[aprssig] SS7-7

[Wes Johnston, AI4PX]

Does anyone remember that airplane that sent an emergency beacon over
watertown NY about 3 years ago?  I can't remember what path he used, but I
recieved him in central SC on my d700 in the parking lot at work.  If anyone
knows what path he used, it'd be nice to know... I think he was at 3500 feet
and i know his packet went 800 miles.

Wes


On 12/11/07, Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:
>
> By the way.  When I say there is nothing worse than WIDE7-7,
> everyone should  also realize that conversly, there is nothing
> wrong with using SS7-7.
>
> Example.  MD3-3 will hit every digi in Maryland if launched from
> the center of the state.  MD5-5 will hit every digi in Maryland
> if launched from the remotest corner of the state.  Soooooo..
> There is no difference between MD3-3, MD5-5 or MD7-7.  They have
> exactly the same result.  Each of them will hit all 20 or so
> digis in the state (depending on where sent). (If that is their
> intent).
>
> So nitpicking the "N" in SSn-N paths to me is pointless *if* the
> point of a particular packet is truely to flood the local ARRL
> (SS) section.  Of course, MOST OF THE TIME a full section flood
> is not intended.  In this case, those in Eastern Maryland might
> use MD3-3 to cover their end of the state without bothering
> Deleware or Virginia, and those in Western Maryland might use
> MD3-3 to cover the panhandle of Maryland without bothering, VA,
> WV, Ohio and PA... Etc...
>
> I simply want WIDE7-7 to disappear completely and forever.  IN
> fact, almost anything above 4 in my mind everywhere is far more
> than any emergency would ever call for.  Even listing
> "exceptions" for the use of WIDE7-7 seems to me to viloate the
> spirit of the New-N paradigm which was to SIMPLIFY APRS paths
> and protect the network for IMPROVED reliability...
>
> But by the same token, SS7-7 is completely different and
> perfeclty legitimate if a section wide message from the section
> personnel is needed.
>
> Just a point...
> Bob, Wb4APR
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org
> > [mailto:aprssig-bounces at lists.tapr.org] On Behalf Of Keith
> VE7GDH
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 6:57 PM
> > To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [aprssig] WIDE7-7 in the PNW
> >
> > Bob WB4APR wrote...
> >
> > > I believe that is only a "recommendation" in the pacific
> > > northwest. I personally do not recommend that WIDE7-7
> > > EVER be used or recommended for anything period.
> >
> > My understanding was that only an idiot would use WIDE7-7
> unless there
> > was a real need for it. It's been a while since I have seen
> > it used, but
> > I do from time to time see WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 and other
> combinations that
> > yield even several hops more than that. If there was some
> > emergency that
> > required going more than the recommended number of hops,
> > SSn-N would be
> > a good candidate as it could stay in BC or WA etc. as the
> > case was. Even
> > something like WA3-3,OR3-3 could be used to get from "here"
> down to
> > California if need be (assuming there enough digis with
> support for
> > SSn-N down in that direction) but certainly not for everyday
> use!
> >
> > > Theoretically, such a path could saturate the entire west
> coast
> > > from Seattle to San Diego, Pacific Ocean to Colorado. I
> cannot
> > > imagine any viable use for such an abusive path. Since the
> entire
> > > pacific Northwest can be saturated with a packet as simple
> as
> > > WIDE4-4, I would hope that they would limit their
> recommendations
> > > for flooding emergencies to only that. But again, only my
> opinion
> > > from afar...
> >
> > You are right... WIDE4-4 could potentially make it from
> > "here" (not too
> > much north of Seattle) to at least northern California. For
> > normal use,
> > I would consider that an abusive path too. It certainly
> shouldn't be
> > used in normal day-to-day use. It would have to be some kind
> of an
> > unusual event, such as trying to deal with some kind of
> disaster
> > situation. I would never recommend use of WIDE7-7 unless
> > there were very
> > exceptional circumstances, and even then wouldn't expect it
> > to be overly
> > successful in reaching that far. Hopefully we see more use of
> > WIDE7-7 by
> > idiots than we see "proper" use of it during disasters - hi!
> >
> > 73 es cul - Keith VE7GDH
> > --
> > "I may be lost, but I know exactly where I am!"
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > aprssig mailing list
> > aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>



-- 
Some people's minds are so open, their brains fall out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig/attachments/20071211/962f41b4/attachment.htm