[aprssig] Old adnauseum subject: APRS Source Routing

[Ron McCoy]

As too often happens on mailing lists, everyone staking out turf and 
talking past each other. Do all of you _really_ talk this way to people 
when you are face to face? That would be a remarkably unpleasant crowd 
to be around.

I take issue with Bob's frequent assertion that APRS is "perfect" for 
whatever topic is at hand, but, in most cases I don't have anything 
positive to offer so I watch from the sidelines.

Pete seems to be protecting his on D-STAR turf and bristles at Bob's 
suggestion that _it_ is less than perfect.

Rather than hunkering down in our various bunkers and tossing grenades 
over the walls, what if we used this medium for, oh, I don't know, 
communication? This type of turf warfare is one of the reasons that 
amateur radio is on the decline.

In this post, Jason tells Bob he is out of touch with the networkigencia 
of today. That doesn't seem to advance understanding on any side. Bob 
has stated his reasons for preferring source routing in a world of 
absentee digi owners. Wouldn't it be more to the point to advance an 
argument on how modern networking concepts could be implemented 
sucessfully in such an environment along with their advantages? The same 
would go for all the complaints about Kenwood-centic protocol 
restrictions, sloppy documentation, etc, etc, etc.

Approaching these questions as problems to be solved by discussion and 
consensus seems to be much more interesting than flamefests. But maybe 
I'm in a minority. These types of interactions, both on lists and in my 
local ham group are what have driven me back to computers, networking, 
electronics and the maker ethic while my radios gather dust.

[/soapbox]

I'll now return to my corner waiting to be told I'm ignorant, off topic 
or in violation of FCC rules...or more likely all three. Have fun.

Jason KG4WSV wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Bob Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:
>   
>> I strongly defend "source routing" for the APRS network.
>>     
>
> Then you're out of step with virtually ALL modern networking techniques.
>
> I guess since our network is built with core components that were
> designed 20 years ago, it's apropos to use networking paradigms from
> 20 years ago, even if they are models that have been long since
> abandoned by the rest of the world.
>
> -Jason
> kg4wsv
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>