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

[Georg Lukas]

* Bob Bruninga  <bruninga at usna.edu> [2011-12-26 20:35]:
> Agree.  That is why I proposed the new keyword PGATE.  This is a way
> that a Phone APP can signal its desire to be gated locally.  And it is
> a target that new IGate software can begin to recognize as such a
> request..

I still can not see where PGATE would be added into the packet/path, and
how it would improve the situation over having APRS-IS clients as-is.

> > Since it is impossible to reasonably differentiate 
> > between one type of Internet connected client and 
> > another and because you can't ensure proper client 
> > configuration, the idea of "gating to RF if in the
> > vicinity" leaves you open to numerous issues including
> > stations "spammng" the local RF.
> The PGATEn-N path gives us the differentiation. True, Spamming is a
> problem to be addressed.

You can misconfigure an RF client. You can misconfigure an IS client.
You can as well misconfigure a PGATEn-N client.

> Agreed.  But I'm taking the idea that a mobile Ham with a smart phone
> in an area should get equal access to the local ham channel as anyone
> else.

Now we are on the same wave length, be it a smartphone, a laptop or any
other IS station you can have with you.

> Hence the 1 minute direct, 2 minutes via one hop and 4 minutes
> via 2 hop restriction.

So we need to have limiting anyway. IMHO, the decision of how much
traffic to allow should be with the iGate operator, irregardless of what
the mobile IS user demands.

> Now I see Pete's concern. And it is Valid!  Anyone then can generate
> SPAM in Dallas from anywhere in the world by putting local objects all
> over the dallas map from the IS.  And that is Pete's point, that there
> is no way an IGate can smartly separate the spam from the legitimate
> Phone mobile.

The only way to separate that is by listening to the IS device's posits,
which can be faked, or by reqiring some RF user to "authenticate" the
traffic, like you suggested.

> I take the problem as a "challenge", since I think the goal of seeing
> a mobile PHONE in the area is a good capability to have.

Great! But how (and why) distinguish a phone from other IS devices?

> Phone traveler enters an area.  Sees local RF activity on his IS app.
> He sends a message to another MOBILE or HUMAN operator saying "CQ, I'm
> traveling through".  If the HUMAN responds to that message with a
> response, then that opens the PGATE for his posits for a while.

I see two problems with that, even though I like the general approach:

a) It's non-intuitive for "normal ham operators" when it works and when
it stops.

b) It invites people to game the system, by spamming messages just to
get gated.


Georg DO1GL
-- 
APRSdroid - Open Source APRS Client for Android ++ http://aprsdroid.org/m
     ++ https://market.android.com/details?id=org.aprsdroid.app ++
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20111226/e8125b1d/attachment.asc>