| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 02.10.03 10:14l 285 Lines 9523 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2049-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Sep 29, 5/12
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0BI<DB0NOS<DB0EA<DB0RES<ON0BEL<
7M3TJZ<SP7MGD<ZL2TZE<VK3KAY<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 031001/1351Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:9449 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2049-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Packet Path on TH-D7 suggestions
From: Brian Frobisher <froby@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:13:36 -0700
X-Message-Number: 20
What might be a good path to use on my Kenwood TH-D7 for APRS?
I am in the city of Los Angeles.
Right now I have it set to WIDE2-2
Thanks
Brian
WA6JFK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Packet Path on TH-D7 suggestions
From: WA8LMF2@aol.com
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:29:47 EDT
X-Message-Number: 21
In a message dated 9/29/2003 12:21:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
froby@earthlink.net writes:
>What might be a good path to use on my Kenwood TH-D7 for APRS?
>
> I am in the city of Los Angeles.
>
> Right now I have it set to WIDE2-2
>
> Thanks
>
> Brian
>
> WA6JFK
Leave it as it is. Currently the Southern Cal digipeater network totally
ignores RELAY and plain WIDE.
Stephen H. Smith wa8lmf (at) aol.com
Home Page: http://wa8lmf.com
Ham Radio/Mobile SSTV page: http://members.aol.com/wa8lmf/ham
APRS Stuff
http://members.aol.com/wa8lmf/aprs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@cedar.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 14:41:13 -0500
X-Message-Number: 22
>My proposal would be the following:
>
>1. Eliminate callsign substitution immediately. It causes more
> duplication than any good until digi firmware and FindU can
> recognize the duplication.
THANK YOU!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: aprsca.net down?
From: "Dick Stanich" <dick@kb7zva.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 14:41:50
X-Message-Number: 23
On 09/29/03, ""Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org>" wrote:
>I just checked my Xastir display and saw a bunch of interface errors - I
>can't seem to connect to aprsca.net and it doesn't respond to pings. Is the
>system down?
>
>Scott
>N1VG
Yes it is. Phil should be back sometime later today or tomorrow. You might
try aprswest.net, since it has almost the same port assignments.
Dick, KB7ZVA
APRSWest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: wes@johnston.net
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:17:56 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 24
Not arguing about if kantronics tncs use the path in their dupe checking (I
really don't know if they do or don't).... but why in the world should
*anything* in the path matter for dupes? It really sounds simple.... keep
a checksum of the payload portion of the packet in memory for XX seconds.
Weigh every packet you may digipeat against that array of checksums.
Doesn't that solve the dupes problem?
Did kantronics miss the boat on this one?
Wes
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 14:41:13 -0500, Dave VanHorn wrote:>
>
>>
>>My proposal would be the following:
>>
>>1. Eliminate callsign substitution immediately. It causes more
>> duplication than any good until digi firmware and FindU can
>> recognize the duplication.
>
>THANK YOU!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: "Tim Cunningham" <tim_cunningham@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:31:39 -0500
X-Message-Number: 25
UIDIGI also misses the boat on this one. The dupe checking on the
network also misses the boat on this one. Your suggestion of weighing
only the payload is a great idea! Unfortunately, we have to live with
the hardware we have now (reality) until it can be updated or completely
verified.
Tim -N8DEU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 3
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:08:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 26
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Tim Cunningham wrote:
>Here are some examples of no callsign substitution along with NOID
>WIDEn-N digis:
>
>K4GIG-7>S4TT9V,RELAY,WIDE2-2/1:'rDFog#k/]"61}
>K4GIG-7>S4TT9V,RELAY*,WIDE2-2/1:'rDFog#k/]"61}
>K4GIG-7>S4TT9V,RELAY*,WIDE2-2/1:'rDFog#k/]"61}
>K4GIG-7>S4TT9V,RELAY*,WIDE2-1/1:'rDFog#k/]"61}
>K4GIG-7>S4TT9V,RELAY*,WIDE2-1/1:'rDFog#k/]"61}
AH, but these are meaningless in the present network.
1) We must get rid of the non-callsign substituting digis
2) THis shows how useless WIDEn-N is to network analysis becasuse without
the actual path taken, ALL packets look the same and look like dupes
when in fact, they are probably heard from different digis which is
actually proper operation.
