[aprssig] Rotate.aprs.net technical question (Was: APRS IS Issue ?)

dick at kb7zva.com dick at kb7zva.com
Mon Mar 3 12:27:41 EST 2008

> So, my question: How many core servers must be operational to handle 
> the current number of connections (not CWOP load), today, of the APRS 
> core?  Do we have that?

Tier 2 sees about 1500 end-users connects without the CWOP's. There are
about 500 hams using the Core for direct connects bypassing the lowel-level.
So, if 3 Core servers are handling 500 hams... in theory we would need an
additional 9 Core servers for a total of 12 Core servers, just for hams.

No, we don't have that because when you add more Core servers, you change
the complexity on how things work. Each Core unit has to be inter-connected
to each other. The more you add, the less stable the Core becomes because
of this built-in complexity. 

Distribution of end-users to lower-level servers allows us to preserve the Core
as a hub for all APRS-IS activity.

Was it a good idea to allow the CWOP's (around 4000 of them) to connect
directly to the Core? No. It only proved how fragile things could become.

Yes, the CWOP's should have their own network off the APRS-IS. That would
be a temporary fix for all hams in the short term. The future of the APRS-IS
depends on common sense, planning, and a distributed system that will
preserve the Core from further abuse.

Dick, KB7ZVA
APRSWest - Tier 2

More information about the aprssig mailing list