| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 29.10.06 05:37l 285 Lines 10513 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 8911-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: [APRSSIG] Vol 28 #20, 2/2
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0PM<OE5XBL<OE6XPE<IW2OHX<IW2OHX<I0TVL<ON0AR<ZL2BAU
Sent: 061029/0424Z @:ZL2BAU.#87.NZL.OC #:11936 [Waimate] $:8911-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL2BAU.#87.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:29:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William McKeehan" <mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net>
Subject: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
Over the past couple of years, APRS activity in my area has grown
dramatically. As more stations come on the air, the operators are tempted
to setup digi's and IGates.
I don't think most of them really understand most APRS fundamentals. You'll
hear them say things like "Isn't that great, I can see stations from 600
miles away" and you will see paths like:
RELAY,WIDE3-3
RELAY,WIDE,WIDE2-2 (this is on several stations - one "expert" sharing
his knowledge to others)
In an area approximately 60x60 miles, we have about 11 digi's and IGates
(some stations are both, some only one or the other). Two of these digi's
are high level digi's, one is nearly 3000 HAAT. Some guys are talking about
putting up yet another digi right in the center of this area (<1000 ASL, so
basically 0 HAAT in this area).
I know that we are not in a good position now and adding more digi's is a
bad idea, but I do not know how to convey this to some of these users. I
want to discourage any new digi's in the area and suggest that some turn
off their digi's/IGates.
Are there any guidelines (beyond common sense) to setting up digi's
published anywhere on the web that I could point people to as something to
back me up? or am I wrong and more digi's are OK?
Looking for the right words to guide people in the right direction.
--
William McKeehan
KI4HDU
Internet: mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net
http://mckeehan.homeip.net
Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:19:02 -0500
From: "Patrick Green" <pagreen_at_gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
Seeing as I visited Knoxville, TN several times, I've made the following
observations:
1. The Cove Mountain digi should be the only Wn-N
2. Everyone in the valley should be fill-ins.
I've been able to hit Cove Mountain from Lenoir City to Bean station on an
HT. Also it reaches London, KY in a single hop, and probably other digis
in other directions of a similar distance.
This is my opinion only. I don't live in the area so things may have
changed drastically since I've been there.
73 de Pat --- KA9SCF.
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:47:45 -0700
From: "Ron Cluster" <rcluster_at_comcast.net>
Subject: RE: [aprssig] iGate software
Jim (no callsign given) wrote:
>My first venture into this area has been with UI-View and, whilst being good
>when it's connected, is poor at recovering from internet link dropouts.
>As far as I can tell (and from my experiences last week), UI-View gives up
>if the connection to the server is lost for any period of time
>(minutes). It tries to reconnect once, then gives up if it can't.
This is absolutely incorrect. I have watched UI-View continue to try and
connect to an IS server every 30 seconds for over 2 hours during an internet
outage. (OK, I didn't sit and watch it the whole time, but it was still
trying 2 hours later when the internet connection was restored and it then
re-connected immediately).
It all depends on what choices you make in the setup screens. Take the time
to read the built-in help screens in UI-View. It's all there.....
73.....Ron.....AC7TK
(-9 Mobile, -7 hiking (D7),
-2 Wx, -1 Work....Sheesh)
UI-View32 iGate, Wx & WIDE1 digi
Eugene, OR
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 06:07:46 -0500
From: Jason Winningham <jdw_at_eng.uah.edu>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
I've been speculating to myself that maybe we don't have enough digis. If
we got the existing digis down to a reasonable HAAT, thereby reducing the
cell size, and added more digis we might get both better coverage and
better control of the traffic. 3000' HAAT may be great for a voice
repeater, but I suspect it isn't all that great for a digital network node.
Maybe the high-site digis should be set so that they don't repeat a packet
unless it isn't repeated by someone else in a reasonable time, thereby
leaving the high-site digis to do fill-in and backup work.
I don't have any data to support this, but I wouldn't mind seeing some
numbers or simulations or tests to convince me one way or the other.
Random thought before my caffeine takes effect...
-Jason
kg4wsv
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:04:17 -0600
From: Joel Maslak <jmaslak-aprs_at_antelope.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
On Oct 20, 2006, at 5:07 AM, Jason Winningham wrote:
>I've been speculating to myself that maybe we don't have enough
>digis. If we got the existing digis down to a reasonable HAAT,
>thereby reducing the cell size, and added more digis we might get
>both better coverage and better control of the traffic. 3000' HAAT
>may be great for a voice repeater, but I suspect it isn't all that
>great for a digital network node.
