[aprssig] The new N-N paradigm summary (fwd)

[Robert Bruninga]

Cap,
Thanks for your good opinion on the true potential of un-abused 
WIDEn-N.  But you can do all of what you want under the new 
n-N paradigm and keep WIDEn-N too.

1) California can keep WIDEn-N and continue to focus on
    education to keep people from routinely using anything over 
   W2-2.   And, as you say,  using ONLY W2-,2 instead of 
    WIDE,W2-2 is prefererd to reduce dupes.   (but change the 
   digis to UITRACE WIDEn-N so that the source digi is retained).
   Then you still have WIDEn-N but can use UIFLOOD for
    ##LNKn-N's as a bonus.  (No need for TRACEn-N anymore)

2) OR.. Change them all to the state version of CAn-N and it will
    work identically to your existing WIDEn-N, yet protect 
    surrounding states from california abuses.

3) AND Use the Interstate LNKn-N's for backbones.  Dont worry 
    about local LA Basiin interstates.  They are already covered
    by CAn-N or Wn-N if you keep it.

When you say WIDEn-N works in California, I assume that means
that a low power tracker running less than 5 Watts can be tracked
anywhere  in Calif reliably.  That is the measure of "works" in APRS, 
not just a measure of how many other stations you can see which
usually is a measure of "QRM" and not reliability.

Bob

>>> cap at cruzio.com 1/4/05 3:13:30 AM >>>
I'd simply like to register my opinion (before slipping off on a trip,
so
unfortunately I won't see any replies).  I think this is a
short-sighted
idealistic plan, in search of a problem.  That would be okay, and I
haven't
complained before now because it seemed like another harmless idea. 
But now
that it's become an idea to move away from WIDEn-N it has too much
potential
to cause excessive harm to our existing modern fully WIDEn-N capable
VHF
network in California (and throughout the Western US).  The existing
full
WIDEn-N network in California and adjacent states _is working_.  I've
seen
different problems on the East coast where not all the digis are
WIDEn-N
capable, but that's not the situation in the Western US.  The WIDEn-N
network _works_ for hundreds of APRSers here.  It works _beyond_ the
"ALOHA
circle".  It works _with_ our high altitude WIDEn-N digis.  The
"reduced
throughput" problem on VHF is tolerable, and declining.  There really
aren't
many severe negative consequences of "reduced throughput due to packet
collisions on VHF" except slow message ACKs for those keyboarding.  The
VHF
WIDEn-N APRS network is amazingly resilient!  Warnings of a VHF net
"death
spiral" have been greatly exaggerated.  More of our users are learning
that
simply WIDE2-2 is a good path for general use, and it works.  It's
better
than a path that includes any commas.  Using only WIDEn-N or TRACEn-N
produces no dupes.  Kantronics TNCS do not do any dupe checking on
packets
other than with pure WIDEn-N and TRACEn-N paths.  RELAY or WIDE or
TRACE
aren't much needed, and digipath commas cause loss of dupe-checking in
our
Kantronics TNCs. Going back to RELAY,WIDE (or worse yet
RELAY,WIDE,WIDE)
would be a step backward in California.  For years, we've been
educating
local users that using only WIDE2-2 or TRACE2-2 will do the job for the
VHF
community of APRS users, especially considering very few places in
California are more than 2 hops from an IGate.  This has slowly been
paying
off in our fully WIDEn-N capable network over the past few years,
especially.  Most users have learned to avoid overly broad digipaths
(if
they've learned anything) by now.  Many have learned to avoid commas
in
their digipaths.  We're making good progress, and our VHF traffic load
is
_declining_, despite new stations appearing regularly.  The Western
US,
besides being more complete as a pure WIDEn-N network than the East, is
just
different topographically, too.  Interstates?  We have high digis
overlooking the LA Basin that cover big stretches of 5 or more
interstate
freeways at once, and I-5's 800 miles in California can be covered by
only a
few WIDEn-N digi hops.

So, why lose (throw away) this progress we've worked so hard for so
many
years to produce?  Is there really some new "enforcement" plan or idea
that
is worth more than all the courteous effort that's already been
expended in
educating ourselves and our fellow hams on VHF?  I don't think so.  I
know
some feel frustrated with the slow effort of education, elmering, and
some
aren't much good at it.  But I think "nationally" throwing out WIDEn-N
in
favor of LINKn_N or equivalent is like throwing the baby out with the
bathwater.
73, Cap KE6AFE



_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
aprssig at lists.tapr.org 
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig