[aprssig] APRS vers. CWOP

Roger Elmore relmore at utm.edu
Thu Feb 28 23:59:53 CST 2013


Max KG4PID wrote:
> I've noticed that some hams send their weather data via 
> APRS-IS while others sent it to the CWOP. Is there an 
> advantage to one over the other?
 
Both the APRS servers that licensed Amateurs need a passcode to access (CWOP calls those "Private"), and the CWOP server rotation (CWOP calls those "Public") use port 14580  to get data to MADIS for quality checking.  

http://wxqa.com/servers2use.html

In my case, I used the "Public" CWOP servers for 3-4 years because I didn't RTFM and ask for a passcode.  Even with a Ham call as your CWOP station ID, you can get in on the "Public" servers with a direct internet connection.  After I got into APRS-RF, registered UI-View and got a passcode it all clicked, and I started using the "Private" servers.  My guess is that the majority of the Amateur calls you see with TCPXX in the packet path are not active in APRS-RF and probably don't really understand the APRS-IS side... they just see their station on findu (CWOP doesn't point people to aprs.fi like the tracker folks do) and they're happy.

Is there an advantage?  I've tried to get that question answered myself:

http://server.gladstonefamily.net/pipermail/wxqc/2012-September/015990.html

I tend to be on the side of, let the "Public" have the "Public" CWOP servers because it's all they *can* use, and I use the Amateur servers that need my passcode.  Since my weather station is connected direct to the internet (not on RF with a path to an IGate) I started using rotate.aprs2, then after a suggestion in the UI-View Yahoo Group switched to noam.aprs2.  A while later the same UI-View guru said he thought all weather was on firenet, so I switched to that.  

Personally I wouldn't mind some input on what "Private" server the folks here feel an Amateur should use with their passcode to get their weather data to MADIS.
--
Roger  KJ4AJP



More information about the aprssig mailing list