[aprssig] Is the APRS Spec for APRS Data Type Identifier just randomly ignored? Should it be?

[James Washer]

Anyway, back to my original question/intent... Should we launch an effort to improve the state of things. I could run a perl script once a week/month/etc that would send mail to this mailing list with a list of stations that were sending "illegal" packets on a regular basis. Perhap locals could then try to contact these folks.

In reality, I suspect this is a lost cause. I'm just trying to get a straw poll on the idea from the group.

 - jim KG7HH

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:10:02 -0700 (PDT)
"Curt, WE7U" <archer at eskimo.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, James Washer wrote:
> 
> > Curt, the APRS Spec includes BEACON as well as many other non AP* destinations. Further, the spec goes on to say "any other  destination NOT include in the generic ..." are ALTNET,
> >
> > Wouldn't this imply a BEACON destination is indeed an APRS packet?
> 
> Yep.  Forgot about those exceptions.
> 
> --
> Curt, WE7U.   APRS Client Comparisons: http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
> "Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
> "Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
> "The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"