[aprssig] WIDEn-N question
bruninga at usna.edu
Wed Nov 4 08:09:31 CST 2009
I can not make sense out of all the back and forths here. So
here is what it should be:
For one hop: Use WIDE1-1
For two hops: Use WIDE1-1,WIDE2-1 (Higher reliability using
For two hops: Use WIDE2-2 (Slightly more efficient)
For 3 hops: Use WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 BUT NOT RECOMMENDED IN MOST
1 hop: Use WIDE1-1
1 hop: Or WIDE2-1 if there is no need to bring up your
2 hops: Use WIDE2-2
3 hops: Dont. If you need to go 3 or more hops, then chose a
SPECIFIC path in a given direction. Do NOT flood an entire
state just to talk to a station in one direction.
The beauty of the New-N paradigm is that all packets are now
TRACED and contain the PATH they took to reach you. If you need
to talk to someone at a distnace, reverse the path.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aprssig-bounces at tapr.org
> [mailto:aprssig-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf Of Steve Noskowicz
> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:54 PM
> To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [aprssig] WIDEn-N question
> Hi Lynn, I hafta' chuckle every time I see that (Mr)
> That's ok. I understand 100%. I am also only repeating my
> recollection/understanding (for validation or correction).
> Perhaps Bob will read my words and either confirm or suggest
> that I change my brand of sedative. (:-)
> I intentionally left this detail out of my Beginner Guide and
> just say "for a path, just use bla, bla". I also don't go
> into that level of detail when doing a talk since it is
> always beginners and it's better to just say use this path
> and shut up! - so to speak (:-).
> I remember reading the "...fix14439" page and questioning the
> ...WIDE 2-2 vs. WIDE3-2 and wanted to understand the
> purpose/intent/desire. I'm pretty sure I kept it off list.
> I had a desire for it to make sense and WIDE 2-2 seemed to
> rub me the wrong way when WIDE2-1 was "correct". I've been
> an Engineer way too long.
> Perhaps you can ping him to see if my interpretation was an
> original intent, or not. It sure seems reasonable to want to
> know the packet's intent.
> 73, Steve, K9DCI
> --- Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) wrote:
> > Steve,
> > I'm really not being contentious, but I've never seen a
> > recommendation of the N-1 described below. You caught
> > me at a good/bad time as I'm actually preparing an APRS
> > presentation for our local ham club and had just re-read the
> > following New-N Paradigm pages....
> > http://www.aprs.org/fix14439.html
> > http://www.aprs.org/newN/relayFIX.txt
> > As it says there, I've only seen WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 suggested
> > and never WIDE1-1,WIDE3-2 although I completely understand
> > the logic behind the latter.
> > Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ
> > Steve Noskowicz wrote:
> > > In other words, For strict adhereance to the New
> > Paradigm (and ignoring which digi uses which part of the
> > path), the above "should" be:
> > > WIDE1-1,WIDE2-1
> > > vs.
> > > WIDE1-1,WIDE3-2
> > > vs.
> > > WIDE1-1,WIDE4-3
> > >
> > > to be completely correct (again, ignoring
> > if it is wise to do).
> > >
> > > On this one WIDE1-1,WIDE3-2 you
> > will sometines see that WIDE1-1,WIDE2-2 is sometimes
> > recommended instead. That is the one that Bob said
> > would be expected by come operators (who look at such
> > things) and that is was "ok" for that reason even though it
> > is not per the paradigm.
> > >
> > > Hope that is clear ...um... and that I "get" the
> > paradigm.
> > >
> > > 73, Steve, K9DCI
> > >
> > > --- On Tue, 11/3/09, Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)
> <ldeffenb at homeside.to>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > aprssig mailing list
> > aprssig at tapr.org
> > https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
More information about the aprssig