2025-11-21 — Plug and Play New Packet Radio Units, Including 2m!, The Piling On and Misinformation About ARDC Continues, The 44Net Story Interview, LinHT – a Complete M17 Transceiver, futureGEO
Loïc - Thanks for mentioning that repository. I read the one you linked to and you're right, it's enlightening. I'll have more to say on GEO next week.
As usual it is rich and thick like good blackberry juice.
I think I can see quick uptake on the NPR devices locally. Now to get the FCC to clear out those stupid limitations. I also would like to see some sort of work around to use so many of the network apps and tools on our digital IP (AREDN in my area) networks. It is all encrypted now, so if you want to do such as video conferences and other such things you have to deal with the encryption rules. I understand the reason back when encrypting on amateur radio indicated you were up to something not right, but now all of the common tools are encrypted.
William - There's some hope that the Part 97 rules don't use the word encryption: "Prohibited - messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning". There's some "room" to make the case that we as individual Amateur Radio Operators are not attempting to obscure the meaning. My basic test for the real world impact is that we as Amateur Radio Operators cannot query the FCC's databases for Amateur Radio license information without the use of encryption (HTTPS). Thus how can we, from an Amateur Radio system, be expected to validate whether someone using Amateur Radio spectrum is actually licensed? Thus, I think there's a case to be made, but it will have to be done carefully. Radio Amateurs of Canada have settled on encryption key escrow with RAC as a solution, and that seems to have satisfied their regulator.
Steve (by the way most folks call me Chuck) and yes the statement "Prohibited - messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning" when taken from the aspect that we are not using the application for obscuring the meaning just to transmit data, and as you pointed out we cannot even query the db for license data without it, really shows that the present day status of network tools and apps is that they all use encryption. If I am trying to present AREDN as a high speed data solution to the Emcomms folks, I cannot then turn around and expect them to use the same tools that they use day in and day out on their networks on the amateur based one. Indeed that is one of the selling points for AREDN, "it looks and works like the internet".
Where can I find out about the Canadian solution?
On another note, I was trying to recall which TAPR networking conferences we both were at. Do recall several back in the late 70's into the early 2K's.
Steve, thank you for that info. That sounds like the path we have to follow. As you pointed out you cannot even access the FCC site without using tls... So what is good for the goose is good for the gander...
It'd be objectively cool to have an amateur radio transponder in geosynchronous orbit. Because why wouldn't you want one?
But I've got to wonder -- for what purpose? What is the problem you'd want to solve with this? I think if it's experimentation and ham/ham communication, than a QO-100 style solution would be a great fit.
But if you think that you'd like a SERVICE or SOLUTION for the problem of trunking together local-scoped ham radio RF networks, then maybe just think about buying that trunking as a service. Surely there must be some hams at SpaceX that could help cook-up an interesting private network solution using Starlink. Maybe point-to-point links, or a bunch of MPLS LSP "circuits" connecting a bunch of sites together? I'm sure there's lots of capabilities for building private networks using that constellation that might be a fit for an amateur radio trunking use-case. I mean, some hams likely pay a nominal amount of $$$ for power and tower rent for their repeaters.. this is sort of a 21st century version of that.
Of course, infrastructure funding in amateur radio has always been a problem, how would the starlink service get paid for? Perhaps a framework where the operator club or organization for a regional ham network would pay the cost for adding their additional ground station. This might be a reasonable funding model if there's a critical mass to get anything going at all.
When I used to be "in charge" of things before I retired, I encouraged the people working for me to consider both "build" and "buy" alternatives to the problems that we had. If you don't have the right combination of people/expertise, resources/$$$ or time, then the right choice can vary.
I'm using T-Mobile's Starlink SMS service today. It replaced my Garmin InReach terminal and is better than Apple's Globalstar-based satellite messaging service. It uses a portion of TMO's 600MHz spectrum, right now to deliver low speed (SMS/MMS) data, but there's plans afoot for higher speed, wider bandwidth modulation that will allow a mostly normal cellular phone experience. I'm pretty sure the Gen 2 satellites are SDR based, so depending on their bandpass filtering it might be technically feasible to include a chunk of amateur spectrum, for a fee of course.
