack-of-time.

One of these has been setting up a Raspberry Pi with DRAWS board for use on the bicycle as a radio interface. The DRAWS interface is basically a sound card, RTC, GPS and UART interface for radio interfacing applications. It is built around the TI TMS320AIC3204.

Right now, I’m still waiting for the case to put it in, even though the PCB itself arrived months ago. Consequently it has not seen action on the bike yet. It has gotten some use though at home, primarily as an OpenThread border router for 3 WideSky hubs.

My original idea was to interface it to Mumble, a VoIP server for in-game chat. The idea being that, on events like the Yarraman to Wulkuraka bike ride, I’d fire up the phone, connect it to an AP run by the Raspberry Pi on the bike, and plug my headset into the phone:144/430MHz→2.4GHz cross-band.

That’s still on the cards, but another use case came up: digital. It’d be real nice to interface this over WiFi to a stronger machine for digital modes. Sound card over network sharing. For this, Mumble would not do, I need a lossless audio transport.

Audio streaming options

For audio streaming, I know of 3 options:

  • PulseAudio network streaming
  • netjack
  • trx

PulseAudio I’ve found can be hit-and-miss on the Raspberry Pi, and IMO, is asking for trouble with digital modes. PulseAudio works fine for audio (speech, music, etc). It will make assumptions though about the nature of that audio. The problem is we’re not dealing with “audio” as such, we’re dealing with modem tones. Human ears cannot detect phase easily, data modems can and regularly do. So PA is likely to do things like re-sample the audio to synchronise the two stations, possibly use lossy codecs like OPUS or CELT, and make other changes which will mess with the signal in unpredictable ways.

netjack is another possibility, but like PulseAudio, is geared towards low-latency audio streaming. From what I’ve read, later versions use OPUS, which is a no-no for digital modes. Within a workstation, JACK sounds like a close fit, because although it is geared to audio, its use in professional audio means it’s less likely to make decisions that would incur loss, but it is a finicky beast to get working at times, so it’s a question mark there.

trx was a third option. It uses RTP to stream audio over a network, and just aims to do just that one thing. Digging into the code, present versions use OPUS, older versions use CELT. The use of RTP seemed promising though, it actually uses oRTP from the Linphone project, and last weekend I had a fiddle to see if I could swap out OPUS for linear PCM. oRTP is not that well documented, and I came away frustrated, wondering why the receiver was ignoring the messages being sent by the sender.

It’s worth noting that trx probably isn’t a good example of a streaming application using oRTP. It advertises the stream as G711u, but then sends OPUS data. What it should be doing is sending it as a dynamic content type (e.g. 96), and if this were a SIP session, there’d be a RTPMAP sent via Session Description Protocol to say content type 96 was OPUS.

I looked around for other RTP libraries to see if there was something “simpler” or better documented. I drew a blank. I then had a look at the RTP/RTCP specs themselves published by the IETF. I came to the conclusion that RTP was trying to solve a much more complicated use case than mine. My audio stream won’t traverse anything more sophisticated than a WiFi AP or an Ethernet switch. There’s potential for packet loss due to interference or weak signal propagation between WiFi nodes, but latency is likely to remain pretty consistent and out-of-order handling should be almost a non-issue.

Another gripe I had with RTP is its almost non-consideration of linear PCM. PCMA and PCMU exist, 16-bit linear PCM at 44.1kHz sampling exists (woohoo, CD quality), but how about 48kHz? Nope. You have to use SDP for that.

Custom protocol ideas

With this in mind, my own custom protocol looks like the simplest path forward. Some simple systems that used by GQRX just encapsulate raw audio in UDP messages, fire them at some destination and hope for the best. Some people use TCP, with reasonable results.

My concern with TCP is that if packets get dropped, it’ll try re-sending them, increasing latency and never quite catching up. Using UDP side-steps this, if a packet is lost, it is forgotten about, so things will break up, then recover. Probably a better strategy for what I’m after.

I also want some flexibility in audio streams, it’d be nice to be able to switch sample rates, bit depths, channels, etc. RTP gets close with its L16/44100/2 format (the Philips Red-book standard audio format). In some cases, 16kHz would be fine, or even 8kHz 16-bit linear PCM. 44.1k works, but is wasteful. So a header is needed on packets to at least describe what format is being sent. Since we’re adding a header, we might as well set aside a few bytes for a timestamp like RTP so we can maintain synchronisation.

So with that, we wind up with these fields:

  • Timestamp
  • Sample rate
  • Number of channels
  • Sample format

Timestamp

The timestamp field in RTP is basically measured in ticks of some clock of known frequency, e.g. for PCMU it is a 8kHz clock. It starts with some value, then increments up monotonically. Simple enough concept. If we make this frequency the sample rate of the audio stream, I think that will be good enough.

At 48kHz 16-bit stereo; data will be streaming at 192kbps. We can tolerate wrap-around, and at this data rate, we’d see a 16-bit counter overflow every ~341ms, which whilst not unworkable, is getting tight. Better to use a 32-bit counter for this, which would extend that overflow to over 6 hours.

Sample rate encoding

We can either support an integer field, or we can encode the rate somehow. An integer field would need a range up to 768k to support every rate ALSA supports. That’s another 32-bit integer. Or, we can be a bit clever: nearly every sample rate in common use is a harmonic of 8kHz or 11.025kHz, so we devise a scheme consisting of a “base” rate and multiplier. 48kHz? That’s 8kHz×6. 44.1kHz? That’s 11.025kHz×4.

If we restrict ourselves to those two base rates, we can support standard rates from 8kHz through to 1.4MHz by allocating a single bit to select 8kHz/11.025kHz and 7 bits for the multiplier: the selected sample rate is the base rate multiplied by the multipler incremented by one. We’re unlikely to use every single 8kHz step though. Wikipedia lists some common rates and as we go up, the steps get bigger, so let’s borrow 3 multiplier bits for a left-shift amount.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
B S S S M M M M

B = Base rate: (0) 8000 Hz, (1) 11025 Hz
S = Shift amount
M = Multiplier - 1

Rate = (Base << S) * (M + 1)

Examples:
  00000000b (0x00): 8kHz
  00010000b (0x10): 16kHz
  10100000b (0xa0): 44.1kHz
  00100000b (0x20): 48kHz
  01010010b (0x52): 768kHz (ALSA limit)
  11111111b (0xff): 22.5792MHz (yes, insane)

Other settings

I primarily want to consider linear PCM types. Technically that includes unsigned PCM, but since that’s losslessly transcodable to signed PCM, we could ignore it. So we could just encode the number of bytes needed for a single channel sample, minus one. Thus 0 would be 8-bits; 1 would be 16-bits; 2 would be 32-bits and 3 would be 64-bits. That needs just two bits. For future-proofing, I’d probably earmark two extra bits; reserved for now, but might be used to indicate “compressed” (and possibly lossy) formats.

The remaining 4 bits could specify a number of channels, again minus 1 (mono would be 0, stereo 1, etc up to 16).

Packet type

For the sake of alignment, I might include a 16-bit identifier field so the packet can be recognised as being this custom audio format, and to allow multiplexing of in-band control messages, but I think the concept is there.

Playing with speech synthesis

This afternoon, I was pondering about how I might do text-to-speech, but still have the result sound somewhat natural. For what use case? Well, two that come to mind…

The first being for doing “strapper call” announcements at horse endurance rides. A horse endurance ride is where competitors and their horses traverse a long (sometimes as long as 320km) trail through a wilderness area. Usually these rides (particularly the long ones) are broken up into separate stages or “legs”.

Upon arrival back at base, the competitor has a limited amount of time to get the horse’s vital signs into acceptable ranges before they must present to the vet. If the horse has a too-high temperature, or their horse’s heart rate is too high, they are “vetted out”.

