| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 06.03.04 13:10l 223 Lines 9293 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 2961-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Mar 04, 3/14
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0BEL<ZL2TZE<N1UAN<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 040306/1016Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:20449 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:2961-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: RE: stir up the path pot!
From: Mark Earle <wa2mct@mearle.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 12:08:31 -0600
X-Message-Number: 18
Sometimes, the goal of the user is not to get to the IS or a gateway, but
to have the posit reports seen over a wide area via rf only.
I generally have more of a need for my packets to be displayed on rf than
over the internet. Not everyone's goals are to get to the IS.
) ) 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: stir up the path pot!
From: "Christensen, Eric" <CHRISTENSENE@MAIL.ECU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:10:43 -0500
X-Message-Number: 19
Actually... Thinking about it, this would only ENCOURAGE users to use
larger paths. If they aren't getting into one I-Gate, then they are going
to increase the path to get into another one. That is why we need to either
knock these packets out at the digi or on the IS.
YES, I acknowledge that some areas CAN support larger paths, but if those
packets are getting into other areas that cannot support added weight of
"outside" packets then you are causing harm to the network. I'm sorry that
you can't get into an I-Gate without using WIDE7-7 or 6-6 or 5-5... You
need to find someone that can support putting up an I-Gate. I-Gates are
like digipeaters, they are part of the overall infrastructure and should be
planned out. If you want to be seen for many hundreds of miles, I suggest
you use a sat or HF and not use such paths on the network.
-----Original Message-----
From: Spider [mailto:spider@rivcom.net]
I am pretty sure UI-VIEW32 has this feature...look under NOGATE in the
igate.ini file help.
Jim, WA6OFT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: stir up the path pot!
From: "Christensen, Eric" <CHRISTENSENE@MAIL.ECU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:34:12 -0500
X-Message-Number: 20
Then use HF or Satellites... But with large paths you are doing nothing but
causing harm to a network you cannot even hear. APRS was DESIGNED for local
or regional tactical use and was never designed for long distances
(relatively speaking). You cannot think of your path as linear (going in
straight lines away from your position) but you have to think that ever digi
that repeats your packet will then begin another series of packets that end
up causing multiple packets coming to many areas. Duplicate protection
works on some digipeaters, but if I remember correctly the Kantronics modems
do not do dup suppression very well. This is a problem in itself.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Earle [mailto:wa2mct@mearle.com]
Sometimes, the goal of the user is not to get to the IS or a gateway, but
to have the posit reports seen over a wide area via rf only.
I generally have more of a need for my packets to be displayed on rf than
over the internet. Not everyone's goals are to get to the IS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Destination Addresses for Wx Stations and Digipeaters
From: "Christensen, Eric" <CHRISTENSENE@MAIL.ECU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:42:10 -0500
X-Message-Number: 21
I was looking at http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs/tocalls.txt which
lists the destination addresses for all things APRS. I see that APN3xx for
KPC-3 digipeaters. What should the xx be? Can they be blank? Also, what
should be used for stand-alone weather stations that use KPC-3 modems?
Thanks,
Eric KF4OTN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: stir up the path pot!
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 13:46:30 -0500
X-Message-Number: 22
>>>"Christensen, Eric" said about the WIDE7-7 path:
>
>We. need. to intercept the packets on the IS and filter
>them OUT!
Hummh... interesting concept.
I always object strongly to any on-air filtering or policing, because we
just cannot tell what that person's immediate needs are at any instant in
time. Such filtering ruins the integrity of the network if it makes
arbitrary decisions like this.
BUT!!! we have to penalize the long term use of such paths somehow if we
expect them to ever learn... and change...
Eric's suggestion to Filter them from the APRS-IS is something worth
considering...
If we penalize them from getting to the APRS Global Internet system because
of long paths, then we are not "interfering" with their immediate RF
communicaitons needs, but we are offering a penalty... That is the only
way to get these people to learn...
Would this work?
1) All IGATE clients DEFAULT to not accepting any packet with a path
length greater than WIDE2-2.
2) Local IGate SYSOP can determine based on TRAFFIC, and local topology
whether 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, or even 7-7 are permissible in his area.
Then again, where 5-5 can be used, then it can be used. But where it is
intolerable, the IGate filters it out. It puts the IGate sysops in control
of stuff in their areas, and because of the penalty, the end user learns
why he is not getting in.
And its all a LOCAL thing, solving LOCAL problems Locally...
Am I missing something?
de WB4APR, Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: stir up the path pot!
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:57:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Message-Number: 23
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>Would this work?
>
>1) All IGATE clients DEFAULT to not accepting any packet
> with a path length greater than WIDE2-2.
>2) Local IGate SYSOP can determine based on TRAFFIC,
> and local topology whether 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, or even 7-7 are
> permissible in his area.
>
>Then again, where 5-5 can be used, then it can be used.
>But where it is intolerable, the IGate filters it out. It puts
>the IGate sysops in control of stuff in their areas, and because
>of the penalty, the end user learns why he is not getting in.
>
>And its all a LOCAL thing, solving LOCAL problems
>Locally...
So WIDE2-2 filtering at the IGATE would be default, but the igate sysop
could change it? I'd suggest changing the default to WIDE3-3.
As long as the IGATE sysop could change it from the default, I like the
idea. If it was hard-coded, then people in rural areas without much
infrastructure would suffer terribly.
--
Curt, WE7U archer at eskimo dot com
Arlington, WA, USA http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: stir up the path pot!
From: "Christensen, Eric" <CHRISTENSENE@MAIL.ECU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:07:57 -0500
X-Message-Number: 24
After reflecting...
This would solve the problem for some, but not for all... The words "Not
everyone's goals are to get to the IS" keeps running through my head.
Steve's 7-7 guy wasn't looking at getting into the IS... Just to be seen in
Phoenix from... well, everywhere he was. How many networks did this guy
throw packets into that can barely hold their own? Hard to say... I'm sure
he was seen in the northern Midwest and in NYC... Not knowing the local
network topography of other areas, it is hard to say what was happening and
how many people were "denied service" of their local networks due to the
degradation of the system. Kind of like me pinging a friend of mine on
802.11b the other day... almost brought him to his knees...
We need to somehow implement a multi-layer network with destination
addresses... That way a packet will go in, and will be relayed over a
preset area (the region) and maybe have that digipeater also acting as an
I-Gate and improving the network that much more. I know that the I-Gate
thing is not available in all areas but would be an interesting push. But
at least this would keep the packets to a reasonable level in the
over-crowded areas.
If a digipeater was actively monitoring the network and knew that there were
three other digipeaters within 50 miles of it and knew that it could hear
them directly, then a packet coming in would be relayed directly to these
digipeaters but not by using WIDEx-X but using the callsigns of those
digipeaters. It could use a multi-hop situation and the original digipeater
would know exactly where these other digipeaters were because it was already
calculating their distances and their headings. Hmmm... That would
actually prevent dups from other digis hearing the packets and repeating
them because the other digipeaters wouldn't act on a packet that wasn't
addressed to them. This would, however, add to the level of packets due to
the multiple addressed packets from the original digipeater. It could be
less in the long run, though.
Just thinking aloud...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