Where it gets troublesome is when it goes into service. If intended as a backhaul service there will be those hams who insist on using satellite backhaul just because they can. Back in the repeater analog linking days I knew many hams who would intentionally use the 70cm link radios just to show off. I myself use ASL 3 as the primary way I reach the club repeater system. Now imagine a bunch of uncoordinated hams just jumping in, doing whatever, just because their license says they can operate on those frequencies. And if encryption is proposed they'll be the first ones to howl about it. The Europeans seem to be a lot more willing to go with the plan, which is another big reason why HAMNET exists there and not here. I'm not saying that every ham is going to ignore the plan, but enough probably will that it will become problematic.
The mental model in my head is that SpaceX/Starlink is contracted to implement some private network. Individual logical links are added as new nodes that need backhaul are added, and this is implemented by the party that architects and operates the backhaul network implemented over Starlink (and perhaps other providers of LEO constellations or other WAN connectivity.)
I don't think that you can operate a backbone network like this on an ad-hoc basis. There are architectural and design decisions that need to be made and implemented, which is the antithesis of wild-west random configuration choices. I know this in my bones; I spent decades in the business designing and building large, global ISP backbone networks.
Even if you don't build a private network (which seems like it would be really cool if Starlink were to expose MPLS LSPs to their private network customers), you could do a similar thing with just their standard ISP/Internet transit product coupled with VPN connectivity between the amateur radio regional networks. But that's just a different in the plumbing; you still have architectural and engineering choices to make and someone (or someones in a group) has got to actually operate this infrastructure so that it works and is robust and able to be monitored and managed.
One model to point to is the 44Net VPN offering. There is "someone" that operates and coordinates this infrastructure; it's not a cowboy, ad-hoc, everyone does their own random thing. Other examples of infrastructure are the various digital voice Internet network things for linking DMR (etc) hotspots together. There's an organization that runs these things.
Seems like "someone" could figure out a model for a country/continent/global scale backbone network fabric to interconnect "last-mile" amateur RF data networks for the greater good. Maybe this is something that ARDC could/would support in various ways from funding architecture, engineering and reference platforms for "gateway" nodes to last-mile networks? Perhaps funding the operational network? I don't know what their thoughts are as a group that makes these grants in that regard. Seems like a non-terrestrial backhaul/backbone fabric fits into the EMCOMM PR bucket pretty well, and at the same time helping to drive development of next-generation digital modes and applications for amateurs.
Louis - I predict... and will actually encourage and get involved, in promoting Starlink as Amateur Radio backhaul connectivity. I don't think there's much to be gained (as Amateur Radio's very small scale usage) in requesting anything unusual from Starlink other than IPv6 connectivity. The 44Net VPN is an ideal pairing with Starlink, and the $5/month for 500 kbps uncapped, or $25/month for fast, but capped service, is pretty irresistible compared to failure prone cellular and terrestrial connectivity. Amateur Radio really needs to start making the leap to IPv6, and Starlink's wretched CGNAT for IPv4, and their stellar support for IPv6, might be the impetus that's needed.
Eric - There IS that likelihood of abuse, or just poor behavior. I liked the plan for the last proposed GEO for Western Hemisphere that didn't get built - it would segment the uplink into individual channels and you would have to authenticate yourself (send a request packet with your Amateur Radio authentication) to get assigned an uplink channel. The pithy explanation was something like "I don't want Captain Midnight" using my satellite". We have the technologies to deal with abuse. For better or worse, we now have that capabilities to lock out users on DMR and other DV systems (which are sometimes abused).
You might have missed the development that Starlink just bought its own big chunk of cellular spectrum from the failed attempt by Dish Networks to form a fourth nationwide cellular network. It's not going to be dependent on T-Mobile; I predict that Starlink will become a cellular provider and likely work out an MVNO deal with T-Mobile. T-Mobile customers can roam onto Starlink when out of range of T-Mobile network, and Starlink customers can roam onto T-Mobile when out of range of Starlink satellites (like in urban areas).
Louis: We have a practical and inexpensive way to link any two Amateur Radio Operators already regardless of location - Internet connectivity. We can even "flavor" it as Amateur Radio if we use, for example, the 44Net VPN. We do that now, to good effect. Read some of the last ten or so issues of the Random Wire newsletter for some tales of hams who've had to relocate to care facilities that cannot accommodate conventional radios and antennas. But they can still "do radio" with Internet talk groups, and now cool devices like the m1ke I just wrote about. NOTHING WRONG WITH ANY OF THAT, AND ENTIRELY PRACTICAL AND USABLE AND FUN.
