[aprssig] Digpeater setup
Robbie - WA9INF
mwrobertson at comcast.net
Thu Mar 31 11:49:36 CST 2005
Robbie - WA9INF wrote:
> Robert Bruninga wrote:
>>>>> dsparks at pobox.com 3/30/05 11:35:17 PM >>>
>>> ... We now recommend that use of WIDE and RELAY are obsolete ...
>>> because [they do] more damage than good.
>>> ... but isn't there a role to be played by a modified RELAY digi?
>>> What about a setup where such a station keeps track of recent
>>> [packets] received directly, and then digis them only *IF* they
>>> aren't heard being resent by a WIDE digi within a certain period of
>>> time, like 20 sec., let's say?
>> Absolutely, that is a greaat solution. But it should not be
>> based on the dupe-generating-RELAY legacy. SImply let
>> that same algorithm work on WIDEn-N packets at that
>> "fill-in-digi" location. We must wean ourselves from starting
>> paths with RELAY which has no really good dupe-elimination
>> process in most of the digis out there.
> Please explain how RELAY causes DUPES? If I am understanding it, a dupe
> is when a station retransmits a packet that was digipeated by a previous
> RELAY. Not when two stations digipeats a packet it heard from the
> tracker direct.. That is not DUPLICATION.. WIDEn-N digipeaters also
> attempt to digipeat what it hears direct. If that tracker is using only
> WIDE2-2 in its path, and both WIDEn-N hears it, then digipeats it, isn't
> that DUPEs also according to the way you make is seem?
> So, if home RELAY fill ins are spaced properly, what is the problem?
> They are doing what they were put there to do assuming that the tracker
> couldn't reach a WIDEn. No other home station RELAY that doesn't hear
> that tracker direct, will digipeat the tracker because the RELAY in the
> original path has been stripped and replaced with the original RELAY.
Above line should read:
original path has been stripped and replaced with the original RELAY's
callsign. Sorry for double posting!
More information about the aprssig