[aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?

[Ray McKnight]

If you've ever used a packet node you'd probably not be asking "why not".
The purpose of a node is to connect to other remote nodes, and eventually
a BBS somewhere.  Most node software isn't very smart and will generate
ack's for each and every packet, plus retries for each dropped frame.  Although
there *are* rather sophisticated nodes, running software like Roseswitch, KA9Q
or other variations, the big problem is that even with this software a node still
generates an awful lot of packets.  Once a single user connects and simply
request a dir listing or checks messages, bulletins, they've likely already tied
up the channel for several minutes of nearly continuous packets.  Multiply this
by each sucsessive user who logs in and it can be an absolute traffic jam during
peak hours.  Now, throw those rediculous KA-Nodes on the channel, which don't
conform to any intelligent protocol, and you might as well auction the freq off to UPS.

If there is such little APRS activity in your area that you are screaming for something
to occupy the air, there most likely isn't enough usage to justify a true node either.
APRS and connected mode do NOT play well together - it's like putting bicycles
in the middle of I-5 in downtown LA.  A node is a time consuming endeavor as far
as management.  A good one requires a lot of planning and coordination, so to
communicate effectively with other compatible nodes.  Simply plopping a Kantronics
on the air and enabling it's "node" function is like screamong bomb on an airplane,
it only creates chaos and failure.  Keep nodes where they belong, 145.01/03/05 etc.

With the advent of WinLink which offers far superior performance, and can be
used on either HF or VHF effecitively and MUCH faster, why bother?  But if you're
stubborn and determined, I'll dust off my old CP/M machine and you can have a blast.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Patrick Green 
  To: TAPR APRS Mailing List 
  Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 19:38
  Subject: Re: [aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?


  On 9/8/06, William McKeehan <mckeehan at mckeehan.homeip.net> wrote:

    I'm really looking for reasons to give someone to NOT put a packet node (BBS
    or just PBBS) on 144.39.

  Watch how busy a channel becomes when people try to connect:

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20060911/c082e5d7/attachment.html>