[aprssig] Re: Tracker Smart Pathing: user types, alternatives
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduThu Mar 23 22:26:12 UTC 2006
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS high speed
- Next message: [aprssig] Re: Tracker Smart Pathing: user types, alternatives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>>> <apratt at bestbits.org> 03/23/06 2:08 PM >>> On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:42:05 -0500, "Robert Bruninga" wrote: >> a) But is your wife really looking at FINDU every minute ... > > Of course not.... Proportional Pathing gives me an > effective (3 hop) beacon rate of eight minutes. If my > digi hit success rate poor - say, 25% - I'm down to > 32 minutes. Ok, for many people, that is still probably good enough for spousal FINDU monitoring on day trips. It appears you want to run 3 hop updates all the time so that you get a better hit count in some weak areas, while knowing that you are using an abusive path the rest of the time with 8 times the QRM load on everyone. >Yes to three hops, but probably three-minute updates. Ah, that is better. 3 or 5 minute packets is resonably fair to others if that's what you must do for your need. But my point is that if someone needs a higher rate closer in, we certianly hope they will consider setting their tracker to Proportional Pathing so that their high rate packets do not go too far and QRM everyone else in half the state of California, yet they will get occasional 3 hop updates should they find themselves in a 3 hop need. Proportional pathing is just another option. Your best hope is that everyone else will use it so that you get 8 times less QRM for your packets. >[I konw 3 hops] is a bad path in well-connected areas. >The whole point of this AUTO-hop-count [digi] idea is >to get a 3-hop route when I need it, and a one-hop >route when that's enough. > > Today, I have to pick a single route that will work >acceptably well in the WORST areas I pass through; >that path is rude and abusive in the BEST areas. Then I think you should consider that the 30 minute update using Proportional Pathing, compared to your 12 minute update (your stated 25% success with 3 min packets) is not all that bad considering it is 1/8th the QRM to everyone else. >A digi that writes "one hop" into the AUTO path when >the local IGate is down will indeed fail me. But I'd >have failed in that area anyway if I manually ran >WIDE1-1... , thinking that one-hop IGate was >still alive, so I'm no worse off. But you have already said that you want to run 3 hops everywhere. The sentence above implies that you will change your path to 1-1 when you are near a 1-hop IGate digi? I thought you wanted something you could set and forget? That is what the Proportional Pathing Option is. >A local user can manually recover by setting WIDE2-2 >and removing AUTO until things get worked out. Ah? Now you are saying that whenever the AUTO digi is not configured properly, that local users will have to stop, and re-configure their tracker (that they cannot tell is working or not in the first place) when he notices tht the digi is no longer automatically inserting the right path because the sysop has not gotten around to updating it due to the lost 1 hop IGate? >The digi operator should program the hop count to >one or more "reliable" IGates, but we all know it's a >crap shoot...... >This [AUTO digi] idea doesn't require "replacing >every TNC digi in the country." I haven't heard >yet that it's impossible with current digi hardware.. Ok, ill say it then. it is impossible to do at every digi that is based on a TNC, and that is 91% of all digis in the USA (910 out of about 1000). >A mobile user with a path like WIDE2-2,AUTO will >deliver the capacity advantage of one hop in an >urban area that's been upgraded, Ah, but that can already be done at ANY digi under the existing New-N paradigm. It is already done in the LA basin and anywhere else where the digi wants to trap paths to 1 hop. So again, the AUTO is nice, but I still think it has problems in ever getting implemented for all kinds of reasons. >and the IGate-reaching advantage of three hops in >a rural area that's been upgraded, while getting the >usual two hops in un-upgraded areas. Yes, and so can proportional pathing... for a lot of people who would use it, and that would lessen the load on everyone. And finally... If there really is a 3 hop problem area, it is MUCH easier to install an IGate PC somehwere within the surrounding tier of digis at someone's house with internet, then to expect all digis in the state to replace their hardware with PC's just so they can do the same thing with AUTO... Again, not trying to force anyone to use Proprtional Pathing -with-Decayed Beaconing, but just thinking it will be a nice way to reduce QRM for most people who cre more about 1 and 2 hop updates... de WB4APR, Bob
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS high speed
- Next message: [aprssig] Re: Tracker Smart Pathing: user types, alternatives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
