Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)
ldeffenb at homeside.to
Mon Jan 5 12:47:13 CST 2009
I believe the idea is callsign to callsign e-mail without explicitly
knowing or caring if they're on RF or -IS? If the gateway can determine
the difference, then it could use two different limits as the two specs
are different. If I'm actually USING this to send an e-mail to someone
the first time, I'll restrict myself to 67 characters unless I'm SURE
they're on APRS-IS in which case I can be more verbose. Why force
multiple short messages over -IS if its spec allows longer?
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ
Pete Loveall AE5PL Lists wrote:
> Good point, Jason. However, I thought the idea is APRS, not APRS-IS, <=> E-mail. According to the spec, an APRS message packet has "max 67 chars" for the message and that should be the upper constraint since this is targeted to RF users IMO.
> Pete Loveall AE5PL
> pete at ae5pl dot net
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jason KG4WSV
>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:56 AM
>> gack! Think maybe you should check the APRS-IS design first? I don't
>> know the upper limit on packet size, but it would pay to check it out.
>> Think "APRS messages", not "small email".
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
More information about the aprssig