Communications protocol for PRO-9x

[gmclam]

I am looking for the communications protocol for several RS scanners; PRO-92, PRO-93, PRO-95. I am talking about the format of the serial data sent from a PC (or other scanner) and sent back by the scanner during upload/download/cloning.

I appreciate any help. Thanks,
George

 

[dougjgray]

At home I can send you the pro92 format, however it appears that for some reason starting with the 93 they are using some sort of encyrption or compression and I havent found anywhere that documents the format for the pro93 and newer. Maybe there was a way to open up celluar frequncies through software and the FCC told gre to not release that and encrypt it

 

[rdale]

Cellular has nothing to do with the lack of serial communications support.

 

[gmclam]

Cellular has nothing to do with the lack of serial communications support.

Who said anything about cellular?

 

[gmclam]

At home I can send you the pro92 format, however it appears that for some reason starting with the 93 they are using some sort of encyrption or compression and I havent found anywhere that documents the format for the pro93 and newer. Maybe there was a way to open up celluar frequncies through software and the FCC told gre to not release that and encrypt it

Thank you. I would love to have the format. If the protocol for the PRO-93 or PRO-95 does not surface, I am prepared to figure it out myself. It appears to not be very robust.

BTW, I am not interested in the cellular freqs.

Thanks,
George

 

[rdale]

Who said anything about cellular?

Uhh, the message in response to yours. Right above mine?

 

[dougjgray]

Who said anything about cellular?

Oops I did sorry just speculating a reason for the encryption. any way I the 95 and 97 the data from the scanner looks encrypted and not the same as the 92

 

[gmclam]

I am mostly looking for the protocol for the PRO-95. I've already done some homework on this and yes the 92 is different. Considering that the 95 has the physical ability to do cellular, I doubt that is the reason for the encryption.

One thing that might be a reason for changing the protocol is that you can do more than just clone frequencies with scanners later than the 95.

Thanks,
George

 

[dougjgray]

yea it could be compressed some how to fit more info in. Any way Ive attach a text file show the file format for the 92. tarsoft didnt exist when I had a 92 and made my ownn visual c program and used this to extract the data.

 

[gmclam]

Thank You!

Thank you very much.

I notice that your description of this protocol (for the 92) is one way. There is no handshaking and no response from the other unit. It seems that they put the (fixed) delays in there to allow the other unit to process a block of data and wait for the next. I'm wondering how they know when another unit is even connected, let alone ready to receive.

This information is GREAT. It's just what I was looking for .. now on to the PRO-95... which appears to be 9600 baud and a different animal.

Thanks again.
George

 

[DonS]

.. now on to the PRO-95... which appears to be 9600 baud

No offense, but I'd think someone who's planning on replacing the radio's firmware would have access to an oscilloscope.

 

[gmclam]

No offense, but I'd think someone who's planning on replacing the radio's firmware would have access to an oscilloscope.

LOL.
I've got a lot more than just an o'scope.

 

[DonS]

LOL.
I've got a lot more than just an o'scope.

Yet, for some reason, you think that the PRO-95's PC/IF port is running at 9600 bps? The first couple of bytes out of the port should've dispelled that myth.

 

[Mischief810]

What speed does the Pro-97 run at? I've tried locking the port at different speeds to see if Win97 will write to or read from the scanner differently. It doesn't have any effect at all.

With such a small amount of data to be read (or written), it would seem that the scanner could handle the transfer faster.

Your software rocks Don, and a payment is on its way one week from today.

 

[DonS]

What speed does the Pro-97 run at? I've tried locking the port at different speeds to see if Win97 will write to or read from the scanner differently. It doesn't have any effect at all.

Presuming that you're trying to use Windows to set the speed of the COM port... that won't have any effect on Win97. My software opens the port and sets the appropriate bit rate for the scanner. Anything you do to the port is ignored, as it must be....

With such a small amount of data to be read (or written), it would seem that the scanner could handle the transfer faster.

Perhaps the scanner could, but its bit rate is fixed. It will only send or receive data at the rate designed into its firmware. That's the rate Win97 sets, and there isn't anything you or I can do about it.

Your software rocks Don, and a payment is on its way one week from today.

Thank you! That's much appreciated!

 

[DonS]

Yet, for some reason, you think that the PRO-95's PC/IF port is running at 9600 bps? The first couple of bytes out of the port should've dispelled that myth.

I apologize for the tone of that message and the one above it. I shouldn't post when I'm tired and frustrated with other matters.

I suppose I've been immersed in these radios for so long, and so much of their operation seems obvious to me, that I (unreasonably!) expect it to be obvious to others.

No offense or ill will was intended.

 

[gmclam]

I apologize for the tone of that message and the one above it. I shouldn't post when I'm tired and frustrated with other matters.

I suppose I've been immersed in these radios for so long, and so much of their operation seems obvious to me, that I (unreasonably!) expect it to be obvious to others.

No offense or ill will was intended.

I've written a lot of "operating systems" for gadgets in my life and that includes a heckuva lot of serial protocols. I've also had to work with some awful protocols as well. I have not even looked at the streams to or from the PRO-9x scanners (yet), and the way it is looking, I doubt I will. The current infrastructure limits abilities that I want to add to the PRO93/PRO95 such as controlling it from a PC and being able to read basic data back (not just the programmed channel info).

So far I've been investigating the h/w design, the chips used, and those capabilites and limitations. It looks like the 95 was built with a masked CPU (unless the parts list I was sent is not complete/accurate) and so that sets my direction first on figuring out what is available to drop in there. After that I'll explore the legal and business sides of the project and decide my next action.

As I wrote in other forums, any new (serial) protocol will be made available so that others can take maximum advantage of my work (if I decide to go ahead with it). What I've seen so far is an awful protocol. I think it was designed with the closed mind of merely cloning one scanner from another and not with the intention of being downloaded (or uploaded to) a PC/etc.

The prior post by Mischief810 points out one of my issues as well. If intelligent handshaking was used, I am sure the d/l process could be quicker (even at the same baud rate currently being used). And it is silly to always require the full 32K/etc of data to be xfered when less than half is typically programmed.

Best regards,
George

 

[dougjgray]

Thank you very much.

I notice that your description of this protocol (for the 92) is one way. There is no handshaking and no response from the other unit. It seems that they put the (fixed) delays in there to allow the other unit to process a block of data and wait for the next. I'm wondering how they know when another unit is even connected, let alone ready to receive.

This information is GREAT. It's just what I was looking for .. now on to the PRO-95... which appears to be 9600 baud and a different animal.

Thanks again.
George

Yes it was fixed wth just a 2 connector interface it could(can) only do one way at a time, probably why GRE Radios dont offer computer control, my experience in visual c was that at 4800 baud there was no issue being recieved by the scannerfrom the computer it would just wait for the data (in other words the scanner was fast enough to stay ahead so to speak) and it didnt check parity (odd/even) but on the PC end you needed to account for the change in parity (odd/even) and timing was more critical dependent on what was going on in the PC and how fast the PC was.

Doug

 

[Gilligan]

Considering that the 95 has the physical ability to do cellular...

How so?

 

[gmclam]

Pro-95

How so?

The scanner has the physical circuitry to tune to the same frequencies used by analog cellular phones. It is the software that limits being able to do it, not the hardware.