As for GEO, what I'm observing from the tales of QO-100 users is the sheer fun and sense of experimentation from having connectivity on Amateur Radio spectrum (we have some allocations in 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz that overlap with unlicensed use) anywhere within the footprint of QO-100. And, the point, is doing it with Amateur Radio spectrum, with Amateur Radio equipment. For sheer practicality, I don't think it's possible to beat Starlink service as-is. It works anywhere, it's reliable for its lack of local terrestrial infrastructure, with Starlink Mini you can now keep it powered indefinitely with a bit of preplanning to incorporate solar + batteries.
I haven't written it yet, but with all of the off the shelf capabilities we have now, including the new NPR Radios, and 802.11af / Wi-Fi HaLow, and AREDN's vastly expanded capabilities, especially Supernodes, we can now finally knit disparate Amateur Radio data networks together using TCP/IP. Even packet can be incorporated with the use of JNOS that can act as an AX.25 to TCP/IP router.
I view a GEO as kind of the ultimate repeater, and done right, perhaps even an ultimate SuperPeater. Instead of AREDN Supernode (tunnels via Internet), we could use GEO.
Yeah... fun, and experimentation in Amateur Radio. That's why I'm agitating for a Western Hemisphere Amateur Radio GEO.
I'm pretty close to dropping the SIM card for my router and going with Starlink mobile. I'm waiting to see the pricing for certified refurbished mini terminals. If it's not too prohibitive I'll probably jump in. At least until the TMO-Starlink partnership can do just as well speed and feature wise as my current 5G service.
Eric - See my comment in the other comment thread that Starlink just bought cellular spectrum from Dish Networks' failed "fourth US cellular network". We ain't seen nuthin' yet of what Starlink has planned for cellular.
If I’m reading the ham radio jargon correctly, NPR is essentially a plug and play network device along the lines of a USB WiFi dongle? If that’s the case, that’s what I’ve been looking for since joining the hobby 10+ years ago. A local, standards based RF network without the need of the internet backbone. Gives the hacker the ability to focus on what can be done with the network rather than focusing on the hardware that runs the network.
Cale - NPR isn't quite that simplistic. For example, an NPR device can be configured as a central node, a function kind of akin to a Wi-Fi router. But, you're right - mostly Ethernet in, RF out. The Localino NPR units are black box DATA RADIOS like we've been wanting for some time. NPR has been around since 2019, but using it wasn't quite practical because of external (fussy) amplifiers needed to get the power levels up to usable. But these units from Localino solve that issue - they're plug and play at 7W on 70cm. The 2m version will require some regulatory work here in the US, as there's no mode on that unit that's legal in the US at the moment (max bandwidth on 2m is 20 kHz, and NPR's minimum bandwidth is 100 kHz).
The majority of people completing my club's license classes and passing the exams are not particularly interested in HF CW and SSB. They're only mildly interested in VHF/UHF analog FM.
I'm not saying that operations from the 1950s-1970s will go away entirely, but it's going to be a monotonically decreasing percentage of the hobby -- especially as the Baby Boomers die out.
Chuck - The majority of Amateur Radio Operators in the 2020s are captive to their (incomplete, in my opinion) worldview that what Amateur Radio IS, is mostly HF, CW+SSB, with a sprinkling of VHF / UHF voice (FM + Digital), and the very, very occasional "interesting" mode such as satellite, EME, microwave DX, and a tiny sliver of data such as APRS or Winlink.
For some time, I thought what was needed to gain more "mindshare" about Zero Retries Interesting areas of interest within Amateur Radio was to expose them to it. But now, in the fifth year of publishing Zero Retries, I've come to realize that such exposure results in perhaps 3% "oh, I didn't know about that - sounds interesting" and 97% "oh, that's not really Amateur Radio / I'm not intersted in that at all".
Thus I’m no longer attempting “promotion of Zero Retries Interesting subjects” to general Amateur Radio audiences. I now do so only on request groups that request such a presentation because they know of Zero Retries and related subjects such as LinHT. Instead I’ll be promoting Zero Retries Interesting subjects to potential NewTechHams audiences such as the local annual Linux conference.
From a North-America perspective, note that Radio Amateur du Québec Incorporated (RAQI) has participed with Amsat-F to provide an answer: https://gitlab.com/amsat-dl/futuregeo/-/blob/71881968ccc85801053afb15a69cefa9b68b6fc7/task1/proposals/2024-05-AMSAT-F_RAQI_proposal_en_v1x0.pdf
You will also find other answers in the same repository. They are very insightfull to read...
