[aprssig] Why Not "Gate in Vicinity"

[Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)]

On 12/26/2011 1:18 PM, Lawrence LaBranche wrote:
>
> Maybe a subscription based model with rules might be the answer. A 
> reverse igate would be subscribed to rules that would be decided on as 
> a group, and automatically updated in the clients.

As you can tell by the periodic "proper path" and "allowed beacon rage" 
discussions that rage here periodically, there is no "one size fits all" 
for those APRS parameters.  What is reasonable and proper for one area 
may be way too much or decidedly not enough for other areas.  There is 
no central committee for APRS that would work planet-wide AFAIK.

Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32

PS.  And having been a long-term observer of APRS rates and coverage 
areas, I'll stop another suggestion before it comes up.  I have seen no 
way to determine channel loading nor coverage area in an automated 
fashion.  RF conditions are just too variable and the packet origination 
load is a complete unknown.