Discussion:
Paths - Solution proposal
Mark Cheavens
2014-07-13 13:53:53 UTC
Permalink
With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months
being paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the
current problem and what we should work together to first come up
with a needs list and to secondly work to solve the issue.

While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are
many new users and it might be time for a reminder.

The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently
available (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or
clones, as well as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.

The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the
TNC-2's have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.

As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end
users (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should
be in many different operating environments and parts of the country.

Solution:
Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
- (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)

The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based
upon the current load of the network.

The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay
it to see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.

The digipeater will have to know:
It's location
It's PHG (coverage area)
How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and antenna
elevation above that terrain).
List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
- That list will also keep track of the packet location
Current channel loading

We need the digi to decide!

Examples:
If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location
and the location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from
this station in X minutes the packet should be repeated!
(x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it
has heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).

- If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a
packet was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the
packet be digipeated?
- Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel loading is
zero, then why not! (Private or test network)

If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the
packet be digipeated?
- Was it heard directly?
- Was it digipeated by another digi?
- What is the channel loading?
- Is the station moving or fixed?
- How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?

----------------------------
With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working
on a modern solution.
- Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small
single board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
- An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)

The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but simply
to point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed and
begin to think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to have
"path" problems.

Respectfully,
Mark Cheavens
KC5EVE
Mike Goldweber
2014-07-13 14:31:05 UTC
Permalink
Hi Mark,

I like the idea because it relieves the end user of the responsibility to
know when and how to use the "paths". It leaves the responsibility with
those who are the experts in this area.

Normally, I would argue for putting the responsibility on the end user.
However, given the end user can't, or don't know bow to use this setting we
should look for another solution. Mark, your idea is a good one.

Best Regards,
Mike Goldweber
KB3IXO

Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com


On July 13, 2014 9:56:37 AM Mark Cheavens <mcheavens-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months being
> paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the current
> problem and what we should work together to first come up with a needs list
> and to secondly work to solve the issue.
>
> While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are many new
> users and it might be time for a reminder.
>
> The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently available
> (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or clones, as well
> as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.
>
> The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the TNC-2's
> have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.
>
> As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end users
> (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should be in many
> different operating environments and parts of the country.
>
> Solution:
> Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
> - (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)
>
> The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based upon
> the current load of the network.
>
> The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay it to
> see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.
>
> The digipeater will have to know:
> It's location
> It's PHG (coverage area)
> How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
> It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and antenna
> elevation above that terrain).
> List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
> - That list will also keep track of the packet location
> Current channel loading
>
> We need the digi to decide!
>
> Examples:
> If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location and the
> location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from this station in
> X minutes the packet should be repeated!
> (x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it has
> heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).
>
> - If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a packet
> was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the packet be
> digipeated?
> - Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel loading is zero,
> then why not! (Private or test network)
>
> If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the packet
> be digipeated?
> - Was it heard directly?
> - Was it digipeated by another digi?
> - What is the channel loading?
> - Is the station moving or fixed?
> - How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?
>
> ----------------------------
> With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on a
> modern solution.
> - Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small single
> board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
> - An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)
>
> The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but simply to
> point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed and begin to
> think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to have "path" problems.
>
> Respectfully,
> Mark Cheavens
> KC5EVE
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
David Flood
2014-07-13 14:50:41 UTC
Permalink
Mark,

While your ideas would work if we were starting from scratch, it will
probably fail as a redesign due to two reasons:

1) It makes the same fatal assumption that almost every computer programmer
is making these days, that everyone has (or can afford) the most modern
hot-rod hardware available.

2) That all deployed hardware is junk and should be replaced

Just as in the computer world not everyone has 64 Gig of RAM (but every
programmer writes as if they do) and a video system that supports
resolutions normally only seen in stadiums, not everyone in the Ham world
wants to buy, configure, and mess with the equivalent of a Raspberry PI with
a TNC-PI and radio attached.

Dave
KD7MYC


-----Original Message-----
From: aprssig-bounces-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces-***@public.gmane.org] On Behalf
Of Mark Cheavens
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 6:54 AM
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
Subject: [aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal

<snip>
With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on a
modern solution.
<snip>
David Andrzejewski
2014-07-13 15:01:36 UTC
Permalink
I'm not sure how I feel about Mark's solution, but just for sake of
argument, perhaps there's a compromise.

