[aprssig] CQSRVR Concept (correction)

Bob Bruninga bruninga at usna.edu
Fri Dec 30 09:14:34 EST 2011

I was too narrow in my comments on the CQSRVR concept for providing connectivity between IS-only and RF-only users when I said:

> Its like nuking the planet in case someone nearby also 
> has nuked the planet to see if they can hear each other locally.

Pete (and Steve) reminds me that he was suggesting local SUBGROUPS.  That is, everyone in BALTIMORE for example that wants to see Baltimore mobile IS-devices would subscribe to CQ BALTIMORE and any mobile IS-only device that intended to travel around Baltimore could also then join CQ BALTIMORE.

So, here is a NEW summary of EXISTING capability (without CQSRVR):

1) The IS-mobile can see everyone.  No problems there...
2) The IS-mobile can TEXT anyone he sees for live contact.
3) This TEXT msg already forces one (and only 1) RF posit (evry 30m)
4) All RF operators have some chance of seeing this one RF posit.

So the IS-only user can be seen (depending on the low reliability of that one RF position once every 30 minutes maybe.  And he can text...

So Now let's see how using the existing CQSRVR capability adds additional advantages:

5) Interested RF mobiles can subscribe to the LOCAL CQSRVR group if they want to get a TEXT each time a new IS-mobile wants to ID himself.

These are all good ideas (as Pete points out) because they all have to be initiated by someone, and cannot add SPAM by forgotten unattended left-on-forever apps.  But on the other hand, because they require multiple steps by both the initiator, and in the case of CQSRVR, the uninterested receiver, they probably will not get used.

I think that is why Steve said earlier, that the onus is on the IS-user to INITIATE a message to a local if he wants to be seen.  Then it all works OK now.  Maybe we should leave it at that.  

THE SYSTEM can WORK now.  It just requires effort by the human... and we all know there is plenty of room for MORE human involvement in APRS and ham radio in general.  

Few mobiles bother to QSO these days because it is too hard to find CTCSS codes.  APRS's new FREQUENCY/TONE system is supposed to help provide that info.  See:  http://aprs.org/localinfo.html

But I still want to explore methods of better incorporating the attentive IS-only mobile that at least has a voice radio in his car.


More information about the aprssig mailing list