Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] RE: APRS Message Idea

AE5PL Lists HamLists at ametx.com
Fri Mar 4 12:39:22 UTC 2005


You are correct.  Those objects gated to RF do not make it back to
APRS-IS.

And if someone gates the information to RF, then obviously someone feels
that the information is useful to the local RF community.  Someone
abusing this capability could just as easily flood the local RF channel
with APRS-IS data.  Nothing can be done about this other than contact
the errant IGate sysop.  This should not be considered an argument
against Firenet.

I hope that we can put past mistakes behind us (I think ALL of us have
been guilty of at least one mistake or two in our lives) and understand
the positive things that Firenet and other experimental projects can
bring to amateur radio.

73,

Pete Loveall AE5PL
mailto:pete at ae5pl.net 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wes Johnston
> Posted At: Friday, March 04, 2005 6:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [aprssig] RE: APRS Message Idea
> 
> I thought IGATED outbound objects were supposed to be tagged 
> with TCP as a pseudo path element, and other IGATES wouldn't 
> gate them to the net to prevent loops?  If this is the case, 
> then FIRENET objects gated to RF would not have been gated 
> back into the APRS-IS.
> 
> Quoting dick at kb7zva.com:
> 
> > Not really. If I send an object to RF, it will enter the 
> APRS-IS from 
> > another source. IGates.
> >
> > We also saw how Firenet could be abused. Someone could easily take 
> > those objects and flood them to RF. Once that happened they WOULD 
> > appear on the APRS-IS, because they re-entered the APRS-IS 
> from IGates 
> > that heard them on RF.




More information about the aprssig mailing list