When the competitor reaches the final check-point, ideally you want to let that competitor’s support team know they’re on their way back to base so they can be there to meet the competitor and begin their work with the horse.

Historically, this was done over a PA system, however this isn’t always possible for the people at base to achieve. So having an automated mechanism to do this would be great. In recent times, Brisbane WICEN has been developing a public display that people can see real-time results on, and this also doubles as a strapper-call display.

Getting the information to that display is something of a work-in-progress, but it’s recognised that if you miss the message popping up on the display, there’s no repeat. A better solution would be to “read out” the message. Then you don’t have to be watching the screen, you can go about your business. This could be done over a PA system, or at one location there’s an extensive WiFi network there, so streaming via Icecast is possible.

But how do you get the text into speech?

Enter flite

flite is a minimalist speech synthesizer from the Festival project. Out of the box it includes 3 voices, mostly male American voices. (I think the rms one might be Richard M. Stallman, but I could be wrong on that!) There’s a couple of demos there that can be run direct from the command line.

So, for the sake of argument, let’s try something simple, I’ll use the slt voice (a US female voice) and just get the program to read out what might otherwise be read out during a horse ride event:

$ flite_cmu_us_slt -t 'strapper call for the 160 kilometer event competitor numbers 123 and 234' slt-strapper-nopunctuation-digits.wav
slt-strapper-nopunctuation-digits.ogg

Not bad, but not that great either. Specifically, the speech is probably a little quick. The question is, how do you control this? Turns out there’s a bit of hidden functionality.

There is an option marked -ssml which tells flite to interpret the text as SSML. However, if you try it, you may find it does little to improve matters, I don’t think flite actually implements much of it.

Things are improved if we spell everything out. So if you instead replace the digits with words, you do get a better result:

$ flite_cmu_us_slt -t 'strapper call for the one hundred and sixty kilometer event competitor number one two three and two three four' slt-strapper-nopunctuation-words.wav
slt-strapper-nopunctuation-words.ogg

Definitely better. It could use some pauses. Now, we don’t have very fine-grained control over those pauses, but we can introduce some punctuation to have some control nonetheless.

$ flite_cmu_us_slt -t 'strapper call.  for the one hundred and sixty kilometer event.  competitor number one two three and two three four' slt-strapper-punctuation.wav
slt-strapper-punctuation.ogg

Much better. Of course it still sounds somewhat robotic though. I’m not sure how to adjust the cadence on the whole, but presumably we can just feed the text in piece-wise, render those to individual .wav files, then stitch them together with the pauses we want.

How about other changes though? If you look at flite --help, there is feature options which can control the synthesis. There’s no real documentation on what these do, what I’ve found so far was found by grep-ing through the flite source code. Tip: do a grep for feat_set_, and you’ll see a whole heap.

Controlling pitch

There’s two parameters for the pitch… int_f0_target_mean controls the “centre” frequency of the speech in Hertz, and int_f0_target_stddev controls the deviation. For the slt voice, …mean seems to sit around 160Hz and the deviation is about 20Hz.

So we can say, set the frequency to 90Hz and get a lower tone:

$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf int_f0_target_mean=90 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-mean-90.wav
slt-strapper-mean-90.ogg

… or 200Hz for a higher one:

$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf int_f0_target_mean=200 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-mean-200.wav
slt-strapper-mean-200.ogg

… or we can change the variance:

$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf int_f0_target_stddev=0.0 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stddev-0.wav
$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf int_f0_target_stddev=70.0 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stddev-70.wav
slt-strapper-stddev-0.ogg
slt-strapper-stddev-70.ogg

We can’t change these values during a block of speech, but presumably we can cut up the text we want to render, render each piece at the frequency/variance we want, then stitch those together.

Controlling rate

So I mentioned we can control the rate, somewhat coarsely using usual punctuation devices. We can also change the rate overall by setting duration_stretch. This basically is a control of how “long” we want to stretch out the pronunciation of words.