There's no problem with it for a digital network node. The problem is if
there are too many stations using it at once. As you get one that is
higher, more and more stations can use it.
What's the current channel loading, for instance?
In Wyoming, we use several very high digis (3000' HAAT isn't unusual but
more the rule). No problem - we have a lightly loaded network. Why not
support wide-area communication if loading is low?
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:07:35 -0500
From: Gregg Wonderly <gregg_at_wonderly.org>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
Jason Winningham wrote:
>I've been speculating to myself that maybe we don't have enough digis.
>If we got the existing digis down to a reasonable HAAT, thereby
>reducing the cell size, and added more digis we might get both better
>coverage and better control of the traffic. 3000' HAAT may be great for
>a voice repeater, but I suspect it isn't all that great for a digital
>network node.
If the digis are all configured with dwait=0 and other appropriate settings
so that they all digi, immediately and in unison, more digis, in general,
are a good thing. Without proper configuration, more digis might just
result in a continuous follow the leader, continuous QRMing of the area.
Gregg Wonderly
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:21:41 -0500
From: Jason Winningham <jdw_at_eng.uah.edu>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
On Oct 20, 2006, at 9:04 AM, Joel Maslak wrote:
>What's the current channel loading, for instance?
Of course that's an important question, but the message that kicked off
this thread talked about the large volume of traffic.
>In Wyoming, we use several very high digis (3000' HAAT isn't
>unusual but more the rule). No problem - we have a lightly loaded
>network. Why not support wide-area communication if loading is low?
There's no reason not to, but realize that most of us don't operate in such
an area.
For a comparison, Wyoming was talking about launching cell sites on high
altitude balloons, so that two or three such cells could cover the state.
North Alabama isn't all that highly populated compared to some places, but
I'd guess it is a lot closer to average than Wyoming, and our cell towers
are around 50' to 75' (and there are a lot more than three).
-Jason
kg4wsv
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 08:37:18 -0600
From: Joel Maslak <jmaslak-aprs_at_antelope.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
On Oct 20, 2006, at 8:21 AM, Jason Winningham wrote:
>For a comparison, Wyoming was talking about launching cell sites on
>high altitude balloons, so that two or three such cells could cover
>the state. North Alabama isn't all that highly populated compared
>to some places, but I'd guess it is a lot closer to average than
>Wyoming, and our cell towers are around 50' to 75' (and there are a
>lot more than three).
Actually that would be North Dakota talking about that. Because of the
mountains, even a high balloon would have many shadows in Wyoming, making
the idea less than ideal. The eastern (flat) side already has fairly good
cell coverage because of major highways in it. :)
That said, Wyoming State Government is the largest state user of satellite
telephones. Really high cell sites. :)
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:53:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William McKeehan" <mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Too many digi's ?
That may be a good idea if we had a large number of users, but with the
digi's and home stations and mobile stations, there are only about 30
stations, so we are far from saturated. I personally think 2 high level
digi's would cover the area well and provide minimal overlap (one
North-West, the other South-East of the center of this 60x60 square); a
couple of fill-in digi's (one South-West, the other North-East) would fill
out the area nicely. This would provide 2 cells, pretty close to each
other. The way it is now, there are 8 cells with major overlap, so each
packet get's digi'd multiple times, even if it uses a single hop path.
On Fri, October 20, 2006 7:07 am, Jason Winningham wrote:
>I've been speculating to myself that maybe we don't have enough
>digis. If we got the existing digis down to a reasonable HAAT,
>thereby reducing the cell size, and added more digis we might get
>both better coverage and better control of the traffic. 3000' HAAT
>may be great for a voice repeater, but I suspect it isn't all that
>great for a digital network node.
>
>Maybe the high-site digis should be set so that they don't repeat a
>packet unless it isn't repeated by someone else in a reasonable time,
>thereby leaving the high-site digis to do fill-in and backup work.
>
>I don't have any data to support this, but I wouldn't mind seeing
>some numbers or simulations or tests to convince me one way or the
>other.
>
>Random thought before my caffeine takes effect...
>
>-Jason
>kg4wsv
--
William McKeehan
KI4HDU
Internet: mckeehan_at_mckeehan.homeip.net
http://mckeehan.homeip.net
Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
------------------------------
aprssig mailing list
aprssig_at_lists.tapr.org
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
End of aprssig Digest, Vol 28, Issue 20
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