Loïc - Thanks for mentioning that repository. I read the one you linked to and you're right, it's enlightening. I'll have more to say on GEO next week.
As usual it is rich and thick like good blackberry juice.
I think I can see quick uptake on the NPR devices locally. Now to get the FCC to clear out those stupid limitations. I also would like to see some sort of work around to use so many of the network apps and tools on our digital IP (AREDN in my area) networks. It is all encrypted now, so if you want to do such as video conferences and other such things you have to deal with the encryption rules. I understand the reason back when encrypting on amateur radio indicated you were up to something not right, but now all of the common tools are encrypted.
William - There's some hope that the Part 97 rules don't use the word encryption: "Prohibited - messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning". There's some "room" to make the case that we as individual Amateur Radio Operators are not attempting to obscure the meaning. My basic test for the real world impact is that we as Amateur Radio Operators cannot query the FCC's databases for Amateur Radio license information without the use of encryption (HTTPS). Thus how can we, from an Amateur Radio system, be expected to validate whether someone using Amateur Radio spectrum is actually licensed? Thus, I think there's a case to be made, but it will have to be done carefully. Radio Amateurs of Canada have settled on encryption key escrow with RAC as a solution, and that seems to have satisfied their regulator.
Steve (by the way most folks call me Chuck) and yes the statement "Prohibited - messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning" when taken from the aspect that we are not using the application for obscuring the meaning just to transmit data, and as you pointed out we cannot even query the db for license data without it, really shows that the present day status of network tools and apps is that they all use encryption. If I am trying to present AREDN as a high speed data solution to the Emcomms folks, I cannot then turn around and expect them to use the same tools that they use day in and day out on their networks on the amateur based one. Indeed that is one of the selling points for AREDN, "it looks and works like the internet".
Where can I find out about the Canadian solution?
On another note, I was trying to recall which TAPR networking conferences we both were at. Do recall several back in the late 70's into the early 2K's.
Again keep up the great work.
Chuck - See the article in Zero Retries 0180 - Canadian Amateur Radio Operators Experimenting with Encryption - https://www.zeroretries.org/i/152044023/canadian-amateur-radio-operators-experimenting-with-encryption for the Radio Amateurs of Canada key escrow.
Steve, thank you for that info. That sounds like the path we have to follow. As you pointed out you cannot even access the FCC site without using tls... So what is good for the goose is good for the gander...
It'd be objectively cool to have an amateur radio transponder in geosynchronous orbit. Because why wouldn't you want one?
But I've got to wonder -- for what purpose? What is the problem you'd want to solve with this? I think if it's experimentation and ham/ham communication, than a QO-100 style solution would be a great fit.
But if you think that you'd like a SERVICE or SOLUTION for the problem of trunking together local-scoped ham radio RF networks, then maybe just think about buying that trunking as a service. Surely there must be some hams at SpaceX that could help cook-up an interesting private network solution using Starlink. Maybe point-to-point links, or a bunch of MPLS LSP "circuits" connecting a bunch of sites together? I'm sure there's lots of capabilities for building private networks using that constellation that might be a fit for an amateur radio trunking use-case. I mean, some hams likely pay a nominal amount of $$$ for power and tower rent for their repeaters.. this is sort of a 21st century version of that.
Of course, infrastructure funding in amateur radio has always been a problem, how would the starlink service get paid for? Perhaps a framework where the operator club or organization for a regional ham network would pay the cost for adding their additional ground station. This might be a reasonable funding model if there's a critical mass to get anything going at all.
When I used to be "in charge" of things before I retired, I encouraged the people working for me to consider both "build" and "buy" alternatives to the problems that we had. If you don't have the right combination of people/expertise, resources/$$$ or time, then the right choice can vary.
I'm using T-Mobile's Starlink SMS service today. It replaced my Garmin InReach terminal and is better than Apple's Globalstar-based satellite messaging service. It uses a portion of TMO's 600MHz spectrum, right now to deliver low speed (SMS/MMS) data, but there's plans afoot for higher speed, wider bandwidth modulation that will allow a mostly normal cellular phone experience. I'm pretty sure the Gen 2 satellites are SDR based, so depending on their bandpass filtering it might be technically feasible to include a chunk of amateur spectrum, for a fee of course.
