Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] Periodic Disconnects from APRS-IS

Phillip B. Pacier ad6nh at arrl.net
Fri Jan 19 02:11:40 UTC 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 
straight.  Thanks!

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 
right!
>
> 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
www.aprs2.net




More information about the aprssig mailing list