[aprssig] Re: WIDEn-N and the New Paradigm for UIDIGI

Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.edu
Mon May 16 09:47:15 EDT 2005

I see.
I guess when we get to 100% new-N implementation
in about 5 to 10 years (it does take that long for
some hams to do antyhing new), then I think this
is a good idea.

But for now, we need the WIDE2 on the end so
that we know what the packet *was*.  If it arrives
as DIGI1,DIGI2, the existing rules imply this started
as a non-desired WIDE,WIDE.  If we loose the
ability to tourbleshoot the net, we end up with an
unmanageable mess.  I far prefer the wasted 7 bytes
at least until we get to 100% of all digipeaters 
having implemented the New-N and we can be certain
that no one is using the WIDE,WIDE path...


>>> henk.de.groot at hetnet.nl 5/16/2005 8:42:40 AM >>>
Hello Bob,

Robert Bruninga schreef:
> Actually THe extra 2 does not waste anything because
> in the AX.25 protocol those fields are 7 bytes no matter
> what the callsign.  And My bet is it will take YEARS for
> all digis to switch over to the New-N paradigm.  Bob

Bill drops the complete trailing WIDE2/WIDE2* at the last hop. So there

will be one complete VIA call less; this will save 7 bytes of data. I 
think Bill's proposal makes sense since one can easily count te number
calls already replaced.

So with your previous remark I now have 2 options:

1) End the packet with a trailing WIDE2* like:


2) End the packet without a trailing WIDE2* like:


In both cases any calls following the original WIDE2-N will be kept too
there are any, like NOGATE, RFONLY or maybe distribution directives
WORLD, LOCAL and IGATE, but also an additional WIDE2-2.

This detailed discussion may look a bit like nit-picking, but I want my

template to be okay since it will most likely be copied a lot without 
adjusting a lot. So if my template is wrong, it is likey any error will
up everywere...

Kind regards,


aprssig mailing list
aprssig at lists.tapr.org 

More information about the aprssig mailing list