[aprssig] Packet routing, path specification.

[Robert Bruninga]

>>> wa7nwp at jnos.org 06/23/05 12:10 PM >>>
>Would it be possible to do both?   Client 
>stations could choose either an outgoing 
>NSR path (an anti-path) or a legacy path as needed?

Yes, I think the two can co-exist.  Just name 
the PATH as "NSR" and that then gives your packet
over to the NSR system and it will route it
according to the NSR's sysop's design. 

Of course this waters down its potential, because its 
biggest advantage was to be able to prevent users 
from abusing their freedome to choose their own path.

But I would have no problems with it at all under
these general rules:

1) A user can send a WIDE2-2 anywhere and
    WILL get 1 or 2 hops out of it guarnateed. 
    ( THe  APRS default path)...

2) A user can send ANY length D1,D2,D3 directed
    path (since even a full 7 hop path is less total
    copies on the network than a single W2-2) and
   is an inconsequential load on the system, but
   permits the users the flexibility to handle
   unusual needs.

Any other path will be at the mercy of the NSR
sysop.  Or just select the path of "NSR" for
full NSR routing.

Bob
>>> wa7nwp at jnos.org 06/23/05 12:10 PM >>>
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Robert Bruninga wrote:

> >to effectively implement the NSR algorithm.
> 
> ...
> 
> I fully suport the APRS-IS, and global messaging
> via the internet, but it being able to use a reasonable
> RF path as needed where needed is the essence of
> HAM radio in my mind.  There is a big difference between
> the distribution needs of APRS 24/7 home stations just 
> doing nothing all day versus a real-live-HAM radio
> activity with humans at both ends...

Would it be possible to do both?   Client stations
could choose either an outgoing NSR path (an anti-path)
or a legacy path as needed?

Bill - WA7NWP



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