<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>I am a bit confused now. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">My station NEWBRY is both a high-profile digipeater and a two-way igate. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">I am currently using the T& symbol, because it transmits IS packets with a WIDE2-1 path. And that's what symbols-new.txt says to use. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Is that correct, or should I use I# as Kenneth's notes state?</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">It seems like perhaps I# would be better, because although that doesn't indicate that it's a two-way igate, it does indicate that it is both a digipeater and igate, which T& does not. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">- Dave<br><br><div><div><br></div></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">-- <br><br>David Andrzejewski<br>E-mail/iMessage/Jabber: <a dir="ltr" href="mailto:david@davidandrzejewski.com" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="link" x-apple-data-detectors-result="1">david@davidandrzejewski.com</a><br>PGP Key ID: 5EBA8A72<br></span><span style="font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"></span><br style="font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"></div></div><div><br>On Oct 18, 2016, at 17:37, Frank Knobbe <<a href="mailto:k4fhk@knobbe.us">k4fhk@knobbe.us</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 23:21 -0700, Kenneth Finnegan wrote:</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>My suggestion for a suggested set of Digipeater overlays for us to</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>promote to users is as follows:</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span></span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> /# - Generic WIDEn-N digipeater</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> 1# - WIDE1-1/direct-only digipeater</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> A# - Alternate input (i.e. 144.990MHz) digipeater</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> I# - I-gate equipped digipeater</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> S# - SSn-N local net alias digipeater</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span> X# - eXperimental digipeater</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>Would it make sense to reserve a symbol, say C#, for cross-band digi?</span><br><span>One that digis' VHF onto UHF? (The other direction may not be</span><br><span>desirable).</span><br><span></span><br><span>Cheers,</span><br><span>Frank</span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>PS: On the viscous digi thread, I personally see it more of a mode of</span><br><span>operation. I think with any symbol, one should focus on the primary</span><br><span>reason/task for the device. For example, my TX Igate is a standard Igate</span><br><span>symbol with T overlay, but it also viscously digipeats anything our high</span><br><span>digis didn't catch (like a fill-in-as-needed digi...lol). But, it's</span><br><span>primarily a TX Igate, so I chose that symbol.</span><br><span></span><br><span>Since the viscous digi is primarily a direct-only digipeater, I think a</span><br><span>1# would be more appropriate. The fact that the direct-only digi is also</span><br><span>viscous seems secondary, at least to me.</span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>aprssig mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>