[aprssig] Tier 2 Status

Steve Dimse steve at dimse.com
Wed Jun 21 21:39:21 CDT 2006

On Jun 21, 2006, at 10:21 PM, Stan - N0YXV wrote:

> Quoting Steve Dimse <steve at dimse.com>:
>> No, you misunderstand the configuration of the APRS-IS. All the tier
> No I do understand the configuration you're misunderstanding me.  
> Everything you
> just typed I already know,

Well, your statement "If Tier2 goes down we have a backup (Tier 1)."  
Seems to belie that. Tier 2 is not an interlinked tier that can "go  
down", each server in tier 2 has a single link to the core, they are  
not linked to each other. An individual hub in tier 2 can go down,  
but not the whole tier.

> my confusion isn't in how it works but why we do what
> we do.

Maybe this thread gives a clue! One person designed it expecting  
maybe a hundred users someday, the software currently in use is  
written by another with different ideas, and there are dozens of  
sysops with differing opinions.

> Great lets hop to it...what kind of time frame are you looking at  
> to add those
> next servers? Is this something we can look forward to in the  
> coming year?

I'd love to see more core servers added. I have one person already  
chomping at the bit. However, as Pete points out, I am not involved  
in the operational end of the APRS IS any longer, and the powers that  
be do not wish to increase the core.
>> on very fat pipes, but servers in such locations are available, every
>> time I need a server location I get several good offers from people
>> here on the sig.
> Great I'll take an OS48 with two new 3Gig dual processor servers  
> right away.
> :-)(Sorry for the smartalc comment I just couldn't resist and it  
> gets to my
> point qwick.)

The horsepower needed for a hub is actually pretty low, the tricky  
thing is getting the bandwidth.

Steve K4HG

More information about the aprssig mailing list