[aprssig] Packet Node on 144.390 ?
jdbandman at earthlink.net
Sat Sep 9 08:50:59 CDT 2006
Connected traffic frames takes precedence over unconnected (UI) frames.
To place connected traffic on an APRS channel would pretty well shut
down the flow of APRS traffic. The whole point of using unconnected
protocol is to have traffic moving WITHOUT the need for the user to
know/understand the network.
I think you're asking for trouble here. Do you REALLY want people
reading bulletin board messages, connected keyboard chatting, etc.
making your APRS tracking information take a secondary precedence?
Granted, the prevalence of internet email has pretty well reduced packet
BBS use and what bulletin boards that are still out there
exchange/forward traffic on UHF backbones.
If you introduce connected packet traffic be prepared to answer the
onslaught of angry APRS users who want to know why this was done and why
it shouldn't be on the traditional packet radio frequencies. There is no
advantage for the APRS system in having nodes on the frequency, at least
not at the current state of development.
Perhaps down the road the coders will develop a way to use nodes and
backbones but, again, the interent datastream beats that by about a
million miles which begs the question: "What's the point?"
Jim Duncan, KU0G
More information about the aprssig