$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=0.5 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stretch-05.wav
$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=0.7 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stretch-07.wav
$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=1.0 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stretch-10.wav
$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=1.3 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stretch-13.wav
$ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=2.0 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-stretch-20.wav
slt-strapper-stretch-05.ogg
slt-strapper-stretch-07.ogg
slt-strapper-stretch-10.ogg
slt-strapper-stretch-13.ogg
slt-strapper-stretch-20.ogg

Putting it together

So it looks as if all the pieces are there, we just need to stitch them together.

RC=0 stuartl@rikishi /tmp $ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=1.2 --setf int_f0_target_stddev=50.0 --setf int_f0_target_mean=180.0 -t 'strapper call' slt-strapper-call.wav
RC=0 stuartl@rikishi /tmp $ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=1.1 --setf int_f0_target_stddev=30.0 --setf int_f0_target_mean=180.0 -t 'for the, one hundred, and sixty kilometer event' slt-160km-event.wav
RC=0 stuartl@rikishi /tmp $ flite_cmu_us_slt --setf duration_stretch=1.4 --setf int_f0_target_stddev=40.0 --setf int_f0_target_mean=180.0 -t 'competitors, one two three, and, two three four' slt-competitors.wav
Above files stitched together in Audacity

Here, I manually imported all three files into Audacity, arranged them, then exported the result, but there’s no reason why the same could not be achieved by a program, I’m just inserting pauses after all.

There are tools for manipulating RIFF waveform files in most languages, and generating silence is not rocket science. The voice itself could be fine-tuned, but that’s simply a matter of tweaking settings. Generating the text is basically a look-up table feeding into snprintf (or its equivalent in your programming language of choice).

It’d be nice to implement a wrapper around flite that took the full SSML or JSML text and rendered it out as speech, but this gets pretty close without writing much code at all. Definitely worth continuing with.

DC Power Distribution

So, lately I’ve been helping out with running the base at a few horse rides up at Imbil. This involves amongst other things, running three radios, a base computer, laptops, and other paraphernalia.

The whole kit needs to run off an unregulated 12V DC supply, consisting of two 105Ah AGM batteries which have solar and mains back-up. The outlet for this is a Anderson SB50 connector, fairly standard for caravans.

Catch being, this is temporary. So no permanent linkages, we need to be able to disconnect and pack everything away when not in use. One bug bear is having enough DC outlets for everything. Especially of the 30A Anderson Power Pole variety, since most of our radios use those.

The monitor for the base computer uses a cigarette lighter adapter, while the base computer itself (an Intel NUC) has a cable terminated with a 30A power pole. There’s also a WiFi router which has a micro-USB power input — thankfully the monitor’s adaptor embeds a USB power outlet, so we can run it off that.

We need two amateur radios (one for voice comms, one for packet), and a CB set for communications with the ride organisers (who are otherwise not licensed to use amateur bands). We may also see a move to commercial frequencies, so that’s potentially another radio or two.

I started thinking about ways we could make a modular power distribution system.

The thought was, if we made PDU boxes where the inlet and outlet were nice big SB50s, configured so that they would mate when the boxes were joined up, we could have a flexible PDU system where we just clip it together like Lego bricks.

This is a work in progress, but I figured I’d post what I have so far.

Power outlets on the distribution box, yet to be wired up.

I still need to do the internal wiring, but above is basically what I was thinking of. There’s room for up to 6 consumers via the 30A power pole connections along one side, each with its own 20A breaker. (The connectors are rated at 45A.)

Originally I was aiming for 6 cigarette lighter sockets, but after receiving the parts, I realised that wouldn’t fit, but two seems to work okay, and we can always make a second box and slap that on the end. Each has a 15A breaker.

Protecting the upstream power source is a 50A breaker. So total of the down-stream port + all outlets on the box itself may not exceed 50A.

