[aprssig] Re: Fixing Los Angeles (Rev 1)

[Phillip B. Pacier]

However, in addition, I believe it is necessary to still support RELAY 
and WIDE, and to "educate" users to use those paths.  The network must 
be setup as it was originally intended to be, with low-level RELAYs and 
higher level WIDEs.  I really think n-N, on a "flood" basis, serves no 
useful purpose any longer.  LINKn-N sure, but general WIDEn-N no.  I 
have already helped to "educate" many users in the San Diego area to use 
the RELAY,WIDE or WIDE,WIDE or DIGI,WIDE paths, and things are working 
much better down there.

73
Phil - AD6NH

Robert Bruninga wrote:

>With feedback from Greg and others, I have completely
>revamped the suggestion for solving APRS congestion in
>the LA basin.
>
>Please take another look at it:
>
>http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs/fixingLA.html
>
>Now there is no phase in plan, no coordination, and no dupes.
>It drops to WIDEn-N support as the universal path everywhere
>(encouraging W2-2 in most areas)...
>
>These principles can be applied in other areas too.
>
>de Wb4APR, Bob
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at lists.tapr.org
>https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
>  
>