[aprssig] Periodic Disconnects from APRS-IS
Phillip B. Pacier
ad6nh at arrl.net
Thu Jan 18 20:11:40 CST 2007
Steve Dimse wrote:
> On Jan 18, 2007, at 10:44 AM, Phillip B. Pacier wrote:
>> Ah! One of the main reasons why Tier 2 was created!
> Pete's post had nothing to do with Tier 2.
> This is a client issue, not a hub issue. The APRS IS stream has
> reached the point where some people's computer/software/internet
> connection cannot keep up with the full stream. This causes no
> problems for the hub. Pete's point was those people with this trouble
> should use a filtered feed, which is just as available on the core as
> on your servers. Many people want a full feed, and have systems that
> can handle it, and the core provides them the option to receive it there.
> People can make their own choice where they connect, but if you are
> going to turn every post involving the APRS IS into a commercial for
> your system, I will use it to remind people that the leaders of Tier 2
> have in the past demonstrated their contempt for their users by
> cutting off access to thousands of weather sites without warning,
> using them as pawns in a failed power play.
Ah, these emails are spinning so fast I need to take some Dramamine!
Well, I do appreciate the opportunity you open up to set the record
Tier 2 is as reliable as ever, with well over 1,000 clients currently
connected. Our server uptimes are unmatched, and obviously the opinion
of 1,000 plus users speaks for itself. To address the alleged cut-off
of access to thousands "weather sites" [?] without warning, nothing of
the such occurred with the malice that is being portrayed. Steve, you
yourself have been asking for years that the CW users be "released" (as
if we had them in a harness?) to you for over two years now. When we
finally complied, you couldn't handle it, were unprepared to handle it,
or your core service couldn't handle it, or a combination of those
scenarios. When we saw what was happening, and that the CW clients were
continuing to attempt to connect to our servers, we turned them back
on. They will remain on despite the propaganda and lies about our
service posted now on the CWOP web pages. Our attempt to comply with
your request is what caused thousands of station's data to be lost for
less than a day's time. That is all that happened, no matter how you
try to spin it. We have been service oriented from day one over five
years ago when we saw the stress at the core servers and sought a
solution to resolve it. We have also made several attempts to work with
the core servers over the years, and all we get is this spin,
propaganda, and personal attacks. I'm always ready to work with the
core service sysops, but not under these present conditions.
Fortunately, when this lack of cooperation on the part of the core
service has ended up in a loss of quality of service to our clients, we
have been able to devise our own methods of dealing with the issues.
This post was not a commercial for Tier 2. Users can and will connect
where they believe the best service is available. 35 servers and 1,000+
users (and 3,000+ CW clients) later, I think our service and quality
speak for itself. I don't need to run commercials - again, the 1,000+
clients choose for themselves where to connect. I merely stated that
Tier 2 was created out of the basis of the problem being discussed, and
that the list of Tier 2 servers on Pete's web list is incomplete, and
the address to find the complete information is available at
www.aprs2.net. If you want a full feed, connect to the core servers and
I wish you the best of luck. If/when it fails you, feel free to connect
to a filtered feed at the core servers or at Tier 2. Our servers are
open and welcome to anyone who wishes to connect. I never imagined
having this much support. I guess it goes to show we're doing something
> On the other hand, the core has plenty of capacity, with high
> reliability servers housed in professional data centers, and with
> operators that express the highest ideals of amateur radio,
> professionalism and service.
>> It should also be pointed out that round-robin DNS does not account
>> for a server becoming suddenly unavailable. If a server in the list
>> becomes unavailable, until the DNS zone file is updated and all of
>> the caching is reset, that server's IP will still be issued on the
>> pseudo-random basis. There is rotate.aprs.net and there is also
>> rotate.aprs2.net, but I recommend not using them for any reason.
> If a client has the ability to specify a list of servers, that is the
> preferred way. However, if the client only allows a single name, then
> rotate.aprs.net is much better than picking a single server's name.
> The core situation is monitored very closely, with human as well as
> automated means, and when a change is needed in rotate.aprs.net, it is
> made quickly.
Good point. I don't know of too many clients that only allow for one
server name to be entered, but that is certainly a situation where
rotate is useful, and also why Tier 2 has available rotate.aprs2.net.
Again, users can make their own decisions and I encourage all users to
educate themselves enough so that they can make their own decisions!
Thank you all for your time. 73!
Phil Pacier - AD6NH
Tier 2 Coordinator
More information about the aprssig