[aprssig] So long.... APRS-IS officially has lost 1/2 it's servers.
Scott Miller
scott at opentrac.org
Sun Mar 2 01:36:28 EST 2008
Ok, I'll admit I tuned out a lot of the Tier2 / Core / CWOP pissing
match, so maybe someone can help condense for me why this is such a big
deal. Yes, I understand that the 5-minute timer thing for CWOP is a bad
design, but it sounds like there's been more trash talk than real
attempts to resolve the problem through open communication.
As for the horrendous system requirements for the core - WHY? I measure
an average throughput of about 30 kbps for the whole stream. Yes, 256
connections would fill up most of a 10 mbps pipe, but why the enormous
processing power requirements? Sure, you've got to do some parsing and
calculation for filters, plus dupe checking, but my trackers do a
respectable job of that using 8-bit processors at 7.3 MHz with no
floating point. Processing a full IS stream ought to take about 10 to
100 times as much CPU power, but a modern desktop is at least 10,000
times faster. Certainly for a logging database there's some serious I/O
overhead, but I've logged the full IS stream to Oracle Spatial on a
modest single-disc machine.
And why the protestations about Tier2? It seems like the most logical
architecture to me. Offload the filter processing and end-user
bandwidth to a bunch of distributed machines, and let the core handle
server-to-server connections. Consolidating everything into a small
group of servers smacks of empire building, and we've just seen that it
can't be relied on.
I don't mean this as a personal statement about anyone. I know a number
of people have contributed considerable time and resources to the
endeavor and I don't mean to belittle that. But maybe it's time to take
another look at both the architecture and the software, and to talk
about a more democratic organization for the operation of the network
and coordination of its activities. Maybe DCC would be a good venue for
this - thankfully it seems to be much less prone to flame wars and name
calling than the APRS SIG.
Just my 2 cents...
Scott
N1VG
Dave Anderson KG4YZY wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Some of you may have noticed that last night the core of the APRS-IS
> network lost ½ of its servers. I can only apologize to those of who
> this impacted.
>
>
>
> My goal was not to create service interruption. A month ago I advised
> everyone publically and privately that I was exiting the APRS-IS network
> as a core system operator on the last day of February. Unfortunately
> it appears no one else is willing to put up with the nonsense, as no
> other servers have come online to fill the void my servers Ieave. I
> can’t say I blame anyone either, it’s a thankless job that takes a lot
> of abuse. Let me highlight a few of the reasons I left for those of
> you who may not have read my first message. I’ll make this one much
> shorter and to the point.
>
>
>
> Last year, the tier2 group of sysops sent a letter to the citizen
> weather observer program managers that they were withdrawing support
> from the program. That part is of no question, many of us have copies
> of this letter. The core sysop’s jumped up and decided to help this
> program out. The fact that the tier2 guys apparently retracted their
> withdrawal, unfortunately, was never passed on to us from the CWOP
> management.
>
>
>
> So when we realized that three core servers could not do the job, I went
> out and bought a brand new Dell dual CPU eight core server to take over
> the role of fourth. I then sent what was the old fourth box to my co-lo
> in Dallas to become third. That was supposed to be a temporary band aid
> until another system operator could be found to take it over. I didn’t
> –want- to be responsible for ½ of the APRS-IS core traffic. No one was
> ever found with the means or capacity to run a core the size of third,
> so I was stuck footing the bill for running ½ the core of the APRS-IS
> network. My goal in participating in APRS-IS was the betterment of the
> hobby. Any of you who know me should know I’m not afraid to spend some
> money to do that. So life went on.
>
>
>
> At the end of this past year we started having stability problems with
> the server software we run. Memory problems, lock ups, etc. After
> months of diagnosis and countless software builds in an attempt to find
> the cause, it was finally determined it was the NON ham CWOP weather
> stations causing the problem. Over 2500 of them, using their computers
> clock, were sending in weather reports in a swarm on the 5’s of the
> clock. Anyone who works on software can tell you that this was a poor
> design. The CWOP management refused to press hard on the developer of
> this flawed and damaging piece of software to fix the problem. They
> were more afraid the developer would quit supporting the CWOP program.
> They clearly didn’t care how much damage it was doing to the APRS-IS
> network. For that matter, the one CWOP manager made it clear that if
> non hams had to reduce polling rates that hams had to as well. Excuse
> me? Non hams are a guest on our network, not the other way around.
>
>
>
> Well any of you can read the forums archives from January to see what
> happened there. After it was all said and done, the decision to move
> CWOP of the APRS-IS network was made, and several servers were setup
> just for this purpose.
>
>
>
> I posted my disgust with things and the fact I was tired of being the
> punching bag for every time something went wrong, so I announced here
> and in many other forums that I was exiting the APRS-IS network as a
> core system operator. My month long advanced notice expired last
> night, so third and fourth are no longer online.
>
>
>
> It needs to be understood that CWOP non-hams are still causing problems
> with the APRS-IS network. I have observed on the 5’s as much as 4-7%
> packet loss still. These guys are willingly causing damage to our
> network and clearly do not care one way or the other what damage this
> affects. A new set of non-ham servers has been setup, but until
> the draconian measure of filtering non authenticated logins from passing
> data (what CWOP users are), this damage will continue to be an issue as
> the non hams will never be forced to make the move off of our network.
>
>
>
> /Had this step been taken, I probably would have left fourth online, but
> since it has not been taken, I have no option but to walk away 100%./
>
>
>
> I would advise all of you to continue to put pressure to bear to get
> CWOP off of the APRS-IS network.
>
>
>
> CWOP stations represent only 1/8 of the stations heard on APRS-IS, but
> take ¼ of the bandwidth!
>
>
>
> The CWOP management clearly does not care what damage is done to the
> APRS-IS network, and has made it clear they view hams as more of the
> problem here.
>
>
>
> At any rate, as noted, my apologies for any difficulties that my exiting
> the core servers has caused, but one can only be backstabbed and kicked
> so many times before one backs away.
>
>
>
>
>
> 73,
>
>
>
> Dave
>
> KG4YZY
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
More information about the aprssig
mailing list