3) If this user cut his path to RELAY,WIDE then callsign substitution
would eliminate all dupes at each digi, and everyone could see what digis
are sending out there copies..
That is what I am trying to accomplish with the new paradigm...
>NN4S>APP194,RELAY,WIDE3-3/1:>311619zVisor Prism/Magellan GPS
Companion/KPC-3/DR-13050w into 1/4 wave whip[AI4CW]
>NN4S>APP194,RELAY*,WIDE3-3/1:>311619zVisor Prism/Magellan GPS
Companion/KPC-3/DR-13050w into 1/4 wave whip[AI4CW]
>NN4S>APP194,RELAY*,WIDE3-2/1:>311619zVisor Prism/Magellan GPS
Companion/KPC-3/DR-13050w into 1/4 wave whip[AI4CW]
>
>Wow! Compare the above examples with the initial example of
>RELAY,WIDE,WIDE with callsign substitution and you see a major
>reduction in traffic by the same packet taking the same path .
>
>
>Below are more examples of callsign substitution issues causing
>too much data duplication on the local network:
>
>K4DOH>CQ,RELAY,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,RELAY*,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,WC4ADG*,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,WC4ADG*,WIDE2-1/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,WC4ADG*,WIDE2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,RELAY,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,RELAY*,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,W4GPS-7*,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,RELAY*,WIDE2-1/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
>K4DOH>CQ,WC4ADG*,WIDE2-2/1:>TinyTrakII v1.00
All meaningless without knowing how many digis your station hears. A 3 hop
packet as above WILL in a perfect network with NO dupes still generate 21
to 36 copies. ALl you are seeing above is some of those copies (but we
still need to get rid of the non-substituting digis!
>My point is that WIDEn-N is not the problem. We have other bigger
>problems wasting bandwidth on the APRS network.
Completely wrong thinking..
>1. Do we need callsign substitution?
YES! It is the ONLY fully successful dupe elimination algorithm that works
ALL the time on the short packets of RELAY,WIDE and WIDE,WIDE that we must
be using.
> I think it causes more duplication than anything because the
> present day digis do not handle duplicate packets when the
> path has been altered by another digipeater.
Nope, it causes no problem if we just set the network up the way it was
designed and stop trying to flood each packet to the surrounding 21 to 36
digipeaters! RELAY,WIDE and WIDE,WIDE will do just fine. WHere it
doesn't put up an IGate. or use WIDEn-N and let it go as far as the local
sysops allow it...
k
de WB4APR, BOb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:15:34 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 27
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Dave VanHorn wrote:
>>My proposal would be the following:
>>
>>1. Eliminate callsign substitution immediately. It causes more
>> duplication than any good until digi firmware and FindU can
>> recognize the duplication.
Totally missunderstood thinking. CALLSIGN SUBSTITUTION is 100% as
effective at assuring that a path like RELAY,WIDE will never be
duplicated by any digi as does WIDE2-2. But it has MANY advantages.
1) the path is fully traced on EVERY packet
2) The source of entry into the netork is always identified.
3) You can SEE what digipeaters digipeated the packet
4) It will work EVERYWHERE...
THANK YOU! >
Your welcome.
Lets get back to back to basics, get rid of all the local SYSOP hacks
that have ruined the system. and it will work as designed. And it can
continue to sustain growth just like the cellular phone system. WE MUST
MAKE OUR LOCAL LAN accomodate only the reliable traffic it can
handle at 1200 baud.
Get the DX out of your LAN. There aint no other solution!!! Its a 1200
baud channell for local use...
Draw your ALOHA circle of your 50 nearest neighbors, set your paths to hit
them an no further, and bingo. APRS works...
Keep violateing the laws of physics and we get nowhere...
de WB4APR@amsat.org, Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:18:09 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 28
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Tim Cunningham wrote:
>UIDIGI also misses the boat on this one. The dupe checking on the
>network also misses the boat on this one. Your suggestion of weighing
>only the payload is a great idea! Unfortunately, we have to live with
>the hardware we have now (reality) until it can be updated or completely
>verified.
Nope, it works perfectly. Callsign substitution assures that no packet
will be digipeated TWICE by the same digi. It is just as effective as
WIDE2-2. Any other copies of a packet that people see are just more
copies, not dupes...
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
