[aprssig] SSID Standardization

Steve Noskowicz noskosteve at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 7 20:12:43 CDT 2010

--- Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr)  wrote:

> -7 is decidedly NOT ok for both, if they will ever be
> active at the same time.  ...All sorts of> havoc results 

That's an obvious issue I knew would cause probems, but wanted to point out the conflict I see.

It means some 'other ham' is in that vehicle and, therefore one could argue that he "should" be identified as such (local info-wise), or it could be some other thing requiring another full ID all together.

I'm trying to step back and trigger thoughts on a higher level.
My point is that the true purpose of the SSID (in current times) may need(re)definition.  Perhaps vehicle/station type is not a good purpose.

There may be another usefull, global purpose - if not the local definitions already suggested.  However local definitions make it meaningless on APRS-IS, right?   ...  and perhaps that's ok.

I see a real conflict.  In legacy displays, the SSID can give an immediate piece of info, without scrolling to see the symbol, as to the vehicle type.

This is fallout from the adaptation the AX.25 packet for all the new uses - gets sticky finding the right fit, especialy with legacy equipment. When to cut the cord with legacy...



More information about the aprssig mailing list