[aprssig] are write-only APRS-IS clients valid?

[Dave Torrey]

I see that now.  And in #3, it should have been "have filters *that
provide less than a full feed*".  It's too bad the name "filters" was
applied to the concept, instead of "subscriptions".  The latter seems
more intuitive to the implementation.

Thanks,
Dave
KD8GBH

On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 14:58 -0600, Pete Loveall AE5PL Lists wrote:
> You are basically correct except for #2, if I understand your statement.  Your follow-up statement is correct (recently heard list trumps filters).  Server-side filters are -additive-.  So you will always have #1 and server-side filters directly upstream from you will only add to #1, not take away.  This is a very common configuration where people want to see all "local" packets both on RF and directly injected into APRS-IS.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Pete Loveall AE5PL
> pete at ae5pl dot net
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Torrey
> > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 2:41 PM
> > 
> > 1) If I add no filters, I should be receiving appropriate messages to gate to RF,
> > according to stations I have recently gated to IS.
> > 
> > 2) If I add filters (say, geographic), that could cause loss of some messages
> > that should come back through me.
> > 
> > 3) If the server or servers in the chain to which I subscribe have filters (I
> > would hope they don't, but for the sake of argument...), that would have a
> > similar effect to #2.
> > 
> > In regards #2, I might like to have some filtering enabled for other reasons,
> > but would hope the recently-heard list trumps (by including such packets)
> > any filters I set up.
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>