[ax25-layer2] even more thoughts

[Jason Winningham]

On Sep 20, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Robert Bruninga wrote:

>> To take an APRS example, if I'm in a WIDE3 area
>> and pass through a WIDE2 area, I must _manually_
>> change my PATH...
>
> No, when you enter a WIDE2-2 area, your WIDE3-3
> packet will still go one hop

So my packet goes one hop less that is appropriate, failing to cover 
the local area.

>  via the nerest digipeater
> to an IGate and you will still "get out"...

Well, that assumes both that there is an Igate in range, and getting to 
the internet is all I care about.  The former may or may not be true, 
and the latter is certainly wrong.


> What I object to is the stated purpose of this SIG
> to revise the AX.25 spec so that future compliant
> devices CANNOT be used in a compatible way with
> existing source-routing if the application needs it.

Maybe I mis-read something.  I thought the stated purpose of the SIG 
was to explore how AX.25 may be improved, as a data link layer.  It 
seems to me that cutting layer 3 baggage out would certainly be within 
the realm of discussion.  It is certainly appropriate to discuss 
whether backwards compatibility with previous versions is desirable.

> I say again, I fully support a sysop of the proposed
> new AX.25 to set up a digi or node and to disable
> source routing and to enforce it on his users.  But
> that is his and their choice.  but not forced in the spec
> to prohibit TNC's to be built.

There is nothing wrong with forcing a change in a new specification.  
It has nothing to do with "prohibiting TNCs to be built". It doesn't 
have anything to do with making people use it.  It has to do with 
exploring ways to improve amateur radio networks.

-Jason
kg4wsv