| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 16.04.04 16:43l 288 Lines 11008 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3147-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Apr 13, 1/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<OK0PKL<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<7M3TJZ<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<
ZL3VML
Sent: 040416/1153Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:22436 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3147-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
TAPR APRS Special Interest Group Digest for Tuesday, April 13, 2004.
1. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
2. VK aprs email server
3. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
4. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
5. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
6. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
7. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
8. Re:Mobile APRS messaging
9. Re: Mobile APRS messaging
10. Re: Mobile APRS messaging
11. Re:Mobile APRS messaging
12. Re:Mobile APRS messaging
13. Re: Mobile APRS messaging
14. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
15. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
16. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
17. Re:Mobile APRS messaging
18. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
19. CAP and APRS
20. Re: CAP and APRS
21. Re: CAP and APRS
22. Re:Mobile APRS messaging
23. Re: CAP and APRS
24. Re: CAP and APRS
25. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
26. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
27. Re: CAP and APRS
28. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
29. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
30. RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
31. Re: CAP and APRS
32. Re: CAP and APRS
33. Re: CAP and APRS
34. Re: CAP and APRS
35. Re: CAP and APRS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
From: "Phil Pacier, AD6NH" <ad6nh@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 0:12:20
X-Message-Number: 1
On 04/12/04, "Greg Noneman <greg@clubnet.net>" wrote:
>Connecting to message only or filtered ports of either core or tier 2
>servers does make sense for many, if not most, IGates.
Absolutely incorrect. I have personally contacted many of the aprsD IGate
operators as well as operators of other IGate software, and many of them
have no need or desire to stare at a map of the APRS data. These folks can
do no better than to connect to the 1314 message port. Those who do like
to view the data on maps (like myself) will benefit greatly by using the
filtered ports. You have this completely backwards, Greg. There is
little, if any reason for anyone to connect to a full feed port.
>However,
>multiple outbound connections, be it directly to core servers and/or to
>lower level servers, will ultimately result in unnecessary duplicate
>packets at the core.
Yes, this is true and has always been the case.
>The point of this thread is not to direct where
>stations make their connections, but rather to recommend that outbound
>connections be made in an educated and considerate manner.
In order for stations to make connections in an educated and considerate
manner, the server and port to which the connection will be made must be
considered. It is absolutely part of the topic and a subject which I think
is very important and will become much more important as the amount of data
on the APRS IS increases daily. We are long past the days of a single or
even three or four core servers being able to handle all the connections.
If you think that "connecting to message only or filtered feed ports does
not make sense for many, if not most IGates", then why do you offer such
ports on Second? In order for the Tiering concept to make sense, I think
it would be best for the core servers to not offer the filtered ports on
their servers, and the Tier 2 sysops should not offer full-feeds. We are
making strides in this direction already, and I think we will see that it
really works for the best.
73
Phil - AD6NH
http://www.aprsca.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: VK aprs email server
From: "John Williams" <vk5zty@bigpond.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:02:31 +1030
X-Message-Number: 2
For people wishing to send an aprs message to an email address there is
now a local (to VK) alternative.
For people using igates connected to aprs.net.au or second.aprs.net.au the
email server will be no more than 2 aprs network nodes away.
This email server has two modes. Single line and multi line.
Details:-
Destination address is VKMAIL.
Alternate destination address is V
Either will work. The latter being easier for D700s etc.
Email address is specified as - recip@host
Alternate email address is specified as - recip at host
An example single line email
recip@host(space)message text
For multiline emails the ! character is used as the first character in the
message text e.g
LINE 1 contains the email address and some message text
recip@host(space>)!message line 1
LINE2 to LINE n-1 contains the ! character as the first character in the
message.
LINE2
!next line 2
LINE3
!next line 3
To terminate the message, simply leave out the ! at the start of the message.
LAST LINE
end line.
The email message will then be sent.
Remember that aprs messages are restricted to 67 characters. Your aprs
client will probably allow you to go over that amount and the client will
separate the text into multiple aprs messages. In this case the email
server will do it's best to process what it currently has and either send
the email or respond with an error message.
For people using D700s etc while mobile (but not driving) or perhaps
sending a message via one of the digital satellites, there is a message
timeout set to 4 minutes for multi line emails. This timer is reset on
receipt of each valid aprs message. So for instance the server does not
receive the last line of your message it will send the lines received on
expiry of the 4 minute timer.
