<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">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.<br>
<br>
But then, I guess it falls under the "to each his own" category.<br>
<br>
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and
Win32<br>
<br>
On 11/5/2014 11:12 AM, Andrew P. wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:SNT404-EAS290392FAF52BDA80E885846B8870@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
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).
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Just can't figure out why someone would want a stealth digi.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Andrew, KA2DDO </div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>