[aprssig] Smart beaconing and the tragedy of the commons

[Joel Maslak]

On May 23, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Robert Bruninga wrote:

> Because I don't use it. . To me APRS is a real-time
> comunications system, not a maping or plot-my-best-track system.
> . Since I don't use it, I thought it would be best if those of
> you that do, would  come to a consensus as to the optimum
> settings that give you what you want, but not at the expense of
> others so that we can all feel comfortable with it.


With a station doing Smart-Beaconing, if I'm using anything that does  
dead reckoning, I know pretty much where that station is, even with  
*reasonable* settings (as the defaults probably are in most packages  
- if they aren't for a certain package reasonable, let's fix *THAT*  
problem).  It provides less uncertainty and can be done with less  
packets at the same time.  That's a win-win IMHO.

As for the number of users you see abusing Smart Beaconing, I hate to  
mention this but probably almost all your non-D7/D700 users are using  
it.  The fact that some abuse it doesn't necessarily mean that Smart  
Beaconing is more apt to be abused if most users are using it.

I still am advocating for smarter digis.  20 year old digis are great  
and are certainly better than nothing, but perhaps we need to put  
some smarts in the digis to deter dumb stuff - like maybe a digi  
shouldn't repeat a packet that is a long NEMA string (especially if  
it is showing no lock!), shouldn't repeat if it repeated a packet  
from that same source in the last X seconds unless it's a non- 
position packet, not repeat if the station used an excessive TX  
delay, not repeat the same position packet if the position hasn't  
changed and it's been less than X minutes since the last position was  
sent, packets from "N0NE" or similar signs of misconfiguration, etc.   
We could also create a network smart enough to ensure that packets  
get to Findu, and no more, since that would also cut down on the  
unnecessary transmissions (perhaps with a seperate, maybe UHF, link  
to the IGate station - don't repeat the "dumb trackers" who only want  
to be seen on the internet).  Maybe we could even put in some smarts  
in the digis to reduce the problem of lost ACKs in message traffic.   
Sure, someone will have to upgrade some 20 year old piece of  
equipment eventually, maybe starting in the DC area first.  But if  
the network didn't reward bad settings, that would go much further  
towards changing user behavior than disabling smart-beaconing or  
making "idiot proof radios" would do.  Maybe that's what we need to  
concentrate on - after all, why are the DC area digis repeating the  
same station 100+ times in an hour during routine operations?  Maybe  
even a "penalty box" system that causes a station to not be repeated  
at all for X hours if it grossly violates the rules (with perhaps a  
message sent to it - viewable even on Findu for dumb tracker users -  
explaining that it's been blocked and where to find out why).

There's ways to reduce the "reward" for stepping on everyone else.

That all said, one thing I *do* think could help the problem of  
excessive transmissions is if Findu displayed, in big red letters,  
something like "POSSIBLE MISCONFIGURATION DETECTED - TOO FREQUENT  
TRANSMISSION OF POSITION PACKETS POSSIBLY IMPAIRING NETWORK" with a  
note about "best amateur practice" and a link to information about  
correct settings.  Maybe mapping on the internet needs not be an  
enemy of APRS.