[OZAPRS] on density and stomping

[Matthew Cook]

One of the downsides of multiple RX only iGates as has been found in
Adelaide recently is they only benefit internet based observers.

You also loose capabilities like two way messaging and create confusion as
to where users are with internet to RF gateways and delays.

There's been a few times recently where users have messaged me over APRS in
Adelaide that was gated to the net by a RX only iGate that was then fired
back onto RF, only for my reply to never be received.

A well designed Wide2-n network with good coverage and Wide1-n's to over
come terrain issues sounds like a good plan and a lot of fun.

73

Matthew
VK5ZM

On 7 November 2017 at 08:14, Glen English VK1XX <
glenlist at pacificmedia.com.au> wrote:

> Hi Ray
>
> The stomping is a good point.  it's sort of like having a diversity
> receiver. Instead of an RF fade, we have channel contention.  Actually,
> in theory, multiple I-gate RX around town in a  dense area can provide
> an increase in traffic density capability, as the n signals will compete
> at different sites and some will win/loose  due to terrain shielding and
> also flat fading short delay multipath.
>
> Since too many I gates is no problem, Ginini will have Igate as well as
> RF forwarding. The 50kbps half duplex IP link will carry that no problem.
>
> Being open source code, we can add / modify as required. Isaacs will be
> identical HW eventually.
>
> glen
>
> On 7/11/2017 8:14 AM, vk2tv wrote:
> >
> > Glen
> >
> > I wasn't thinking of the digi only responding to its real callsign, it
> > will do that in any case AFAIK. I was thinking of the case where
> > (local) users specify the digis real callsign in their path to keep
> > their traffic "local".
> >
> > There's a lot of discussion about rgi and possible effects of outbound
> > traffic from it but we also need to consider the benefits of having a
> > well-sited W2-1 (say) Igate to respond to inbound traffic that might
> > have been stomped on at another system(s).
> >
> > Ray vk2tv
> >
> >
> >
> > On 06/11/17 20:18, Glen English VK1XX wrote:
> >> yeah, I would guess addr, WIDE1-1, VK1RGI-1 would do it
> >>
> >> another thing to change on the client .
> >>
> >> again, pity more cannot be gleaned by the digi beacon.
> >>
> >> alternatively, the system could have a list of locals...
> >>
> >> cheers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/11/2017 6:36 PM, vk2tv wrote:
> >>> Doesn't the aprs specification provide for a station to direct traffic
> >>> via a specific digi callsign instead of the generic WIDEx-x to
> >>> minimise spread?
> >>>
> >>> Ray vk2tv
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 06/11/17 18:03, Glen English VK1XX wrote:
> >>>> All
> >>>>
> >>>> thanks Josh,Ian, Dom, Ray for the inputs, and asking me good questions
> >>>> for me to think about.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'll read a bit more into USA centric & written articles.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I will filter 1RBM (local cbr) and 1RGI from duplicating
> >>>> everything. Or at least have a think about it. There really needs to
> be
> >>>> a setup for users if they really do want 1RGI is digipeat their 1RBM
> >>>> UIs. I guess that's what WIDE2-2 is for.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also got to think of the reverse case... RBM hearing things that I
> >>>> expect Ginini to hear and not . That of course can happen any time
> for a
> >>>> mobile station, long and short delay multipath abundant.
> >>>>
> >>>> In about 90% of canberra cases, 1RGI will hear whatever 1RBM hears no
> >>>> problem...
> >>>>
> >>>> There there is the providing redundancy issue for other paths.  Ether
> >>>> way, IP link and full control will make things flexible.
> >>>>
> >>>> There's a double edge sword with terminals being dumb /simple and say
> >>>> unable to update their paths based on whatever they are hearing- there
> >>>> would be usefulness I would have thought in having the digi beacon
> spit
> >>>> out some useful information for UI stations.... or maybe there has
> been
> >>>> thought and it didnt catch on.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'll put UHF on the second sound card/dire wolf TNC channel, that will
> >>>> be useful.
> >>>>
> >>>> -glen
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> OZAPRS mailing list
> >>>> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au
> >>>> http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> OZAPRS mailing list
> >>> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au
> >>> http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OZAPRS mailing list
> >> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au
> >> http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OZAPRS mailing list
> > OZAPRS at aprs.net.au
> > http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OZAPRS mailing list
> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au
> http://lists.aprs.net.au/mailman/listinfo/ozaprs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aprs.net.au/pipermail/ozaprs/attachments/20171107/868b7178/attachment-0001.html>