[aprssig] NetNodes, the future
Chris Rose kb8uih at sbcglobal.netWed Dec 29 18:00:05 UTC 2004
- Previous message: [aprssig] NetNodes, the future
- Next message: [aprssig] NetNodes, the future
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
This NETgate idea is another way to set up an Igate? An Igate is an internet gate. Or is this an autmatic system that you connect to with a direct entry of one call sign? I am getting so confused with the "fixes" and am not absorbing them readily. I am sorry about that. I'm in an area that doesn't have enough coverage and am wanting to set up more RF digis. I am not in a situation that many are where there are too many digis or too many operators. There is one digi SE of me and a low profile digi in my county but none N, NE, W or SW in bordering counties. There was one west of me but disappeared about a year ago. HELP. Chris KB8UIH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga at usna.edu> To: <aprssig at lists.tapr.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 10:06 AM Subject: RE: [aprssig] NetNodes, the future >>>> HamLists at ametx.com 12/29/04 7:08:54 AM >>> >>APRS has prospered... Because I do not have to configure >>(one configuration works almost universally (RELAY,WIDE...) >>By simply addressing a message to the remote station (no path >>settings required). > > Agree completely but ONLY for 1 hop or so on a non-congested > channel. Message exchange is a POINT-to-POINT process that > requires acknowledgment and other than occassional one-liners is > just grossly inefficient on an APRS system. > > HAM communications needs a good point-to-point system for > file and paragraph transfer, It is *impossible* to do this on APRS > and APRS was not designed to do this. Thus we need > CONNECTED mode connectivity on another channel to augment > APRS. > > Thus, why not a universal global NETgate system based > on the very viable and transparent NetROM/TheNET system? > Seems a slam-dunk to me... > >>(Do we set up for I35, I30, I20, or I45 linking? >> What about US75? >>Hmmm. Decisions, Decisions, Decisions.) > > The decision there is *very simple*. The new LINKn-N > system was not designed for "linking", and cant possibly > be used for linking because of simple basics of packet > radio. > > 1) The decision is simple. If you are driving along I-35, then > use 35LNKn-N. > > 2) Linking in this context is a multi-hop end-to-end system which > everyone in packet knows cannot work beyond about 1 or 2 > hops even on a clear channel. (for end-to-end messaging (acks) etc)... > > 3) APRS was desiged for one-to-many on a shared channel. > It was never designed and cannot possibly handle end-to-end > point-to-point connected traffic (messages, even one liners on > APRS are like "connected" traffic because of acks). > > Thus there is only one "decision" and it is trivial: > 1) If you are sending brief info to everyone use APRS > 2) If you need to pass files or traffic or paragraphs > to someone, then look on your APRS map or on your > radio's front panel list for the call and freq of the nearby > NETgate and connect to it, and then connect to > anyone on the planet.. > 3) I just cannot imagine anything simpler... (KISS) > > Bob, WB4APR >
- Previous message: [aprssig] NetNodes, the future
- Next message: [aprssig] NetNodes, the future
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