The email server was written primarily to provide locality of service and
to incorporate at some point a number of additional functions that would
be of local (to VK) interest only.
Regards
John
VK5ZTY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
From: "Dave Anderson" <dandersn@citicom.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 03:52:56 -0400
X-Message-Number: 3
>filtered ports. You have this completely backwards, Greg. There is
>little, if any reason for anyone to connect to a full feed port.
There are some reasons, Phil. Beit a database mining connection the APRS-IS
(findu/aprsworld/jfindu/etc), a user simply wanting to see world coverage
(there are who do for signal reports/beacons etc), or whatever. There are
always going to be users that want/need a full feed.
I'll be the first to admit that the majority of 10152/23 connects are
probably -not- needing full feeds, and a regional feed would suffice better
for them, but you can't force someone to subscribe to how you see they
should run their station. APRSCOP comes to mind there. We can educate the
folks out there using -any- server what their best options are and if they
decide to do otherwise, that is their prerogative.
>Yes, this is true and has always been the case.
And is the point of this thread. We are trying to identify the sources of
the duplicate packets, which represent more wasted wasted bandwidth than
if -everyone- picked up a full feed. All we can do is ask users and bring
it to their attention. Right now over 30% of the traffic I have received
in the past 24 hours is duplicate material. That's the issue of discussion
here. Nothing more.
>which I think
>is very important and will become much more important as the
>amount of data
>on the APRS IS increases daily.
Agreed, to a point, although there's more to your post than that.. More
below.
>it would be best for the core servers to not offer the
>filtered ports on
>their servers,
Hmm. Just previous you said:
"There is little, if any reason for anyone to connect to a full feed port."
Now if this is "true" and core servers didn't offer filtered feeds, then
what would we be left with? Oh, yeah, nothing.
Phil, let's keep this on track, the current discussion is about duplicate
packets, not killing the core.
Sorry to be a bit synical, but i'm here to provide a service to the
community, and I think that do that every day, regardless what "title" my
server has.
Seeya,
Dave
KG4YZY
www.aprsfl.net
www.fab-corp.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: IGate/Server SysOps: Check your Configs
From: "Dick Stanich" <dick@kb7zva.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 3:57:17
X-Message-Number: 4
On 04/12/04, "Greg Noneman <greg@clubnet.net>" wrote:
>Connecting to message only or filtered ports of either core or tier 2
>servers does make sense for many, if not most, IGates. However,
>multiple outbound connections, be it directly to core servers and/or to
>lower level servers, will ultimately result in unnecessary duplicate
>packets at the core.
Greg, your server (second.aprs.net) is showing the highest percent of
duplicate packets at about 46%. You also have the fewest filtered port
connects and the most aprsD connects.
My server (aprswest.net) is showing about 10% less duplicates. The most
filtered port connects and the fewest aprsD connects.
I can only assume that our Tier 2 servers and those connecting, aren't the
real cause of your high dupe problem.
>The point of this thread is not to direct where
>stations make their connections, but rather to recommend that outbound
>connections be made in an educated and considerate manner.
I'm not sure if this thread, on this list, will make much difference as you
may be targeting the wrong group. I disagree... it makes all the difference
where stations make their connections. Both Phil and I have spent a lot of
time on other lists educating users to the use of our filtered ports and
the tiering concept. We have the fewest duplicates and lowest percentage of
mis-configured IGates.
Second.aprs.net has been around much longer than any other server. The
connect patterns hasn't really changed that much in all those years. You
still have the highest percent of full-feed connects, compared to other
servers, and the lowest reliability in user uptimes. Yes, education is an
important factor and the reduction of multiple server connects will help.
In theory, the best filter for duplicates are for IGates and end-users to
use tiered servers. As tiered servers grow in quanity, it will take the
strain off the core servers in regard to duplicate packets. A tiered
distributed network is in order.
A useful model would be the NTP hierarchy, which basically passes atomic
time down from master clocks to individual systems worldwide. A tiered
distributed network. It went through the process APRS is currently
undergoing over a decade ago, and aprs2.net is basically following the same
solution it did.
The solution is to adapt our thinking towards a tiered network. Just with
the current 8 tier 2 servers and the use of filtered ports, I see a bright
future. Education and consideration needs to start at the top.
Dick, KB7ZVA
APRSWest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
