[aprssig] RK3KKPK? (CONNECTED Igates?)
bruninga at usna.edu
Sat Jan 28 21:11:21 CST 2012
> Seriously, isn't that what APRS-IS is already?
No, The global APRS Internet system is for UI packets only. There is no means of carrying a CONNECTED link from TNC A to TNC B with Igates and the internet in between.
So, why couldnt we? Of course one objection is the one we see here about security and control of packets sent back to RF via an IGate. But, if we only allowed CONNECTIONS, and no UI packets on this other APRS-CONNECTED channel, then nothing could be forced out of a remote IGate back to RF except connect-requests. No one could force inappropriate packets in the blind.
If a valid connection is established, then the CONNECTED-TO station would bear the responsibility for the traffic.
Just thinking outside the box.
>On 1/28/2012 8:45 PM, Bob Bruninga wrote:
>> Come to think about it, have I been asleep? Why couldn't we have an IGate system on 145.01 all over the USA linked into an IGATE system so that everyone's TNC was only a one-hop CONNECT away from any other TNC in the world?
>> We could call it APRS-CONNECT on 145.01 (if it has not been taken over by a DX cluster)...
>> Bob, WB4APR
More information about the aprssig