| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 02.10.03 10:16l 261 Lines 10257 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2055-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Sep 29, 11/12
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0SON<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0GOS<ON0AR<ON0AR<VK6HGR<
VK3AVE<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 031001/1418Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:9455 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2055-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@cedar.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 20:14:37 -0500
X-Message-Number: 57
At 08:40 PM 9/29/2003 -0400, Bob Bruninga wrote:
>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Dave VanHorn wrote:
>
>>>digipeater and path issues.... It's time to fix it and move on.
>>
>>Wasn't Mike Musick going to do something palm based along these lines?
>>I'd have a tough time siting a PC at my digi, but a palm pilot would be no
>>trouble at all.
>
>What a waste of a perfectly good palm PC...
>
>Bob
It's way smaller than even my smallest PC, which is about the size of a VHS
tape. It's also way cheaper, as they can be had for <$50, new or close
enough. It also draws nearly no power, at least as compared to the same
micro PC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: "Spider" <spider@rivcom.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:45:26 -0700
X-Message-Number: 58
From: "Bob Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
To: "TAPR APRS Special Interest Group" <aprssig@lists.tapr.org>
Cc: "TAPR APRS Special Interest Group" <aprssig@lists.tapr.org>
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 5:22 PM
Subject: [aprssig] Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
>We need to be speciifc. ALl kantronics with callsign substitution ROMS
>do do it on WIDE. THe only WIDE's that dont get substituted are ANY TNC
>that is using MYALIAS as WIDE (except for Paccom NEW roms). We need to
>obsolete those digis. be they old KPC-3 roms, TAPR TNC's or whatever...
>
>BOb
Bob, How come 4 land has the brunt of the...(never mind).
My KPC 3+ manual states;
"If you assign the same call sign to UIDIGI and MYALIAS, a to-be-digipeated
frame with that call sign will be digipeated according to the rules that
apply to UIDIGI."
Another thought...... (flame suit's coolant is activated)
I think DIGI's should only run ONE (1) of the three common 'names' (being
RELAY or WIDE or TRACE).
In other words, in your local network, if you are going to be a WIDE, then
be a WIDE and do not be a RELAY. If you are a RELAY, then you are not a
WIDE, so don't be one. Define them. Use them to take advantage of
coverage!
Now with that thinking, you think that might reduce the copies of packet
flying around if a guy was set to RELAY,WIDE,TRACE? Comments?
Jim, WA6OFT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: LANS and ALOHA range...
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:47:46 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 59
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N...
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY*,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/0
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,W4GPS-7*,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,W4GPS-7,WIDE*,WIDE/1:!3440.31N
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG*,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,WIDE*,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY,W4SBO-7*,WIDE/1:!3440.31
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4GPS-7*,WIDE/1:!3440.3
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY,W4SBO-7,W4GPS-7*/1:!3440
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4SBO-7,W4GPS-7*/1:!344
>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4GPS-7,WIDE*/1:!3440.3
Lets analyze this some more.. besides shutting down all the non-callsign
substituting RELAYS...
I zoomed in on Huntsville and I see you have a great LAN with plenty of
mobile activity..
In that area, I see 3 digis W4GPS-7, K4GIG-7 and KE4ROC-7. One of the
main contributors to the problem above (WC4ADG) is not even a digi? It
does not appear anywhere on FINDU...
The ALOHA circle on FINDU shows about a 32 mile radius, but a large number
of them are mobiles and not always on the air. Lets say it is 50 miles
including a few more outlying stations. Still they should all be able to
communicate using a 2 hop path.
Now, it can be argued that 20 of those are mobiles and they are not all on
the air at the same time except commuting..... BUT, how many of them will
be on the air in an EMERGENCY or special event? All of them? That is
when APRS must work, and reliably, so that is what you design for...
WHen I say reliably, that means that I can MESSAGE QSO with anyone in my
LAN using APRSdos (or any program that fully supports decaying algorithm
and REPLY-ACKS) about as fast as I can type. That is, on average, about a
line every 10 to 20 seconds. (some programs only send a line a minute
adding minutes of latgency to every line when there are collisions.)
etc... That's the way APRS is supposed to work under stress. If your
program or LAN is not working that way...
