[aprssig] Universal Messaging (and new qAP feedback?)

Pete Loveall AE5PL Lists hamlists at ametx.com
Wed Oct 29 22:11:16 EDT 2008

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Bruninga
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [aprssig] Universal Messaging (and new qAP feedback?)
> Please explain how adding a new "qAX" will break anything?
> Adding a new definition should not break any old definitions
> should it?  OK, Maybe make it a "qGX" if you don't like the
> "qAX" idea.  Its only a label.

Please re-read my previous post where I explained how your mangling of the q construct breaks the algorithm and therefore APRS-IS.  Bottom line: the q construct is NOT "only a label".  It is an integral part of the q algorithm implemented years ago to reduce and/or eliminate most of the looping that occurs on APRS-IS.  It accomplishes this and should never be thought of as "only a label".

Bob, your reply was nonsensical.  It totally ignored everything I stated in my post and it simply restated your lack of understanding of what an IGate is and how it fits in the APRS network.


Pete Loveall AE5PL
pete at ae5pl dot net

More information about the aprssig mailing list