[aprssig] Elimination of Directed First-Hop

Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.edu
Thu Apr 14 10:26:35 EDT 2005

>>> n2lbt at spamcop.net 4/14/05 9:58:16 AM >>>
>... I feel the advantage of running a directed first hop 
>and the geometrical savings of wasted bandwidth out 
>weighs the slight chance a digi will be unavailable.

Ah, but there is no longer any reason for a  directed first
hop anymore under the New n-N Paradigm...

It used to be that we strongly ecnouraged a RELAY or a
WIDE or a NAMED first hop before a WIDEn-N path.
This was because WIDEn-N was not traceable and we
felt the identification of the first-hop by the digi name or
callsign substitution was worth the cost of the extra dupes
that RELAY and WIDE caused.

But now under the New n-N Paradigm, WIDEn-N is fully
traceable and so now we no longer need a FIRST-HOP
to get the 1st digi name identified.  Now just WIDE2-2
will arrive as DIGI1,DIGI2,WIDE2*

AND this now has no disadvantages whatsoever and
perfect dupe elimination.  And, unlike the named-1st-hop
approach, it is still generic and not dependent on any
one digi...

Just a thought.

On Apr 14, 2005, at 1:29 AM, Bill Vodall WA7NWP wrote:
>> We recommend <DIRECT>,WIDE (2 hops) here. Our Aloha circle is
>> approximately 75 miles. I don't see how Bob's plan effects us. It
>> really doesn't make sense to me as a home station should use their
>> local digi + one hop.
> What happens when the local digi dies?  Murphey will see that's
> exactly what happens just when you need it the most.
> Better a couple extra packets then to completely lose communications
> when you need it.
> Bill

Dennis Hudson, N2LBT
Albany, NY

aprssig mailing list
aprssig at lists.tapr.org 

More information about the aprssig mailing list