[aprssig] time for APRS second generation network?

[Robert Bruninga]

>>> jdw at eng.uah.edu 01/05/05 11:48 AM >>>
>> But we already have the solution. The "routing " problem
>> has been solved by using the APRS-Internet system.

>An IGate _gateways_ a packet on to Internet), 
>but that is not routing the APRS RF LAN.

Ah, but there is no such thing as "routing" in APRS:
1) APRS is defined as one-to-all information sharing
2) It is physically impossible to have more than 60 or so
    users in a single RF domain.

Thus, by definition, there simply is no such thing as "routing"
on the APRS RF domain except in non-routine, unusual
circumstances.  Otherwise "routing" is simply the APRS-IS.

The only packet in APRS that is a one-to-one is a message
and the APRS-IS routes this beautifully...

Bob

If you need to route something beyond your nearest 60
local LAN, then it has to go via the 
IMO, one of the biggest if not the biggest cause of problems on the RF 
side _is_ the IS side.  Too many operators see a hit on findu as a 
binary test of their rig and configuration:  if I'm on findu, 
everything is fine; if I don't get to findu, something is wrong - throw 
another hop on the packet, and jack up the power a notch while you're 
at it.

I am not saying that APRS-IS is bad in any way, but it causes some 
operators to behave badly trying to use it.

> the New n-N Paradigm is letting the SYSOPS
> enforce it on them with trivial changes at the digis.

What in the new n-N paradigm prevents me from using a path of

RELAY,WIDE,WIDE,WIDE,WIDE,WIDE,WIDE,WIDE

or even

RELAY,RELAY,RELAY,RELAY,RELAY,RELAY,RELAY,RELAY

?

-Jason
kg4wsv


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