Warning: This would make things confusing for users.

Let the users specify the path as they do today - this maintains
compatibility with everything that currently exists. New or upgraded
digis could have this new logic in them, and if they do, they can ignore
the path and try to determine what's best for the network at that
moment. This would be a good transitional phase.

An analogue to this is multi-input voice repeater systems. You've got
some out there that allow the user to manually select which input they
use, usually via PL tone. Others use a voting comparator, and they
determine which input gets used automatically - the onus is not on the
end user to make decisions, the repeater "just works."



- Dave

On 2014-07-13 10:50, David Flood wrote:
> Mark,
>
> While your ideas would work if we were starting from scratch, it will
> probably fail as a redesign due to two reasons:
>
> 1) It makes the same fatal assumption that almost every computer
> programmer
> is making these days, that everyone has (or can afford) the most modern
> hot-rod hardware available.
>
> 2) That all deployed hardware is junk and should be replaced
>
> Just as in the computer world not everyone has 64 Gig of RAM (but every
> programmer writes as if they do) and a video system that supports
> resolutions normally only seen in stadiums, not everyone in the Ham
> world
> wants to buy, configure, and mess with the equivalent of a Raspberry PI
> with
> a TNC-PI and radio attached.
>
> Dave
> KD7MYC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aprssig-bounces-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:aprssig-bounces-***@public.gmane.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Mark Cheavens
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 6:54 AM
> To: TAPR APRS Mailing List
> Subject: [aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal
>
> <snip>
> With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on
> a
> modern solution.
> <snip>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
andre
2014-07-13 18:02:04 UTC
Permalink
op 13-07-14 16:50, David Flood schreef:
> not everyone in the Ham world wants to buy, configure, and mess
> with the equivalent of a Raspberry PI with a TNC-PI and radio
> attached.
>
a propperly configured KPC3+ will cost more and take as much effort to
buy and configure a raspberry pi and tnc-pi combo, I'm guessing the
reason people are sticking to a KPC3+ is that they know it.

73 de Andre PE1RDW
KA7O
2014-07-15 03:02:21 UTC
Permalink
Not simply because it's known - but more importantly from my viewpoint,
they're currently in hand. There's no new investment to make.

Firmware, software, kiss bolt on - these are all more attractive than
re-purchasing all new kit.

73


On 07/13/2014 12:02 PM, andre wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> op 13-07-14 16:50, David Flood schreef:
>> not everyone in the Ham world wants to buy, configure, and mess
>> with the equivalent of a Raspberry PI with a TNC-PI and radio
>> attached.
>>
> a propperly configured KPC3+ will cost more and take as much effort to
> buy and configure a raspberry pi and tnc-pi combo, I'm guessing the
> reason people are sticking to a KPC3+ is that they know it.
>
> 73 de Andre PE1RDW
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTwsmcAAoJEA/hRutfGlBmIRIIANRrvkAZVtp3qXLFPNR6odCZ
> C8SIXLJGEnHJLEu1OPwu09FgtzQ5g3McVwbVKkoC90vrmtd/NWcZFDJE03WL1G3Y
> mvcRtBuW3Nhp+ssclYVEctPsEDMGCsNagMELR0lJV7NSL7J0X92bibDDbvCGckGa
> vSuoHB1Qu9jmpy+4dWCoVYrV21k6H4uI/ri4pJkEcsk6Dd0CdwbWZ5OxNsbnTF68
> 3juG5sfhBRJwaHVExJ329yl3aHE75zqcizGL9yXlA67kWHq4kvXJnP8olt/4jMZc
> YgopldGHMJUwBhh+Nx5mlJ+TjQfPSEm16q7HtzAqrMbTQ1+q9WXDwuwfQxIdaCY=
> =d3w/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
Keith VE7GDH
2014-07-15 14:06:31 UTC
Permalink
KA7O wrote...

> Not simply because it's known - but more importantly from my
> viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's no new investment
> to make.

APRS was built on using existing equipment. For many people, that is
important, but how long do we continue to use old technology? Another 5
years? 25? 100? What we have works for now, and does a surprisingly good
job considering the limitations. However, I suspect we won't be running
1200 bits per second with a maximum of 50-65 users within earshot and
having to fiddle with paths forever. Change will come. It's just a
matter of when.

--
73 Keith VE7GDH
UI-View32
www.ui-view.net
Mike Goldweber
2014-07-15 14:29:55 UTC
Permalink
Just a thought on this point. My ARES group is getting up to speed on digital communications, but we are quickly hitting limitation when it comes time for supporting our served agencies. For example, we've got software that lets us use a nice GUI for sending/receiving emails, and even some of the government forms. This software converts forms into text, and the baud rates are fine. Where we will run into difficulty is when a non-ham (ie someone who doesn't understand the tech, or its limitations), and expects us to send a word document loaded with photographs.

We are looking at other options to get around these limitations, e.g. wireless mesh networks. So, I think the TNCs are fine for some work, we should be open to new tech along with how APRS standards can utilize the new functionality.

73,
Mike Goldweber
KB3IXO


--------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal
From: "Keith VE7GDH" <ve7gdh-***@public.gmane.org>
Date: 7/15/14 10:06 am
To: "TAPR APRS Mailing List" <aprssig-***@public.gmane.org>

KA7O wrote...

> Not simply because it's known - but more importantly from my
> viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's no new investment
> to make.

APRS was built on using existing equipment. For many people, that is
important, but how long do we continue to use old technology? Another 5
years? 25? 100? What we have works for now, and does a surprisingly good
job considering the limitations. However, I suspect we won't be running
1200 bits per second with a maximum of 50-65 users within earshot and
having to fiddle with paths forever. Change will come. It's just a
matter of when.

--
73 Keith VE7GDH
UI-View32
www.ui-view.net
_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
Scott Miller
2014-07-16 01:17:55 UTC
Permalink
I've been driving around with a prototype magnetically mounted 9600
baud, 2/3 watt, 440 MHz self-contained tracker with a battery life of
about 10 days (assuming 8 hours moving per day), putting out packets
every 6 seconds. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to get it up to 4 time
slots per second from the current 2 per second with a little more
tweaking. I have yet to determine if the TH-D7A acting as my IGate can
keep up with that packet rate, though.

So yeah, people are still working on it. There are only so many hours
in the day, though.

Scott
N1VG

On 7/15/2014 7:06 AM, Keith VE7GDH wrote:
> KA7O wrote...
>
>> Not simply because it's known - but more importantly from my
>> viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's no new investment
>> to make.
>
> APRS was built on using existing equipment. For many people, that is
> important, but how long do we continue to use old technology? Another
> 5 years? 25? 100? What we have works for now, and does a surprisingly
> good job considering the limitations. However, I suspect we won't be
> running 1200 bits per second with a maximum of 50-65 users within
> earshot and having to fiddle with paths forever. Change will come.
> It's just a matter of when.
>
Jason KG4WSV
2014-07-15 14:12:30 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:02 PM, KA7O <ka7o-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> but more importantly from my viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's
> no new investment to make.


so, you're typing this message on your Commodore 64 or TRS-80, right?

-Jason
kg4wsv
Bill Vodall
2014-07-15 16:33:46 UTC
Permalink
>> but more importantly from my viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's
>> no new investment to make.
>
> so, you're typing this message on your Commodore 64 or TRS-80, right?

I thought of rotary dial telephones...

The new hardware is cheaper than coffee at Starbucks. The software is
available. Let's start using it.

Bill, WA7NWP
Stephen H. Smith
2014-07-15 17:49:53 UTC
Permalink
On 7/15/2014 12:33 PM, Bill Vodall wrote:
>>> but more importantly from my viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's
>>> no new investment to make.
>>
>> so, you're typing this message on your Commodore 64 or TRS-80, right?
>
> I thought of rotary dial telephones...
>
> The new hardware is cheaper than coffee at Starbucks. The software is
> available. Let's start using it.
>
> Bill, WA7NWP

It's the same-old same-old issue:

What IBM, in the face of the failure of their PS/2 Microchannel architecture
PCs in the face of machines with ISA and PCI slots, once called

"The tyranny of the installed base"

It's the thousands of Kenwood and Yaesu all-in-one APRS radios, embedding
unchangeable copies of the archaic 35-year-old 1200-baud AX.25 protocol, that
provide a powerful dis-incentive to change.

Unless the FCC takes action in the way they did for digital TV (i.e. ban analog
transmission after a certain date) and decrees a drop-dead date for AX.25, I
don't any significant uptake of newer, faster, more robust protocols anytime soon.

