[OZAPRS] IGATEs

[Tony Hunt]

Comments ?? Yes .. Best points were ..

> Common sense ?

Not sure why this would be any different to any other traffic but if your
running a satgate thats not linked to the Net its a bit sad
> + IGATING from RF to NET is good for satgates

Collisions are often a result of settings and or radio/antenna faults TNC
alignment. Blaming it on "non ui-digi
         tnc's" seems a bit obscure..
> + UI-DIGI or no digi, I have seen some horrible collisions with non
ui-digi
> tnc's


One final word..
Be careful of making blanket rules that assume your own local enviroment
is
the same as everybody elses.
If we all lived the same lives we would be pretty boring folks..

Tony Hunt VK5AH


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrew Rich" <vk4tec at tech-software.net>
To: "Ozaprs at Marconi.Ics.Mq.Edu.Au" <ozaprs at marconi.ics.mq.edu.au>
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 12:44 AM
Subject: [OZAPRS] IGATEs


> I would like to throw this into the ring.
>
> + IGATING is generally a bad thing back to RF
> + IGATING to RF is good for messages TO mobiles (eg D700)
> + A model of RELAY,WIDE into an IGATE sounds good
> + UI-DIGI or no digi, I have seen some horrible collisions with non
ui-digi
> tnc's
> + HF traffic path should be treated with respect and given the best
chance
> to get through
> + IGATING from RF to NET is good for satgates
> + Limited INET to RF Igate testing should be allowed but only for trying
it
> out
> + The RF environment is just that for RF signals and should not be
swamped
> by INET to RF traffic
>
> Comments ?
>
> Common sense ?
>
> Andrew VK4TEC
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ozaprs mailing list
> ozaprs at marconi.ics.mq.edu.au
> http://marconi.ics.mq.edu.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
>

_______________________________________________
ozaprs mailing list
ozaprs at marconi.ics.mq.edu.au
http://marconi.ics.mq.edu.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs