[aprssig] Throttleing EchoLink Objects
Steve Dimse steve at dimse.comThu Jul 23 01:35:28 UTC 2009
- Previous message: [aprssig] Throttleing EchoLink Objects
- Next message: [aprssig] Gating Objects from Internet to RF (Really Final?)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Before we talk about throttling ideas, why don't we decide how much bandwidth is acceptable so you have a target to aim for. The first issue is how useful is this, really? If this is incredibly useful for a handful of people, bandwidth > 1% may be worthwhile. Same if it is a little useful to a lot of users. Even if it is useful to no one except in emergencies I could buy it. BUT.... It certain is not useful to a lot of people. Home users are definitely better served by the Echolink online web pages. APRS users in their home area know, or can easily find out, the echolink stations in their area. Don't even bother with trackers. Emergencies? Well, if the internet is unavailable this proposed data is worthless. So that only leaves people traveling outside their home area, without mobile internet, that want to use an echolink node. In my estimation this is a vanishingly small number, one that will continue to shrink every year. Furthermore, there is a real Achilles heel to this... local IGate operators MUST put the callsigns of the local nodes in their blessed list. Without a way to automatically IGate all of this data out to the local RF networks where it is needed, even the very small numbers of people that might benefit will not, and could not, depend on this data. I'll listen to competing arguments, but to me there is nothing in this data that justifies more than a 1% increase. Steve K4HG
- Previous message: [aprssig] Throttleing EchoLink Objects
- Next message: [aprssig] Gating Objects from Internet to RF (Really Final?)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
