[aprssig] Questions about Callsigns Used in APRS

Kenneth Finnegan kennethfinnegan2007 at gmail.com
Mon Sep 26 11:17:52 CDT 2016


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu> wrote:

> ➢ "Total length of logins/callsigns may not exceed 9 characters including
> the SSID if present."
>
> TNC callsigns are 6 plus up to 2 digit SSID and a hyphen.  But for anything
> else that can also be put on the map as an object or item the field is 9.
>

I'm talking about APRS station callsigns which aren't using TNCs but are
directly attached to the Internet. Pete clarified offline that my
interpretation was correct; seven character callsigns with one character
SSIDs and eight or nine character station callsigns with no SSID are
acceptable.

This does mean that any software parsing callsigns from the APRS-IS can't
rely on them being 6x2 in length. Check your buffer lengths everyone!


>
> > 2. What is the minimum length for SSn-N aliases? Two? One? Probably two
> to
> > meet the APRS minimum of three when the 'n' is appended?
>
> The minimum length of any callsign or object/item in APRS is 3 characters.
> SSn-N seems to work, Im not sure about how actual hardware digipeaters
> handle say Sn-N?
>

I came to that realization that that 3 minimum dictated 2 char minimum for
SSn-N. Aliases must be 2-5 characters.


>
> > 5. Is GATE still a valid special handling token worth documenting and
> > supporting?
>
> Only a dual Port TNC or other VHF to HF gateway needs to handle it.
>

Woah... I thought VHF to HF digis weren't at all allowed.


>
> > Do HF stations requesting GATE actually want to land on everyone's VHF
> > LANs...
>
> Aboslutely not.  That would be the worst operating practice.  Unless
> someone
> is calling MAYDAY, etc...  so leave it in.
>

So we don't want regular HF to VHF traffic either? Only for MAYDAYs seems
like an incredibly small use case for developers to write in support for
GATE on multi-port digipeaters. Any of our 30m operators want to chime in
with what they want these days? Is it good enough to have your own I-gates
and rely on RF-gate routing for any cross-band capabilities? That
deprecates the GATE alias.


Thanks for the feedback.
--
Kenneth Finnegan
http://blog.thelifeofkenneth.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig/attachments/20160926/54609997/attachment.html>


More information about the aprssig mailing list