[aprssig] Re : Re : NWS ON rf
Steve Dimse steve at dimse.comSat May 9 19:38:17 UTC 2009
- Previous message: [aprssig] Re : Re : NWS ON rf
- Next message: [aprssig] Re : Re : NWS ON rf
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On May 9, 2009, at 3:05 PM, rttyman wrote: >> You cannot verify ANYTHING that appears on the APRS Internet System. > > LOL. What need of system, where anybody can send obsolete or flood > data? > Apparently it is quite useful! > > Leszek: >> For Sergey, if you want to stop no hams call, put in UI-View in the >> exclude liste, the >> call what you want not hear and the history is finish. >> 73 de F4ARO Leszek > > This is a problem! Too many 'tactical calls' over world, but filter > string > in APRS-IS specification is only limited to 512 chars (not words), hi! > Even its a hard man work to manually look at stream of data and add > new > tactical calls to the 'black list' on our side. I would recommend you filter on location rather than on callsign. > > Im propose to tactical calls operators to use figure 0 (zero) before > tactical call, I think you will find it is impossible to convince people to implement this. Many systems, for example Citizen Weather, depend on the calls as implemented currently. > Another solution possible in special user filter (to be writed by > APRSserver > developer) to stop (on choise) translation to client of tactical calls > (calls w/o number in proper position of source field) While the majority of calls fit a pattern, in recent years licenses have been given out, especially for special event stations, that do not meet the standard pattern. Steve K4HG
- Previous message: [aprssig] Re : Re : NWS ON rf
- Next message: [aprssig] Re : Re : NWS ON rf
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
