[aprssig] Packet routing, path specification.

[Robert Bruninga]

See, the result of this approach in the message
below?

The result will be a human-less vehicle
tracking system only.   Quite useless for
facilitating ad-hoc human-to-human communicaiton
(the original intent of APRS)...

>>> rtg at aapsc.com 06/23/05 8:25 AM >>>
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, AE5PL Lists wrote:

> Whether you intended it with APRS or not, it is a broadcast protocol
> (not point-to-point) and as such, it should be expected to reach the
> area local to the station and no further.
   Agreed!

>  As messaging is the only point-to-point mechanism in the protocol, that 
> has been accounted for in the gateway architecture.
   When are the spec writers going to realize that the messaging 'feature' 
is really an abomination in a broadcast protocol?  The retries, acks, etc. 
coupled with non-routed, broadcast in all directions, digipeaters, is the 
'straw that broke the camel's back' on 144.39.
   It's about time we admitted this mistake, removed messaging from the 
spec, and worked towards a system that would treat 144.39 as we do 146.52. 
If a stations beacon text contained frequency and mode information for 
personal contact, we could leverage the processing power in our smart rigs 
to implement an auto-QSY function, so that messaging could be integrated 
with an APRS client, but implemented on another frequency, another 
network, another mode.

As you're coding digipeaters to implement the NSR algorithm, please also 
implement a filter to drop all messaging packets and acks on the floor...

-- 
Rick Green

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
  temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                   -Benjamin Franklin

_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
aprssig at lists.tapr.org 
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig