[aprssig] Q: Fine point on Paths

[Steve Noskowicz]

 Robert Bruninga  wrote:
> The WIDEn-N algorithm only looks at the ending "N" ...

   Sorry, but I'm not talking about the N decrementing algorithm at all.  I am specifically focused ONLY on the "n' and most specifically the last "n".   OR perhaps all    n's.

SHORT: What is the TRUE purpose of "n".



Long:
   WHAT do we / you / others / whomever want it / them to indicate?  If anything...

   I, perhaps foolishly, thought that the 'n' (since it doesn't change) lets us know Further down stream) that this *was* a 1-hop path.

   If is is valid to use  "WIDE1-1,WIDE2-1" and that is a TWO hop, it appears to me that THAT last "n" is telling me (and the rest of the world that the OM originally set things up for a 2-hop.
   Yhat being the case; "WIDE1-1,WIDE3-2" is the more better correctliness way of doing a 3-hop.

--
73, Steve, K9DCI



> prior systems using WIDE, RELAY, TRACE, SS and soforth.
> 
> > The...(not highly recommended) path WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2
> > Should actually be  WIDE1-1,WIDE3-2   [change
> "2" > "3"]
> > So that the world knows you initially specified a 3
> hop.
> > Is this a valid observation, or do I still need 
> > to change my smokes?
> 
> True, in a perfect fully traceable N-network then a path of
> WIDE1-1,WIDE3-2 would arrive as
> DIGI1,WIDE1,DIGI2,DIGI3,WIDE3*
> showing a 3 hop path...   BUT, because it will be forever
> before
> all digis are converted from non-traceable "N"
> digis to fully
> traceable New-N "S" digis, then the path that
> arrives as
> DIGI1,WIDE1,DIGI2,DIGI3,WIDE3* could just as easily be
> someone
> using W1-1,W3-3 which is actually FOUR hops.
> 
> Personally, I would never want to appear to be using one
> more
> hop then I am actually using.
> 
> Thus I use WIDE1-1,WIDE2-1 and assume every one can add the
> two
> digi fields together and know I am using only 2 hops.
> 
> Bob