The upstream and downstream ports are positioned so that boxes can just be butted up against each-other for the connectors to mate. I’ve got to fine-tune the positioning a bit, and right now the connectors are also on an angle, but this hopefully shows the concept…

The idea for maintenance is the box will fold out. Not sure if the connection between all the outputs on the lid will be via a bus bar or using individual cables going to the tie point inside the box just yet. Those 30A outlets are just begging for a single cable to visit each bus-bar style. I also have to figure out how I’ll connect to the cigarette lighter sockets too.

Hopefully I’ll get this done before the next ride event.

6LoWHAM: Working towards connected-mode operation in aioax25

The past few months have been quiet for this project, largely because Brisbane WICEN has had my spare time soaked up with an RFID system they are developing for tracking horse rides through the Imbil State Forest for the Stirling’s Crossing Endurance Club.

Ultimately, when we have some decent successes, I’ll probably be reporting more on this on WICEN’s website. Suffice to say, it’s very much a work-in-progress, but it has proved a valuable testing ground for aioax25. The messaging system being used is basically just plain APRS messaging, with digipeating thrown in as well.

Since I’ve had a moment to breathe, I’ve started filling out the features in aioax25, starting with connected-mode operation. The thinking is this might be useful for sending larger payloads. APRS messages are limited to a 63 character message size with only a subset of ASCII being permitted.

Thankfully that subset includes all of the Base64 character set, so I’m able to do things like tunnel NTP packets and CBOR blobs through it, so that stations out in the field can pull down configuration settings and the current time.

As for the RFID EPCs, we’re sending those in the canonical hexadecimal format, which works, but the EPC occupies most of the payload size. At 1200 bits per second, this does slow things down quite a bit. We get a slight improvement if we encode the EPCs as Base64. We’d get a 200% efficiency increase if we could send it as binary bytes instead. Sending a CBOR blob that way would be very efficient.

The thinking is that the nodes find each-other via APRS, then once they’ve discovered a path, they can switch to connected mode to send bulk transfers back to base.

Thus, I’ve been digging into connected mode operation. AX.25 2.2 is not the most well-written spec I’ve read. In fact, it is down-right confusing in places. It mixes up little-endian and big-endian fields, certain bits have different meanings in different contexts, and it uses concepts which are “foreign” to someone like myself who’s used to TCP/IP.

Right now I’m making progress, there’s an untested implementation in the connected-mode branch. I’m writing unit test cases based on what I understand the behaviour to be, but somehow I think this is going to need trials with some actual AX.25 implementations such as Direwolf, the Linux kernel stack, G8BPQ stack and the implementation on my Kantronics KPC3 and my Kenwood TH-D72A.

Some things I’m trying to get an answer to:

  • In the address fields at the start of a frame, you have what I’ve been calling the ch bit.
    On digipeater addresses, it’s called H and it is used to indicate that a frame has been digipeated by that digipeater.
    When seen in the source or destination addresses, it is called C, and it describes whether the frame is a “command” frame, or a “response” frame.

    An AX.25 2.x “command” frame sets the destination address’s C bit to 1, and the source address’s C bit to 0, whilst a “response” frame in AX.25 does the opposite (destination C is 0, source C is 1).

    In prior AX.25 versions, they were set identically. Question is, which is which? Is a frame a “command” when both bits are set to 1s and a “response” if both C bits are 0s? (Thankfully, I think my chances of meeting an AX.25 1.x station are very small!)
  • In the Control field, there’s a bit marked P/F (for Poll/Final), and I’ve called it pf in my code. Sometimes this field gets called “Poll”, sometimes it gets called “Final”. It’s not clear on what occasions it gets called “Poll” and when it is called “Final”. It isn’t as simple as assuming that pf=1 means poll and pf=0 means final. Which is which? Who knows?
  • AX.25 2.0 allowed up to 8 digipeaters, but AX.25 2.2 limits it to 2. AX.25 2.2 is supposed to be backward compatible, so what happens when it receives a frame from a digipeater that is more than 2 digipeater hops away? (I’m basically pretending the limitation doesn’t exist right now, so aioax25 will handle 8 digipeaters in AX.25 2.2 mode)
  • The table of PID values (figure 3.2 in the AX.25 2.2 spec) mentions several protocols, including “Link Quality Protocol”. What is that, and where is the spec for it?
  • Is there an “experimental” PID that can be used that says “this is a L3 protocol that is a work in progress” so I don’t blow up someone’s station with traffic they can’t understand? The spec says contact the ARRL, which I have done, we’ll see where that gets me.
  • What do APRS stations do with a PID they don’t recognise? (Hopefully ignore it!)

