[aprssig] Too many digi's ?

[William McKeehan]

That may be a good idea if we had a large number of users, but with the digi's
and home stations and mobile stations, there are only about 30 stations, so we
are far from saturated. I personally think 2 high level digi's would cover the
area well and provide minimal overlap (one North-West, the other South-East of
the center of this 60x60 square); a couple of fill-in digi's (one South-West,
the other North-East) would fill out the area nicely. This would provide 2
cells, pretty close to each other. The way it is now, there are 8 cells with
major overlap, so each packet get's digi'd multiple times, even if it uses a
single hop path.

On Fri, October 20, 2006 7:07 am, Jason Winningham wrote:
> I've been speculating to myself that maybe we don't have enough
> digis.  If we got the existing digis down to a reasonable HAAT,
> thereby reducing the cell size, and added more digis we might get
> both better coverage and better control of the traffic. 3000' HAAT
> may be great for a voice repeater, but I suspect it isn't all that
> great for a digital network node.
>
> Maybe the high-site digis should be set so that they don't repeat a
> packet unless it isn't repeated by someone else in a reasonable time,
> thereby leaving the high-site digis to do fill-in and backup work.
>
> I don't have any data to support this, but I wouldn't mind seeing
> some numbers or simulations or tests to convince me one way or the
> other.
>
> Random thought before my caffeine takes effect...
>
> -Jason
> kg4wsv
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>


-- 
William McKeehan
KI4HDU
Internet: mckeehan at mckeehan.homeip.net
http://mckeehan.homeip.net

Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
     - Ralph Waldo Emerson