Where it gets troublesome is when it goes into service. If intended as a backhaul service there will be those hams who insist on using satellite backhaul just because they can. Back in the repeater analog linking days I knew many hams who would intentionally use the 70cm link radios just to show off. I myself use ASL 3 as the primary way I reach the club repeater system. Now imagine a bunch of uncoordinated hams just jumping in, doing whatever, just because their license says they can operate on those frequencies. And if encryption is proposed they'll be the first ones to howl about it. The Europeans seem to be a lot more willing to go with the plan, which is another big reason why HAMNET exists there and not here. I'm not saying that every ham is going to ignore the plan, but enough probably will that it will become problematic.
The mental model in my head is that SpaceX/Starlink is contracted to implement some private network. Individual logical links are added as new nodes that need backhaul are added, and this is implemented by the party that architects and operates the backhaul network implemented over Starlink (and perhaps other providers of LEO constellations or other WAN connectivity.)
I don't think that you can operate a backbone network like this on an ad-hoc basis. There are architectural and design decisions that need to be made and implemented, which is the antithesis of wild-west random configuration choices. I know this in my bones; I spent decades in the business designing and building large, global ISP backbone networks.
Even if you don't build a private network (which seems like it would be really cool if Starlink were to expose MPLS LSPs to their private network customers), you could do a similar thing with just their standard ISP/Internet transit product coupled with VPN connectivity between the amateur radio regional networks. But that's just a different in the plumbing; you still have architectural and engineering choices to make and someone (or someones in a group) has got to actually operate this infrastructure so that it works and is robust and able to be monitored and managed.
One model to point to is the 44Net VPN offering. There is "someone" that operates and coordinates this infrastructure; it's not a cowboy, ad-hoc, everyone does their own random thing. Other examples of infrastructure are the various digital voice Internet network things for linking DMR (etc) hotspots together. There's an organization that runs these things.
Seems like "someone" could figure out a model for a country/continent/global scale backbone network fabric to interconnect "last-mile" amateur RF data networks for the greater good. Maybe this is something that ARDC could/would support in various ways from funding architecture, engineering and reference platforms for "gateway" nodes to last-mile networks? Perhaps funding the operational network? I don't know what their thoughts are as a group that makes these grants in that regard. Seems like a non-terrestrial backhaul/backbone fabric fits into the EMCOMM PR bucket pretty well, and at the same time helping to drive development of next-generation digital modes and applications for amateurs.
Louis - I predict... and will actually encourage and get involved, in promoting Starlink as Amateur Radio backhaul connectivity. I don't think there's much to be gained (as Amateur Radio's very small scale usage) in requesting anything unusual from Starlink other than IPv6 connectivity. The 44Net VPN is an ideal pairing with Starlink, and the $5/month for 500 kbps uncapped, or $25/month for fast, but capped service, is pretty irresistible compared to failure prone cellular and terrestrial connectivity. Amateur Radio really needs to start making the leap to IPv6, and Starlink's wretched CGNAT for IPv4, and their stellar support for IPv6, might be the impetus that's needed.
Eric - There IS that likelihood of abuse, or just poor behavior. I liked the plan for the last proposed GEO for Western Hemisphere that didn't get built - it would segment the uplink into individual channels and you would have to authenticate yourself (send a request packet with your Amateur Radio authentication) to get assigned an uplink channel. The pithy explanation was something like "I don't want Captain Midnight" using my satellite". We have the technologies to deal with abuse. For better or worse, we now have that capabilities to lock out users on DMR and other DV systems (which are sometimes abused).
You might have missed the development that Starlink just bought its own big chunk of cellular spectrum from the failed attempt by Dish Networks to form a fourth nationwide cellular network. It's not going to be dependent on T-Mobile; I predict that Starlink will become a cellular provider and likely work out an MVNO deal with T-Mobile. T-Mobile customers can roam onto Starlink when out of range of T-Mobile network, and Starlink customers can roam onto T-Mobile when out of range of Starlink satellites (like in urban areas).
Louis: We have a practical and inexpensive way to link any two Amateur Radio Operators already regardless of location - Internet connectivity. We can even "flavor" it as Amateur Radio if we use, for example, the 44Net VPN. We do that now, to good effect. Read some of the last ten or so issues of the Random Wire newsletter for some tales of hams who've had to relocate to care facilities that cannot accommodate conventional radios and antennas. But they can still "do radio" with Internet talk groups, and now cool devices like the m1ke I just wrote about. NOTHING WRONG WITH ANY OF THAT, AND ENTIRELY PRACTICAL AND USABLE AND FUN.
