[aprssig] Why Not "Gate in Vicinity" (phones)

Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) ldeffenb at homeside.to
Mon Dec 26 15:15:24 EST 2011

On 12/26/2011 2:52 PM, Bob Bruninga wrote:
> I think there is a misunderstanding.
>> APRS-IS has no concept of "path".  According to
>> http://www.aprs-is.net/Connecting.aspx
>> Packets originating from the client should only
>> have TCPIP* in the path, nothing more or less
>> (AE5PL-TS>APRS,TCPIP*:my packet).
> The PGATEn-N is not in the IS-to-RF packet.  It is a source path from the Phone APP which implements proportional pathing.  The local PGate sees that "PGATEn-N request" and then matches it with it's own settings and path to determine if this is a packet to be gated to RF.  Once that decision is made, on that one packet, then that packet is actually gated to RF following all existing rules.

There was no misunderstanding, both Pete and I knew that you were 
proposing something in the path of the packet on the APRS-IS, not 
necessarily on the RF.  But there is only one path component for an 
APRS-IS-originated packet and that was, is, (and must always be for 
backward compatibility) TCPIP* per the link I quoted above.

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

More information about the aprssig mailing list