[aprssig] Centralised message server

[Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)]

Keith VE7GDH wrote:
> Personally, I don't think it's a good idea for some server to hold 
> messages for later delivery. The sender should send the message and 
> get an ACK... or not. We all know that no ACK doesn't necessarily mean 
> the recipient didn't get the message, but an ACK does mean that they 
> definitely did. Clients like UI-View can send a message <n> times and 
> then "retry on heard" if necessary. If it's the original sender 
> sending or re-sending the message, it's them that's receiving the ACK. 
> I think it would add a layer of complication if they had to check 
> elsewhere to see if an ACK had been sent by the recipient.
>

Your preference is exactly the reason for the message from the server 
offering to buffer and retry (not everyone is running UI-View or keeps 
it online for "retry on heard" to work) as well as offering the 3rd 
option to never offer again to that station.  I definitely wouldn't want 
a server delivering MY messages later unless I gave it permission to - 
on each and every occurrance.

As for the "check elsewhere for the ack", that'd be a good addition to 
my proposed design.  When a buffered message is finally delivered to (or 
denied by) the recipient, a positive acknowledge could be sent back to 
the originator (and automatically buffered) indicating that the message 
was (or was not) delivered along with a date/time stamp.

Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