[aprssig] The New N-N paradigm CAN WORK

[Rick Green]

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Robert Bruninga wrote:

> Then I would hate to travel in your area if my mom lived
> there and every year at XMAS you are denying me the
> chance of letting her see me approach..
  What am I hearing here?  For weeks, I think I've been reading your posts
arguing about the saturation of the APRS channel, and trying to convince
the world to run short paths to keep the channel healthy.  Am I now
hearing you say that it's OK for _you_ to run a long path just so your mom
doesn't have to bring up an internet connection, or wait until you come
around the mountain and enter her ALOHA circle? And everybody else's
excuse for running a long path is illegitimate?

> But it would be an arbitrary and capricious limit that would
> prohibit ligitimate uses and needs for communications.
>
  It wouldn't be arbitrary and capricious.  Each digi operator would set
the limit based on the channel capacity in their own area.  Just exactly
what you've been asking us all to do, only if the digi operators do it, it
relieves the mobile tracker operator of the need to be constantly
analysing the local RF environment and changing their path accordingly.

  Have you forgotten your original purpose of APRS, that of 'local
situational awareness'?  Maybe what we really need to do is eliminate all
the WIDEn-N, LANn-N, LINKn-N, etc. and concentrate on building igates.  If
it's out of range of your nearest RELAY, it's not 'local', so let's let
APRS-IS give us the peek over the mountain, and return APRS on RF to its
roots.

  I forget who said it, but many years ago I was told "Every problem we
face as humans, was once seen as the miraculous solution to some other
pressing problem".

-- 
Rick Green

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
 temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                  -Benjamin Franklin