[aprssig] IGate wildcards/Telpac data

[Steve Dimse]

On 2/15/05 at 8:02 AM AE5PL Lists <HamLists at ametx.com> sent:

>> In theory, this will work fine. In practice, it is virtually 
>> certain that some IGates will run WL-* in the IGate list, and 
>> end up on an unfiltered port, flooding the IGates.
>
>If this happens, the responsible IGate operator will be contacted by
>local operators and have the opportunity to correct the situation.  I
>think you give IGate operators far less credit than they deserve.
>
Not at all. I think most people will set it up correctly. Most of them
will continue to have the filter set properly. Some will have
accidents. I certainly think I would be vulnerable to this mistake,
momentarily forgetting why the filter is important and changing it to
see more stations.
>
>> think the wildcard is too dangerous to accept. Another 
>
>If this attitude is taken, then there really is no reason for the
>packets to be inserted on APRS-IS as few if any IGate operators will
>take the time to track who has a local TelPac node and who doesn't.
>This is the same issue with IRLP nodes and EchoLink links/repeaters.
>The idea is to give the non-Internet connected ham the ability to
>readily identify and use the respective resource.
>
I think you are giving IGate operators less credit than they deserve.
In any event, this is a local issue, each IGate operator and local area
should decide which nodes to IGate. 

I hope everyone keeps in mind there is more involved here than just the
QRM caused by the accidents as they occur. Since I created the APRS IS
about 8 years ago, I've been a lightning rod, accused many times of
trying to kill ham radio. In fact, my work has had the opposite effect,
but I've also become very sensitive to the need to take precautions not
to give these people ammunition. Every time someone screws up their
filter, people will scream that the APRS IS is bad for APRS. Pete is
right that the actual errors can be fixed as they occur, but what is
irreparable is the attitude that will arise from all these problems.

Had I not been restrictive in the way I designed and administered the
system, I guarantee that we would not be having this discussion, that
sentiment against non-APRS data on APRS would be so overwhelming that
it would never have been an option to put Telpac data on the APRS IS or
RF networks. I want the next cool thing that comes along to have the
same chance that Telpac is getting, to add to the overall value of the
APRS system and ham radio.

Steve K4HG