<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">One IGate delivering packets to port
14580 does not affect any other IGate's connection nor the ability
for other IGates to receive messages directed to any received
station. The APRS-IS is not "smart". A message addressed to a
specific station is delivered to ALL IGates that have recently
gated packets from the addressed station.<br>
<br>
Changing the port to which received packets are delivered has
absolutely no effect on "fixing" anything.<br>
<br>
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and
Win32<br>
<br>
On 11/19/2016 10:09 PM, Jim Alles wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABS3LnLXbM_FVjteKwHrF7Uu7g=2y2=JOgHoZcyuk2525uuH=w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">Please,
follow the logic of this argument to the end.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><span
style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">"If
the only Igate in an area is RX only, that definitely breaks
the system."</span><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">I
am picking on this statement, not the person who made it,
because it has been echoed so many times.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">And
it is wrong. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">Every
variation, it is the wrong battle.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">It
isn't that they are receive only. The real problem is, we
RX-only IGate
operators-who-gave-up-on-messaging-because-it-was-broken are
sending our received traffic to the *wrong port* on the
APRS-IS servers. We have had little choice, because no client
software available (AFAIK) has the functionality coded to send
to the APRS-IS server UDP port 8080 when appropriate (1). </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">The
IGate client software(s) would be much improved with the
ability to route either to either a restricted feed port (TCP
14580), with messaging support, or the unidirectional port;
dynamically as determined by local operating conditions. No
packet left behind (tm ;-).</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">Think
about it. To me, it seems practical, backwards-compatible,
doesn't concern the servers, and I think there are a couple or
three developers out there right now that are in a position to
- and might be interested in - improving things.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">(1)
It was actually Mr. Finnegan who just made me aware that such
a port existed, on another forum. My gratitude to you,
Kenneth!</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">73,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif">Jim
(you can call me grandpa) Alles</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 3:57 PM,
Kenneth Finnegan <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:kennethfinnegan2007@gmail.com"
target="_blank">kennethfinnegan2007@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">This "Rx-only Igates are breaking APRS"
rhetoric is problematic; I've had several of my users tell
me that they used to operate Rx-only I-gates with scanners
or old mobile rigs with blown PAs, until they saw
something online telling them that Rx-only I-gates are an
active harm to the APRS network, at which point they do
what seems like the sensible thing and dismantle their
I-gate and e-waste the radio. Did we really mean to tell
them that no I-gate is better than an Rx-gate? Having read
most of the "Rx-only I-gates are evil" posts, even I can't
tell if that's what some of the original authors meant or
not.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We've been doing a very poor job of effectively
communicating the advantages and disadvantages of
Rx-only I-gates to the public, and they're getting very
confused because of it.</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="m_-4249308924887237804gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">--<br>
Kenneth Finnegan<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://blog.thelifeofkenneth.com/"
target="_blank">http://blog.thelifeofkenneth.<wbr>com/</a></div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:32
PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:steve@dimse.com" target="_blank">steve@dimse.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span><br>
> On Nov 19, 2016, at 9:18 AM, Randy Love
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rlove31@gmail.com"
target="_blank">rlove31@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Why don't you start by going around to
every every RX only IGate operator and
convincing them that they it is wrong to not
have a two-way IGate? If the only Igate in an
area is RX only, that definately breaks the
system.<br>
><br>
</span>This is the perfect example of why having a
central authority is not workable.<br>
<br>
Having a one way IGate as the only one one in an
area is only bad for one reason, which is that
someone who might be willing to set up a two way
IGate does not do it because he thinks there
already is one. But this does not break the
system. Local operators need to coordinate their
IGates, not have standards enforced from a
venerated few.<br>
<br>
There are legit reasons to have one way IGates.
Chief among them is that a US IGate operator is
putting his license and/or financial well-being on
the line. I converted my IGate to one way on the
day Dale Heatherington released the verification
algorithm in aprsd. From that day forward the Part
97 exemption for safe haven is an automatic
message forwarding system no longer applied. The
risk of action is relatively low, but definitely
non-zero.<br>
<br>
I think it is self-evident that having a one-way
IGate is better than having none. If you are
trying to force out one way IGates, you are saying
your opinion is more important than others. I have
fought long and hard for the APRS Internet System
to be an inclusive place. If some hams only feel
comfortable one-way gating, they can still play.<br>
<div class="m_-4249308924887237804HOEnZb">
<div class="m_-4249308924887237804h5"><br>
Steve K4HG<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
aprssig mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org"
target="_blank">aprssig@tapr.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.tapr.org/mailman/li<wbr>stinfo/aprssig</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
aprssig mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.tapr.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/aprssig</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</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>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>