There is a LOT to fix. Its time to do it...
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:50:50 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 60
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Dave VanHorn wrote:
>>What a waste of a perfectly good palm PC...
>
>It's way smaller than even my smallest PC, which is about the size of a
>VHS tape. It's also way cheaper, as they can be had for <$50, new or
>close enough. It also draws nearly no power, at least as compared to the
>same micro PC.
AH, thanks. I thought they were much more than that. thanks
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: Dave VanHorn <dvanhorn@cedar.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:02:38 -0500
X-Message-Number: 61
>AH, thanks. I thought they were much more than that. thanks
>Bob
They certainly can be.. My IIIc still sells for $300 new, exactly what I
paid for it two+ years ago. Last christmas, I got four of them at Goodwill
for $30 each. Made great gifts!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: James Smith <k9apr@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:41:29 -0500
X-Message-Number: 62
Actually you can get a nice used Palm IIIc with a full 1 yr warranty for
$140..... :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Take Control of your DIGI part 4
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@home.miller.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:46:28 -0700
X-Message-Number: 63
And if you don't mind one with a cracked screen or other such problems,
they're free. I've collected 3 or 4 lately, a couple of them in good shape.
Not sure if it's the best solution, but they'll give you a good
price/performance ratio. As long as you can deal with integrating them and
dealing with their power management.
Still, I'd rather have a cheap single-board computer that I could telnet
into...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Digipeater Duplicate Checking is broke
From: "Tim Cunningham" <tim_cunningham@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:50:55 -0500
X-Message-Number: 64
>>>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4SBO-7,W4GPS-7*/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000
WX Station
>>>KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4GPS-7,WIDE*/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX
Station
>>>
>>That's exactly as expected. Kantronics does not do dupe elminination
>>on WIDE packets. It's a problem with their implementation.
>
>We need to be speciifc. ALl kantronics with callsign substitution ROMS
>do do it on WIDE. THe only WIDE's that dont get substituted are ANY TNC
>that is using MYALIAS as WIDE (except for Paccom NEW roms). We need to
>obsolete those digis. be they old KPC-3 roms, TAPR TNC's or whatever...
>
>BOb
I changed the topic from "Take Control of your DIGI part 4" to "Digipeater
Duplicate Checking is broke" since that is the real topic.
Callsign substitution works as advertised. It is the dupe checking that is
broken when digipeaters employ callsign substitution.
Bob, you cut out the whole packet snippet. The Kantronics acted on both
RELAY and WIDE in the real example in lines 2 and 11 without callsign
substitution in either case.
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY*,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,W4GPS-7*,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,W4GPS-7,WIDE*,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG*,WIDE,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,WIDE*,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY,W4SBO-7*,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX
StationKE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4GPS-7*,WIDE/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000
WX Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,RELAY,W4SBO-7,W4GPS-7*/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX
Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4SBO-7,W4GPS-7*/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX
Station
KE4ROC-9>BEACON,WC4ADG,W4GPS-7,WIDE*/1:!3440.31N/08633.13W_Remote U2000 WX
Station
What I hear you say is that we need to obsolete these old digi's with
firmware that do not support callsign substitution. I can agree with
the obsolescing part. The bigger problem is the dupe checking.
Let's focus on the real problem.
1. Can you agree that packet dupe checking is broken from the above
example?
2. Both UIDIGI and Kantronics fail to dupe check altered packets caused by
callsign substitution. Can you agree with this statement?
If the answer is yes to both of the above questions, then we are in
agreement so far. The data really supports that dupe checking is broken.
Now, with this in mind, you are advocating that we employ callsign
substitution. This is not a problem in itself. The problem is the havoc it
creates in a local and a distant network since dupe checking is broken when
dealing with packet paths that have been altered by callsign substitution.
In fact, we now know it is broken.
Removing callsign substitution at this point based on the reality of what
we know about dupe checking improves the problem caused by callsign
substitution. Can you agree with this statement?
When the digi firmware is upgraded to support dupe checking on the payload
of a packet, then I think it is wise to implement callsign substitution. We
have had it implemented on our network, but it only amplifies that dupe
checking is not working in a big way with UIDIGI and Kantronics.
Tim - N8DEU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