Right at this point, the Direwolf sources have proven quite handy. Already I am now aware of a potential gotcha with the AX.25 2.0 implementation on the Kantronics KPC3+ and the Kenwood TM-D710.

I suspect my hand-held (Kenwood TH-D72A) might do the same thing as the TM-D710, but given JVC-Kenwood have pulled out of the Australian market, I’m more like to just say F### you Kenwood and ignore the problem since these can do KISS mode, bypassing the buggy AX.25 implementation on a potentially resource-constrained device.

NET/ROM is going to be a whole different ball-game, and yes, that’s on the road map. Long-term, I’d like 6LoWHAM stations to be able to co-exist peacefully with other stations. Much like you can connect to a NET/ROM node using traditional AX.25, then issue connect commands to jump from there to any AX.25 or NET/ROM station; I intend to offer the same “feature” on a 6LoWHAM station — you’ll be able to spin up a service that accepts AX.25 and NET/ROM connections, and allows you to hit any AX.25, NET/ROM or 6LoWHAM station.

I might park the project for a bit, and get back onto the WICEN stuff, as what we have in aioax25 is doing okay, and there’s lots of work to be done on the base software that’ll keep me busy right up to when the horse rides re-start in 2020.

Solar Cluster: Second compute node operational again

So, a few months back I had the failure of one of my storage nodes. Since I need 3 storage nodes to operate, but can get away with a single compute node, I did a board-shuffle. I just evacuated lithium of all its virtual machines, slapped the SSD, HDD and cover from hydrogen in/on it, and it became the new storage node.

Actually I took the opportunity to upgrade to 2TB HDDs at the same time, as well as adding two new storage nodes (Intel NUCs). I then ordered a new motherboard to get lithium back up again. Again, there was an opportunity to upgrade, so ~$1500 later I ordered a SuperMicro A2SDi-16C-HLN4F. 16 cores, and full-size DDR4 DIMMs, so much easier to get bits for. It also takes M.2 SATA.

The new board arrived a few weeks ago, but I was heavily snowed under with activities surrounding Brisbane Area WICEN Group and their efforts to assist the Stirling’s Crossing Endurance Club running the Tom Quilty 2019. So it got shoved to the side with the RAM I had purchased to be dealt with another day.

I found time on Monday to assemble the hardware, then had fun and games with the UEFI firmware on this board. Put simply, the legacy BIOS support on this board is totally and utterly broken. The UEFI shell is also riddled with bugs (e.g. ifconfig help describes how to bring up an interface via DHCP or statically, but doing so fails). And of course, PXE is not PXE when UEFI is involved.

I ended up using Ubuntu’s GRUB binary and netboot image to boot-strap the machine, after which I could copy my Gentoo install back in. I now have the machine back in the rack, and whilst I haven’t deployed any VMs to it yet, I will do so soon. I did however, give it a burn-in test updating the kernel:

