| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 28.10.03 20:28l 218 Lines 9009 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2225-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Oct 26, 4/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0MRW<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<
ZL3VML
Sent: 031028/1251Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:11459 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2225-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: 48V Powerpoles?
From: "Doug Younker" <dougy@ruraltel.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 16:57:10 -0500
X-Message-Number: 33
I'm no engineer, but my guess is that those who are in charge of designing
automotive electrical systems will determine how high a voltage can be
employed with out appreciably altering the current auto manufacturing
process, from that point the decision may be arbitrary. In the event the
lead acid battery remains the norm ,2V per cell would be kept in mind, but
is it written a battery has to contain an equal number of cells?--73
Doug, N0LKK
dougy@ruraltel.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: San Diego firestorm
From: "Spider" <spider@rivcom.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 18:16:56 -0700
X-Message-Number: 24
From: "Mark Fellhauer" <sparkfel@qwest.net>
To: "TAPR APRS Special Interest Group" <aprssig@lists.tapr.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 2:31 PM
Subject: [aprssig] San Diego firestorm
>Anyone got any good scanner frequenices to listen to? I'm stuck at home
>'cause I-15 is closed...
>
>VHF APRS doen't work in my valley/neighborhood - I-15 Pala Road exit...
>
>Mark
>KC7BXS
Sorry to hear that! FireNet is showing a bunch of MODIS Earth Observations
around your area. Looks like some bad fires! I understand President Bush
is reviewing the request to declare a national disaster and should be
announced within the next few hours.
Jim, WA6OFT
FIRENET.US PORT 2023
http://www.dwrracesupport.com/fire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: The real problem.
From: Mark Earle <wa2mct@mearle.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 19:36:16 -0600
X-Message-Number: 25
>> awesome efforts, are not what it's all about. We heap lots of work on
>> findu and things like it but there's no substitute for putting a lot of
>> this sort of stuff at the local levels and basing it on monitored RF
>> traffic.
>
>Out of curiosity how are igates and findu (I'm assuming aprsworld.net is
>lumped into this generalization as well) failing at that they are supposed to
>be doing? Or are you implying that they are not nescessary or useful?
>
>Please elaborate.
>
>-Jim KB0THN
While I agree that RF is whre it is at.. for the local / emergency stuff,
having the internet as a backup or secondary can be very helpful.
One non-emergency we use APRS for is a bike rallye from Houston to Austin.
We cover it on RF, the command posts at both ends can see where strategic
vehicles (ambulances, sag wagon, water truck, etc) are at any moment, on
laptops with LCD projectors. We do this totally on RF.
BUT, if one of the two intervening digis were to fail, we can still display
the posits with FindU or other pages. Plus, folks not in the command post,
but with an interest in the rallye progess, can use their internet broweser
to get a feel for what is going on.
So having both systems expands the value of it (APRS) quite a bit.
) ) de WA2MCT Mark
( (
) ) You will be assimilated... oooh, coffee!!
_|****| http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?wa2mct-8 Home
( | | http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?wa2mct-9 Mobile
`|____| wa2mct@mearle.com wa2mct@juno.com www.mearle.com/mark
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Whoa, wait a minute [was: A Low-Tech APRSteward Proposal]
From: Mark Earle <wa2mct@mearle.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 19:32:46 -0600
X-Message-Number: 26
Snipping some.. I agree, Kenwood radios have a much lower penetration rate
around here (Houston, Austin, and D/FW). And, it irritates me when we must
do something or not do something, because of a limit of that product.
>>Yes, all X,000 of them... And since it is the only fully integrated APRS
There is also an Alinco as I recall, not "fully" integrated, as it does not
display the tnc / posit stuff, but it does have a tnc and is used by some
as their primary radio/ tnc for APRS
><rant>
>Ah, so it's official then.
>
>APRS is no longer a ham radio project - but a marketing device for Kenwood
>products.
>
>Let's formalize the 'evolution' and just call it KRAPS then. Yes, that'd
>be the "Kenwood Radio Ametuer Purchasing System".
></rant>
) ) de WA2MCT Mark
( (
) ) You will be assimilated... oooh, coffee!!
_|****| http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?wa2mct-8 Home
( | | http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?wa2mct-9 Mobile
`|____| wa2mct@mearle.com wa2mct@juno.com www.mearle.com/mark
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: A Low-Tech APRSteward Proposal [was: SMART digi paths]
From: "Gregg G. Wonderly" <gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 19:57:01 -0600
X-Message-Number: 27
>This
>proposal addresses the #1 question that APRS newcomers have: "What's the best
>path to use?". When they ask it "on SIG", the answer becomes: "Power up and
>lurk for 1-hour, then read your BLN's".
When I am mobile I am only going to be within range of that digi for 10-15
minutes, max, on most highways.
What is needed is a way to force the TNC path to the appropriate value.
The OpenTrac project provides wide open space for new packets and new
design. It would be great if the software in the first out the door
opentrac'er had this built in. It would use the users provided protocol
initially, but take the path of any digi that it heard its own packets
from. The path packet would include two components (at least). It would
have the suggested path, and an area that this path was applicable too. At
the borders of the area, the tracker would revert to the users path if it
stopped receiving digipeats, or pick up the path of another digi. The
range of the applicable area could provide opportunity for abuse, but with
Bob's AO-40 idea, an area that covered half the earth would have meaning!
-----
gregg@cytetech.com (Cyte Technologies Inc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: A Low-Tech APRSteward Proposal [was: SMART digi paths]
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@3xf.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 18:22:22 -0800
X-Message-Number: 28
Ideally, OpenTrac should introduce its own routing capabilities outside of
the AX.25 fields. Jeroen Vreeken's been working on that, and has proposed a
set of routing elements that'd at least match the capabilities of the (less
than ideal) current system. That's more for passing data on transports
besides AX.25 than adding new capabilities.
For now, though, it's certainly useful to be able to use the existing
digipeater infrastructure. But having a suggested path broadcast only works
if you've got a receive-capable tracker. Which I'm hoping to do, but not in
the first version. Also, you introduce the possibility of a denial of
service - someone could broadcast false routing info and keep you from
getting digipeated at all.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: A Low-Tech APRSteward Proposal [was: SMART digi paths]
From: "Gregg G. Wonderly" <gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 20:52:52 -0600
X-Message-Number: 29
>Ideally, OpenTrac should introduce its own routing capabilities outside of
>the AX.25 fields. Jeroen Vreeken's been working on that, and has proposed a
>set of routing elements that'd at least match the capabilities of the (less
>than ideal) current system. That's more for passing data on transports
>besides AX.25 than adding new capabilities.
>
>For now, though, it's certainly useful to be able to use the existing
>digipeater infrastructure. But having a suggested path broadcast only works
>if you've got a receive-capable tracker. Which I'm hoping to do, but not in
>the first version. Also, you introduce the possibility of a denial of
>service - someone could broadcast false routing info and keep you from
>getting digipeated at all.
Yes, and I recognize this as another control feature :-) You could
actually direct packets that are creating problems in the network to
/dev/null. I think its time to have some people live up to the
responsibilities that our licensing dictates. If people want to be
destructive, that can happen. The Opentracker could also provide a switch
to disable auto configured paths for the paranoid to use. But, I think
that we are getting to the point in network use that the digipeater system
must be in control of the transmitters in the network, or we'll never be
able to adequately control the network use.
The cell phone system does power control from the towers for exactly this
reason. The tower can constrict its coverage area until it is no long
receiving service requests for more bandwidth than it can provide. We need
to head in this direction...
-----
gregg@cytetech.com (Cyte Technologies Inc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
