<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I have asked this question several
times and the answer is always the same. Digipeaters are not
supposed to delay their digipeated packet, but ARE supposed to
wait for a clear channel. So they're "semi-polite" as it were.
From <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.choisser.com/packet/part03.html">http://www.choisser.com/packet/part03.html</a> (a definition of
DWAIT):<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><tt><b>DWAIT</b></tt>: Used to avoid
collisions, <tt><b>DWAIT</b></tt> is the number of time units
the
TNC will wait after last hearing data on the channel before it
transmits.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
So a DWAIT of zero will not stomp on other packets, but will jump
in as soon as they "last heard data on the channel". Not really
monopolizing in my book, just being aggressive with getting their
data on the air. As long as the digi's other packets are not too
long, too frequent, or too numerous, I wouldn't see a need to
modify the DWAIT by packet type.<br>
<br>
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and
Win32<br>
<br>
On 5/11/2016 9:44 AM, spam8mybrain via aprssig wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:864iwl9dlfj5b4gxh6oh28ye.1462974148477@email.android.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
I was re-reading some of the old postings about digipeating, where
they state that digipeaters (only) should be "impolite" and use a
DWAIT of zero to avoid channel clutter. This would seem to imply
that no station can be a digipeater and something else (weather
station, etc.) unless the full functionality is built into the
TNC, because there is no way for an external application to tell a
KISS TNC on a packet-by-packet basis which packets are DWAIT 0 and
which are to have normal competition for airtime. Either the digi
would be "polite" and cause additional airwaves clutter, or the
non-digi functionality would be "impolite" and dominate the
channel.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So, do any of the "soft" TNCs (AGWPE, DireWolf, etc.) have
the ability to specify priority (DWAIT=0) transmission on a
per-packet basis? How does this jive with the proposed sat-gate
mode?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm curious because I'm doing some research on an idea for
improved digipeating, and it requires using an external program
with a KISS TNC. As such, I'd like to be able to selectively
decide whether my station is "polite" or "impolite" on a
per-packet basis (assuming impoliteness is still preferred
digipeater behavior).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Any feedback would be welcome.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Andrew Pavlin, 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>