As for GEO, what I'm observing from the tales of QO-100 users is the sheer fun and sense of experimentation from having connectivity on Amateur Radio spectrum (we have some allocations in 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz that overlap with unlicensed use) anywhere within the footprint of QO-100. And, the point, is doing it with Amateur Radio spectrum, with Amateur Radio equipment. For sheer practicality, I don't think it's possible to beat Starlink service as-is. It works anywhere, it's reliable for its lack of local terrestrial infrastructure, with Starlink Mini you can now keep it powered indefinitely with a bit of preplanning to incorporate solar + batteries.
I haven't written it yet, but with all of the off the shelf capabilities we have now, including the new NPR Radios, and 802.11af / Wi-Fi HaLow, and AREDN's vastly expanded capabilities, especially Supernodes, we can now finally knit disparate Amateur Radio data networks together using TCP/IP. Even packet can be incorporated with the use of JNOS that can act as an AX.25 to TCP/IP router.
I view a GEO as kind of the ultimate repeater, and done right, perhaps even an ultimate SuperPeater. Instead of AREDN Supernode (tunnels via Internet), we could use GEO.
Yeah... fun, and experimentation in Amateur Radio. That's why I'm agitating for a Western Hemisphere Amateur Radio GEO.
I'm pretty close to dropping the SIM card for my router and going with Starlink mobile. I'm waiting to see the pricing for certified refurbished mini terminals. If it's not too prohibitive I'll probably jump in. At least until the TMO-Starlink partnership can do just as well speed and feature wise as my current 5G service.
Eric - See my comment in the other comment thread that Starlink just bought cellular spectrum from Dish Networks' failed "fourth US cellular network". We ain't seen nuthin' yet of what Starlink has planned for cellular.
If I’m reading the ham radio jargon correctly, NPR is essentially a plug and play network device along the lines of a USB WiFi dongle? If that’s the case, that’s what I’ve been looking for since joining the hobby 10+ years ago. A local, standards based RF network without the need of the internet backbone. Gives the hacker the ability to focus on what can be done with the network rather than focusing on the hardware that runs the network.
Cale - NPR isn't quite that simplistic. For example, an NPR device can be configured as a central node, a function kind of akin to a Wi-Fi router. But, you're right - mostly Ethernet in, RF out. The Localino NPR units are black box DATA RADIOS like we've been wanting for some time. NPR has been around since 2019, but using it wasn't quite practical because of external (fussy) amplifiers needed to get the power levels up to usable. But these units from Localino solve that issue - they're plug and play at 7W on 70cm. The 2m version will require some regulatory work here in the US, as there's no mode on that unit that's legal in the US at the moment (max bandwidth on 2m is 20 kHz, and NPR's minimum bandwidth is 100 kHz).
The majority of people completing my club's license classes and passing the exams are not particularly interested in HF CW and SSB. They're only mildly interested in VHF/UHF analog FM.
I'm not saying that operations from the 1950s-1970s will go away entirely, but it's going to be a monotonically decreasing percentage of the hobby -- especially as the Baby Boomers die out.
Stick to your target.
Chuck - The majority of Amateur Radio Operators in the 2020s are captive to their (incomplete, in my opinion) worldview that what Amateur Radio IS, is mostly HF, CW+SSB, with a sprinkling of VHF / UHF voice (FM + Digital), and the very, very occasional "interesting" mode such as satellite, EME, microwave DX, and a tiny sliver of data such as APRS or Winlink.
For some time, I thought what was needed to gain more "mindshare" about Zero Retries Interesting areas of interest within Amateur Radio was to expose them to it. But now, in the fifth year of publishing Zero Retries, I've come to realize that such exposure results in perhaps 3% "oh, I didn't know about that - sounds interesting" and 97% "oh, that's not really Amateur Radio / I'm not intersted in that at all".
Thus I’m no longer attempting “promotion of Zero Retries Interesting subjects” to general Amateur Radio audiences. I now do so only on request groups that request such a presentation because they know of Zero Retries and related subjects such as LinHT. Instead I’ll be promoting Zero Retries Interesting subjects to potential NewTechHams audiences such as the local annual Linux conference.