| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 11.10.03 10:03l 413 Lines 14933 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2125-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Oct 08, 1/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OE5XBL<OE3XSR<OK0PCC<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<
ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 031010/1105Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:10118 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2125-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
TAPR APRS Special Interest Group Digest for Wednesday, October 08, 2003.
1. Re: Current DigiTravller Price ?
2. Re: Current DigiTravller Price ?
3. Re: interesting phenomena
4. Re: interesting phenomena
5. Re: Q-Construct..
6. RE: nc4cv path
7. Re: interesting phenomena
8. A multi-threaded solution
9. High Speed APRS
10. Re: interesting phenomena
11. Abusive User paths
12. Re: Abusive User paths
13. varying the coverage of a RELAY
14. WIDEN-N copies
15. Re: Abusive User paths
16. Re: varying the coverage of a RELAY
17. Re: High Speed APRS
18. Re: Abusive User paths
19. Re: Dwait Hacks kill APRS
20. TExt messaging to Sprint Phones
21. Radio Shack GPS to D700
22. Re: Radio Shack GPS to D700
23. Re: 9600 user data - Digi_Ned 3rd Party
24. TExt messaging to Sprint Phones
25. Re: TExt messaging to Sprint Phones
26. Re: varying the coverage of a RELAY
27. Re: Zip-LAN question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Current DigiTravller Price ?
From: WA8LMF2@aol.com
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 23:58:47 EDT
X-Message-Number: 1
In a message dated 10/7/2003 8:26:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
k4gps@bellsouth.net writes:
>What is the current DigiTravller price ? I found one locally for $31 but
>I swear I had heard they were lower than that.
They seemed to be going for 29.95 plus tax around here (Los Angeles).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Current DigiTravller Price ?
From: "KK4EMK" <kk4emk@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 00:16:33 -0400
X-Message-Number: 2
I picked up 2 for $29.97 each-- plus GA tax. I was able to get $5 taken
off one because it was missing the software!
Allen KK4EMK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: interesting phenomena
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 00:22:15 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 3
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Wes Johnston wrote:
>KC4PL and I were testing tonight.... we are both running kpc3 8.2 firmware
>on our home stations... his car is a d700 (obviously)
>
>MYA <off>
>UIDIGI RELAY,WIDE,SC,SMS
>UIFLOOD SC,28,NOID
>MXMIT ON
>
>His car transmitted and both his station and mine heard it.
> KC4PL-9>SSUY2S,RELAY,WIDE2-2: <<UI>>:'l9Zl!L>/]"4w}
>
>My station digipeated it.....
>KC4PL-9>SSUY2S,KD4RDB*,WIDE2-2: <<UI>>:'l9Zl!L>/]"4w}
>
>His home station digipeated the original packet...
>KC4PL-9>SSUY2S,KC4PL*,WIDE2-2: <<UI>>:'l9Zl!L>/]"4w}
This is normal. And is what I have been saying for 2 weeks now. Two
digipeaters heard the original packet and so that launched two packets.
Both of which will be handled by the network. But there are SEVERAL things
wrong with this test that should not occur in real life.
1) There should never be two WIDE DIGIS that close together.
2) In this case of RELAY, there should never be TWO RELAY's filling the
sam black hole. Remember, we must begin now to turn off all those HOME
RELAY digis that are just adding QRM to the network. The only statiosn
that should be RELAYS are the ones that are in black holes where a moble
cannot hit any other digs.
3) A mobile RARELY if hits two digis at the same time. A mobile should
never hit two RELAY's at the same time.
4) Both stations may not have DWAIT set to 0, so they both waited their
turn to digipeat instead of both digipeating it at the SAME time so that
no dupes were generated except in the opposite directions.
>Now, if dupe checking were working correctly, my station should have
>digipeated the packet one time. When his home station TXed a copy of it,
>my station should have realized that it had already digipeated that packet
>and NOT TX'ed again.... but it did.... why?
Because this is a MIX of Callsign substitution and WIDEn-N flooding.
Like I said, it should not normally happen in a properly set up network.
but there are LOTS and LOTS of impropperly set up networks.
>I have a feeling that UIDIGI listing SC is NOT getting packets included in
>the do not digipeat for x seconds. However, If his car TX's with a path of
>simply WIDE2-2, then we loose the functionality of the NOID substituting
>itself for the first callsign in the path.
