[aprssig] Stealth digis

[Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)]

ID requirements in the US provide for a CW ID.  There is no actual 
requirement to put the transmitters callsign inside the AX.25 packets.

And the only way you can determine if a digipeater or IGate is properly 
IDing is to go there and monitor the RF to see which ID they may be 
providing.

Of course, that said, it's far easier to just put out a periodic beacon 
AND insert your call in the path of every transmitted packet to be 100% 
sure that the 10 minute ID requirement is being fully met.

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

On 11/5/2014 11:59 AM, David Andrzejewski wrote:
> I would wonder if it's legal for digis to do neither? Wouldn't they 
> have to do one or the other to satisfy ID requirements? (In the US at 
> least)
>
> - Dave/KD8TWG
>
> On Nov 5, 2014, at 11:24, Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) 
> <ldeffenb at homeside.to <mailto:ldeffenb at homeside.to>> wrote:
>
>> They definitely should (IMHO) insert their call if they digipeat 
>> something.  And without a posit beacon (even if they choose to do 
>> ambiguity), there's no way to do any path analysis of their 
>> participation in the network.
>>
>> But then, I guess it falls under the "to each his own" category.
>>
>> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32
>>
>> On 11/5/2014 11:12 AM, Andrew P. wrote:
>>> Is there a reason to have stealth (non-beaconing) digipeaters? There 
>>> are some folks in my area who want to hide their digis from the 
>>> general public (supposedly to keep excess traffic off those digis). 
>>> But, if those digis support WIDEn-N aliases, they should still 
>>> digipeat general traffic in their range, and no one will know who is 
>>> doing it (unless those digis add a trace entry of themselves to the 
>>> path).
>>>
>>> So what would be the point? One digi beacon every 30 minutes 
>>> wouldn't clog the channel. And, unless those digis explicitly didn't 
>>> support standard aliases (WIDEn-N or the obsolete RELAY and WIDE), 
>>> they would still digi general traffic (not just the owner's traffic).
>>>
>>> Just can't figure out why someone would want a stealth digi.
>>>
>>> Andrew, KA2DDO
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aprssig mailing list
>>> aprssig at tapr.org
>>> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aprssig mailing list
>> aprssig at tapr.org <mailto:aprssig at tapr.org>
>> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20141105/ec01c20c/attachment.html>