[OZAPRS] Foundation and RF APRS
vk2tv
vk2tv at exemail.com.au
Sat Dec 21 08:19:12 AEDT 2019
Scott,
Not OT for me.
Ray vk2tv
On 20/12/19 11:10 pm, Scott Evans wrote:
> For the Tier2 servers T2TAS & T2SYDNEY(I'm the sysop of T2TAS) they
> will reject all non verified stations. So if you forget to include
> your pass code then you will be ignored by the server for passing your
> traffic to the internet. I can't answer on behalf of T2QLD or T2PERTH
> (is that still online?) and for any of the ZL (New Zealand) based
> servers. Whereas I-Gates generally don't do any filtering. Only
> exception to this would be for RFONLY NOGATE to destinations.
>
> I realise this is a little bit off the topic, but just wanted to
> clarify the Tier2 internet side of things...
>
> Cheers
>
> VK7HSE Scott Evans
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* OZAPRS <ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au> on behalf of Mark Jessop
> <lenniethelemming at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, December 20, 2019 10:49:05 PM
> *To:* Australian APRS Users <ozaprs at aprs.net.au>
> *Subject:* Re: [OZAPRS] Foundation and RF APRS
> For positioning the use of an object is a good way of having a valid
> foundation callsign show up on the various mapping services. As you
> mention it still needs to be sourced from an AX.25 compatible callsign
> when produced via RF, but this could be a modified callsign as
> mentioned previously. If the source callsign is valid from an AX.25
> standpoint, then it should make its way through igates into APRS-IS
> fine. Whether packets will make their way back *out* of APRS-IS into
> RF is another good question - I'm not sure what IS-RF filtering is
> used on the various TX-capable igates around Australia.
> I'm not sure if any of the commonly available APRS trackers (be it
> standalone devices like the tinytrak/opentracker, or rigs like the
> various kenwoods/yaesus) support emitting of objects instead of
> position reports, so that will be a seriously limiting factor.
> Anyway, the above is a possible option for getting packets out on RF
> that look show up nicely on a map or APRS-capable device and don't
> require additional poking around to find out the actual callsign.
> However, i suspect finding trackers that will produce objects instead
> of position reports may be difficult. (Hopefully I'm wrong on that!)
>
> As for the APRS-IS passcode, well there's also an online calculator
> here: https://apps.magicbug.co.uk/passcode/
> It's just a hash function... I guess the original designers of APRS-IS
> decided security-through-obscurity was good enough :-/
>
> 73
> Mark VK5QI
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 9:55 PM <vk7hse at gmail.com
> <mailto:vk7hse at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> APRS also has the option to add an object to a map, it is with
> this that you could provide the Foundation callsign. In most cases
> in the US where special event stations are in use they are not
> using the primary ax25 mycall as a station identifier but instead
> using the object to place the operators valid callsign. Now this
> doesn’t address the protocol layer restriction for ax25, as that’s
> hard coded and restricted to XXNXXX (or variations thereof) As
> Australian Foundation callsigns (decided to be the better choice
> in 2005) have the XXNXXXX suffix I believe this was chosen with
> the intention to prevent foundation calls from “accidently” trying
> to use packet radio, and if that was the case then it was a bit
> silly. But it is what it is and now that the foundation call is
> permitted digital modes (something I feel they should have always
> had access to) that decision in 2005 has come back to bite them
> (whoever they were at the time!)
>
> Granted I haven’t read the determinations to the letter in recent
> months, but a station ID is only required every “TEN” minutes, not
> on “EVERY” transmission! Packet radio was always overkill for that
> but it was logical that the station ID be it’s callsign hence why
> the ax25 protocol has the limit of a 6 letter call.
>
> Now what can we agree upon in the interim to be acceptable until
> the callsign suffix for the foundation is resolved? Bearing in
> mind that could take some time as there’s now 3 entities involved
> with the process (WIA, AMC & ACMA)
>
> My take would be a tactical name with the operator callsign in the
> status text field (>VK7FABC John Citizen QE37pa) this would work
> for all RF aprs clients but because of the use of a tactical call
> it would be prohibited into the APRS-IS side (unless you are
> sneaky and generate a valid aprs pass code *the software for that
> is available under GNU hint think Xastir)
>
> So that’s my initial thoughts …
>
> Cheers…
>
> VK7HSE Scott Evans
>
> *From:*OZAPRS <ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au
> <mailto:ozaprs-bounces at aprs.net.au>> *On Behalf Of *Jack Schultz
> *Sent:* Friday, 20 December 2019 12:45
> *To:* Australian APRS Users <ozaprs at aprs.net.au
> <mailto:ozaprs at aprs.net.au>>
> *Subject:* Re: [OZAPRS] Foundation and RF APRS
>
> Hi Marcos (and Carlos), interesting to read both your thoughts on
> the topic.
>
> Though my preference is obviously to have a 'valid' callsign for
> AX.25, what I use now is the best I could come up with. Every
> packet contains my full callsign in the comment, which I think
> works well for those that use APRS through a PC interface, but not
> as handy in a mobile rig or handheld where my full call is hidden
> behind several screens.
>
> My thinking is that while transmitting my full callsign makes it a
> legal transmission, I should try and fit as much as possible in
> the designated callsign field, with the lowest priority being the
> leftmost part of the callsign since it is the least specific.
>
> I hear a similar take on local repeaters where there is a usual
> crowd that chats to each other, often simply omitting 'VK'
> altogether when referring to each others callsigns, or the
> callsign of a repeater for example. In the world of APRS, I feel
> there is a similar level of community in that aspect within the
> local RF zone. I generally see a dozen or so core users, so there
> is that immediate recognition when I decode one of their packets.
>
> In Melbourne I've also seen VK3FSPD using APRS first as VKFSPD,
> then using 3FSPD. I prefer the latter form as it avoids ambiguity
> when travelling interstate.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jack Schultz
>
> VK3FJTS (3FJTS-7)
>
> _______________________________________________
> OZAPRS mailing list
> OZAPRS at aprs.net.au <mailto: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/20191221/d3621641/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the OZAPRS
mailing list