[aprssig] Additional IGates ?
Steve Dimse steve at dimse.comFri Mar 18 21:11:07 UTC 2005
- Previous message: [aprssig] Additional IGates ?
- Next message: [aprssig] Additional IGates ?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mar 18, 2005, at 3:35 PM, William McKeehan wrote: > It seems to me that more IGates would be a good thing and would not > hurt > anything; especially listen-only IGates. This comes up periodically. In general, the more ears the better, the additional load on the APRS Internet System is minimal because of the dup filtering. However, the concern is that every area should continue to have functioning bidirectional IGates. Most people only notice that an IGate is down when their data does not appear on findU. If the bidirectional IGate serving an area goes offline, but there is a listen only IGate nearby, then their data still appears on findU. Therefore, any operator of a listen-only IGate needs to maintain constant vigilance that the primary IGate is remaining up. Steve K4HG
- Previous message: [aprssig] Additional IGates ?
- Next message: [aprssig] Additional IGates ?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