That is why I keep saying that people have to start thinking in the new
APRS paradigm! Set up your LANn-N using the UITRACE parameter. Then you
can use SC3-3 and FLOOD to every digi in the SCn-N LAN and there will be
NO dupes yet the path will do callsign substitution of the digis.
NOTICE, however SEVERAL features of using ULTRACE for your LANn-N.
1) It is full path tracing.
2) LAN3-3 will hit as many as 10 to 36 digipeaters depending on how many
digis each of your digis hears.
3) But the AVERAGE PATH length is 2 hops or less. THus the slight
overhead of the pacekt arriving as DIGI1,DIGI2,LAN3-1 is not significant
compared to the value to the network.
4) LAN2-2 will hit from 4 to 9 digis with the average path of
DIGI1,LAN2-1
>>How can we win here? > > Wes
Adopt the new paradigm properly:
1) Get rid of unnecessary RELAY's
2) Use callsign substituting DIGIS at all RELAY and WIDE digis
3) Make sure your network supports RELAY nd WIDE everywhere
4) use the universal local paths of RELAY,WIDE for m obiles
5) adopt any TWO of the 3 new n-N systems (WIDEn-N,LINKn-N and LANn-N)
6) get ussers to use the new universal paths...
etc..
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: interesting phenomena
From: "Bill Vodall WA7NWP" <wa7nwp@jnos.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 21:22:28 -0700
X-Message-Number: 4
Pardon my raving, but this is yet another example of why we have to quit
using obsolete technology to deal with modern situations:
>Now, if dupe checking were working correctly, my station should have
>digipeated the packet one time. When his home station TXed a copy of it,
>my station should have realized that it had already digipeated that packet
>and NOT TX'ed again.... but it did.... why?
>
>I have a feeling that UIDIGI listing SC is NOT getting packets included in
>the do not digipeat for x seconds. However, If his car TX's with a path of
>simply WIDE2-2, then we loose the functionality of the NOID substituting
>itself for the first callsign in the path.
>
>How can we win here?
Digi_ned or even better software.
And from the next message:
>His path is RELAY,RELAY,WIDE,WIDE
>.... and he's killing us here in central SC.
Yet another situation that could be better dealt with using better tools.
73,
Bill - WA7NWP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Q-Construct..
From: KC7ZRU <kc7zru@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 22:27:35 -0600
X-Message-Number: 5
Ah, but you see - a "Google Cache" is not the same thing as 'Googleing' for
information and hoping to find it elsewhere. A Google Cache is a copy of
the origional. In this case, not a different site with similar info you
asked for - but a copy of the specific info you asked for.
Google actually makes a 'mirror' of everything it comes across - on their
own servers (more or less). It's kind of like an online backup to the
origional sites. So, if a page you want to view - in this case
http://www.aprs-is.net/q.htm - is for some reason, "not available", you can
still view the most recent 'mirror' of it anyway.
That's what the link I gave you takes you to. An exact copy of the 'Q'
construct information page from the aprs-is.net site - but on a different
server.
Look at the two sites, compare them - you'll see what I mean.
http://www.aprs-is.net/q.htm
and
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:4tiRa1y30HwJ:www.aprs-is.net/q.htm+&hl=en&=
ieUTF-8
73
Robbie wrote:
>I should have been more specific I guess.. I did google for "other"
>sites, since www.aprs-is.net was "down", :-)
>
>Thanks, Robbie
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: nc4cv path
From: "Rick Tilton" <n4wyk@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 05:34:06 -0400
X-Message-Number: 6
he system itself is pretty cool. Just need to get a
Linux distro installed on the Compactflash card. I've been using a 16 meg
card, but Costco has larger cards cheap - I'll probably go with a 128 or 256
just to have room for compilation tools and such.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Dwait Hacks kill APRS
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:31:40 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 19
Those that believe that setting Dwait at the DIGIs to other than 0 or
hacking around with the UIDWAIT parameter in our APRS system are simply
dead wrong.
THe discussion to date only centered on its advantages in fratricide of
multiple dupes. But this discussion did not also mention the most
important aspect of these parameters even when there are NO dupes!
APRS is founded on flooding a packet outward to tiers of surrounding
digis. As has been shown, a 3 hop path can generate from 10 to 21 copies
of EVERY packet. WIth Dwait=0 and UIDWAIT OFF as is SUPPOSED to be, the
nominal propogation time for a 0ne-second packet will be 3 seconds.
But if local digi hacks have been messing with these parameters, so that
each digi tries to wait for the channel to clear before transmitting, then
the time period for ONE 3 hop packet to CLEAR the air can be from 10 to 21
seconds! With each person consuming that much air time, the local network
could only support about 3 users and 2 mobiles total!
