Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] Throttleing EchoLink Objects

Bob Bruninga bruninga at usna.edu
Thu Jul 23 01:41:05 UTC 2009


TOP POST:

ITs not about how people use aprs now.  (Too many trackers, and no one watching)...  Its all about how we should be using APRS with displays in the mobiles.  

And pushing very useful data like Echolink nodes so that any time, anywhere, I can look at my radio, and make a voice contact to anywhere on the planet is a powerful tool...

Build it and they will come! Bob, WB4APR


---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:35:28 -0400
>From: Steve Dimse <steve at dimse.com>  
>Subject: Re: [aprssig] Throttleing EchoLink Objects  
>To: TAPR APRS Mailing List <aprssig at tapr.org>
>
>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
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig at tapr.org
>https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig



More information about the aprssig mailing list