[aprssig] CQSRVR Concept (correction)

Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) ldeffenb at homeside.to
Fri Dec 30 09:30:24 EST 2011

On 12/30/2011 9:14 AM, Bob Bruninga wrote:
> 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.

If the IS-only mobile is that attentive, all s/he needs to do is make 
friends with the local IGate operator to have his -IS-only station's 
callsign-SSID gated to RF via the existing "gate this callsign" and 
assure the IGate operator that his APRS-IS client is suitably configured 
for such gating.

Single station -IS to RF IGating capability exists in most IGate 
software today.  I realize this doesn't work when out of the local area, 
but it sure would work in your normal stomping grounds.

I interpret most of the recent discussion as proving a way for the 
interested IGate operator to configure his/her IGate to provide 
RF-visibility to the unexpected -IS client that drives into or through 
an area to be seen in the local RF without prior knowledge of what 
callsign-SSID that might be.  I realize that the discussion started from 
the -IS side wanting to be seen on RF, but no matter what, the local 
IGate operator must either a) want to see the -IS stations on his own RF 
or b) be asked, cajoled, bribed, or otherwise persuaded to provide -IS 
to RF IGating in some form, be it the current specific-station gating or 
some future generically-configurable -IS to RF posit selectivity (range 
filtering, blacklisting, path setting, and/or rate limiting).

> 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.

Agreed.  I think the discussion has certainly demonstrated the desire 
for something better/easier, has identified some potential things to 
consider (rates / hops limits), has encouraged RF participation 
(frequency inclusion and/or requirement), has provided for some level of 
opt-out potential (I was unaware of !x! which might be better than my 
NORF), has provided for abuse avoidance (blacklisting/exclusion) and has 
definitely re-inforced that such decisions be made at the local level 
(IGate operator) and not driven from the (relatively uncontrolled and 
potentially RF-unaware) APRS-IS client side, and has definitely 
demonstrated that the interested APRS-IS-only operator can already 
participate in the local RF via APRS messaging (but please, send the 
messages to receptive stations and not to arbitrary digipeaters).

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

More information about the aprssig mailing list