No subject

between the CGates, the only translation needed to flag the CGATE digi as<b=
r>
used (CGATE*). The TCP connection would probably use the KISS protocol as<b=
r>
the data format for simplicity, this would require KISS TNCs on each end to=
<br>
be able to send out packets with the callsign of the person on the other en=
d<br>
of the connection.<br>
<br>
A problem would be multiple CGates in range of a single RF originating<br>
station. In that case the operator would need to use the call of one of the=
<br>
CGates in place of the generic CGATE via. The other end is not a problem<br=
>
because the originator&#39;s CGate would only connect to a single CGate at =
the<br>
destination, though you may want to add in some sort of quality test in the=
<br>
routing table so the better of two CGates is the one in the table.<br>
<br>
Personally, I am not convinced this is worth the effort, I doubt it would<b=
r>
attract many users, but if someone wanted to try this is the way I would<br=
>
recommend they do it. You only need write one piece of software (the CGate)=
,<br>
the configuration is automatic, it uses existing infrastructure (at least<b=
r>
during testing) and the RF users need know nothing about the internet<br>
network, it just looks like a digi.<br>
<br>
Steve K4HG<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
aprssig mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:aprssig at tapr.org">aprssig at tapr.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig" target=3D=
"_blank">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
aprssig mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:aprssig at tapr.org">aprssig at tapr.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig" target=3D=
"_blank">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>

--90e6ba21238178ce1f04b7c86779--