Please, stop hacking your local digi, and get back to the original
settings at the digi. That is
1) DWAIT should be 0 (the default)
2) UIDWAIT should be OFF (the default)
3) The above two commands are the ONLY effect on digipeated UI packets in
Kantronics. But if you run any other FIRMWARE or ROM or software that
does not TRANSMIT IMMEDIATELY on a clear channel, then TURN THOSE OFF TOO.
The DIGI must transmit immediately (before any other users), and should
not use any process to avoid collision with other digis.
APRS was founded on the principle that packets are to radiate outward
efficiently from their source. And this includes all digis acting on the
same "hop" in a path to all digipeat at the SAME TIME. Sure, the carrier
detect from hidden transmitters makes this less than perfect, but it is by
far better than having every one of the 21 to 196 digipeaters all waiting
their turn to COPY the same packet.
de WB4APR, Bob
All Digipeaters in the APRS system that HEAR the same original packet are
all supposed to key up at the same time. This is supposed to
1) Kill any dupes by fratricide
2) Make all outward copies propogate at the same time so that the channel
clears quickly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: TExt messaging to Sprint Phones
From: Bob Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:17:32 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Number: 20
I see that receiving text messages are FREE on the Virgin Phones (prepaid
phones). Has anyone figured out how to send APRS (or any Ham radio
application) data to them?
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Radio Shack GPS to D700
From: "Sadowski, Allan" <allan.sadowski@ncshp.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 14:31:50 -0400
X-Message-Number: 21
Dumb Question... but anyone here know the correct pinout to the RadShack
GPS to the 2.5mm GPS input to the D700 ??? i.e. what conductor on the
6 conductor RJ11 goes to what part of the 2.5mm jack on the D700.
Any advice on soldering a CAT5 cable to that *^#&%^ tiny 2.5mm three
conductor jack that Kenwood in their infinite wisdom used as the GPS
input???
What a pain for a shakey handed old man with lousy eyesight... I'm going
to burn my nose for sure ... having to get my face so close to the part
to solder it.... I'll probably melt the blasted connector AND burn my
nose...
ALOHA
AH6LS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Radio Shack GPS to D700
From: Dale Blanchard <wa7ixk@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 11:56:59 -0700
X-Message-Number: 22
Sadowski, Allan wrote:
>Any advice on soldering a CAT5 cable to that *^#&%^ tiny 2.5mm three conductor
jack that Kenwood in their infinite wisdom used as the GPS input???
I buy the cheap cable with the molded on plug, cut them into and splice
to the other cable ot puut a fitting on that end. I am just going to
crimp the phone plug on the end on the 2.5 mm cable.
---------------------enheim] $:2130-ZL3AI
R:031010/1134Z @:ZL2BAU.#73.NZL.OC #:5165 [Blenheim] $:2130-ZL3AI
R:031010/1122Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:10124 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2130-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : HUMOUR@WW
Resumes
-------
Cover letter: "I am a quick leaner, dependable, and motivated."
Objective: "Seek challenges that test my mind and body, since the two are
usually inseperable."
Cover letter: "Here are my qualifications for you to overlook."
Experience: "Develop and recommend an annual operating expense fudget."
Education: "Graduated in the top 66 percent of my class."
Abilities: "Proven ability to track down and correct erors."
Abilities: "Am a perfectionist and rarely if if ever forget details."
Cover letter: "Thank you for your consideration. Hope to hear from you
shorty!"
Work experience: "Dealing with customers' conflicts that arouse."
Work history: "Performed brain wave tests, 1879-1981."
Generation Gap
--------------
Nancy Reagan tells the story of how President Ronald Reagan was once
challenged by a college student who said it was impossible for Reagan's
generation to understand his.
"You grew up in a different world," the student said. Today we have
television, jet planes, space travel, nuclear energy, computers..."
Taking advantage or a pause in the student's litany, Reagan said, "You're
right. We didn't have those things when we were young. We invented them."
English
-------
This Strange English Language.
We'll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes;
but the plural of ox became oxen not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice;
yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.
If the plural of man is always called men,
why shouldn't the plural of pan be called pen?
If I spoke of my foot and show you my feet,
and I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
why shouldn't the plural of booth be called beeth?
Then one may be that, and three would be those,
yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
and the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
but though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
but imagine the feminine, she, shis and shim.
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