  LD [M]  security/keys/encrypted-keys/encrypted-keys.ko
  MKPIGGY arch/x86/boot/compressed/piggy.S
  AS      arch/x86/boot/compressed/piggy.o
  LD      arch/x86/boot/compressed/vmlinux
ld: arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.o: warning: relocation in read-only section `.head.text'
ld: warning: creating a DT_TEXTREL in object.
  ZOFFSET arch/x86/boot/zoffset.h
  OBJCOPY arch/x86/boot/vmlinux.bin
  AS      arch/x86/boot/header.o
  LD      arch/x86/boot/setup.elf
  OBJCOPY arch/x86/boot/setup.bin
  BUILD   arch/x86/boot/bzImage
Setup is 16444 bytes (padded to 16896 bytes).
System is 6273 kB
CRC ca5d7cb3
Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready  (#1)

real    7m7.727s
user    62m6.396s
sys     5m8.970s
lithium /usr/src/linux-stable # git describe
v5.1.11

7m for make -j 17 to build a current Linux kernel is not bad at all!

6LoWHAM: AX.25 Python library and addressing thoughts

Lately, I had a need for a library that would talk to a KISS TNC and allow me to exchange UI frames over an AX.25 network.

This is part of a project being undertaken by Brisbane Area WICEN Group. We’ve been tasked with the job of reporting scans from RFID tag readers back to base… and naturally we’ll be using the AX.25 network we’re already familiar with. The plan is to use APRS messaging (to keep things simple) to submit the location, time and hardware address of each RFID read.

For this, I needed something I also need for this project, a tool to encode and decode the UI frames. I had initially thought of just using LinBPQ or similar to provide the interface to AX.25, but in the end, it was easier for me to write my own simple AX.25 stack from scratch.

aioax25 obviously is nowhere near a replacement for other AX.25 stacks in that it only encodes and decodes frames, but it’s a first step in that journey. This library is written for Python 3.4 and up using the asyncio module and pyserial. At the moment I have used it to somewhat crudely send and receive APRS messages, and so with a bit of work, it’ll suffice for the WICEN project.

That does mean I’m not shackled in terms of what bits I can set in my AX.25 headers. One limitation I have with my mapping of 6LoWHAM addresses to AX.25 addresses is that I cannot represent all characters or the “group” bit.

This lead to the limitation that if I defined a group called VK4BWI-0, that group may not have a participant with the call-sign of VK4BWI-0 because I would not be able to differentiate group messages from direct messages.

By writing my own AX.25 stack, I potentially can side-step that limitation: I can utilise the reserved bits in a call-sign/SSID to represent this information. I avoided their use before because the interfaces I planned on using did not expose them, but doing it myself means they’re directly accessible. The AX.25 protocol documentation states:

The bits marked “r” are reserved bits. They may be used in an agreed-upon manner in individual networks. When not implemented, they should be set to one.

https://www.tapr.org/pub_ax25.html

Now, the question is, if I set one to 0, would it reach the far end as a 0? If so, this could be a stand-in for the group bit — stored inverted so that a 1 represents a unicast destination and 0 represents a group.

The other option is to just prepend the left-over bits to the start of the message payload. This has the bonus that I can encode the full-callsign even if that call-sign does not fit in a standard AX.25 message.

So a message sent to VK4FACE-6 (let’s pretend F-calls can use packet for the sake of an example) would be sent to AX.25 SSID VK4FAC-6, and the first few bytes would encode the missing E and the group/unicast bit. If the station VK4FAC were also on frequency, the software stack at their end would need to filter based on those initial payload bytes.

We support 8-character call-signs, so we need to represent 2 left-over characters plus a group bit. Add space for two-more characters for the source call-sign (which may not be a group), we require about 3 bytes.

At this point we might as well use 4, store the extra bytes as 7-bit ASCII, with the spare MSBs of each byte encoding the group bit and one spare bit. An extra 8 bits is bugger all really even at 1200 baud.

Obviously, NET/ROM has no knowledge of this. Stations that are on the other side of a non-6LoWHAM digipeater need to explicitly source-route their hops to reach the rest of a mesh network, and the nodes the other side need to “remember” this source route.

This latter scheme also won’t work for connected mode, as there’s no scope to shoehorn those bytes in the information field and still remain AX.25 compatible — it will only work for 6LoWHAM UI frames.

Anyway, it’s food for thought.