______________________________________________________________________


--

Stephen H. Smith wa8lmf (at) aol.com
Skype: WA8LMF
EchoLink: Node # 14400 [Think bottom of the 2-meter band]
Home Page: http://wa8lmf.net

Long-Range APRS on 30 Meters HF
http://wa8lmf.net/aprs/HF_APRS_Notes.htm

"APRS 101" Explanation of APRS Path Selection & Digipeating
http://wa8lmf.net/DigiPaths
Chris Howard w0ep
2014-07-15 18:22:35 UTC
Permalink
Please don't invoke the FCC for this!

Anyone can put up a station that does both AX25 and protocol X.

Anyone can build a black box to sit between the radio and antenna
to translate AX25 to/from protocol X, or a gateway that does the same.

It's amateur radio. If you want to do something, go do it.




On 7/15/2014 12:49 PM, Stephen H. Smith wrote:
> On 7/15/2014 12:33 PM, Bill Vodall wrote:
>>>> but more importantly from my viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's
>>>> no new investment to make.
>>>
>>> so, you're typing this message on your Commodore 64 or TRS-80, right?
>>
>> I thought of rotary dial telephones...
>>
>> The new hardware is cheaper than coffee at Starbucks. The software is
>> available. Let's start using it.
>>
>> Bill, WA7NWP
>
> It's the same-old same-old issue:
>
> What IBM, in the face of the failure of their PS/2 Microchannel architecture PCs in the face of machines with ISA and PCI slots, once called
>
> "The tyranny of the installed base"
>
> It's the thousands of Kenwood and Yaesu all-in-one APRS radios, embedding unchangeable copies of the archaic 35-year-old 1200-baud AX.25 protocol, that provide a powerful dis-incentive to change.
>
> Unless the FCC takes action in the way they did for digital TV (i.e. ban analog transmission after a certain date) and decrees a drop-dead date for AX.25, I don't any significant uptake of newer, faster, more robust protocols anytime soon.
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> --
>
> Stephen H. Smith wa8lmf (at) aol.com
> Skype: WA8LMF
> EchoLink: Node # 14400 [Think bottom of the 2-meter band]
> Home Page: http://wa8lmf.net
>
> Long-Range APRS on 30 Meters HF
> http://wa8lmf.net/aprs/HF_APRS_Notes.htm
>
> "APRS 101" Explanation of APRS Path Selection & Digipeating
> http://wa8lmf.net/DigiPaths
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
andre
2014-07-15 18:41:00 UTC
Permalink
op 15-07-14 20:22, Chris Howard w0ep schreef:
>
> Please don't invoke the FCC for this!
>
> Anyone can put up a station that does both AX25 and protocol X.
>
> Anyone can build a black box to sit between the radio and antenna
> to translate AX25 to/from protocol X, or a gateway that does the
> same.
>
> It's amateur radio. If you want to do something, go do it.
>

Wel put, DPRS proves this point perfectly, originaly it was only
intended that dstar exchange GPS data between eachother but users made
gateways between dstar and aprs.

Drats is another case proving this. it can gateway between ax.25 and
dstar lowspeed data.

73 Andre PE1RDW
Mark Cheavens
2014-07-15 19:15:37 UTC
Permalink
I am not proposing changing the installed using base, just improved
routing at the Digi level.
- Stay with 1200 baud....

For a faster network, we have to build an all new infrastructure.

We need a better solution that either uses the existing TNC's in KISS
mode or an all in one solution. We could then get the sysops to
install using the existing radio's.

Mark
KC5EVE
At 12:49 PM 7/15/2014, you wrote:
>On 7/15/2014 12:33 PM, Bill Vodall wrote:
>>>>but more importantly from my viewpoint, they're currently in hand. There's
>>>>no new investment to make.
>>>
>>>so, you're typing this message on your Commodore 64 or TRS-80, right?
>>
>>I thought of rotary dial telephones...
>>
>>The new hardware is cheaper than coffee at Starbucks. The software is
>>available. Let's start using it.
>>
>>Bill, WA7NWP
>
>It's the same-old same-old issue:
>
>What IBM, in the face of the failure of their PS/2 Microchannel
>architecture PCs in the face of machines with ISA and PCI slots, once called
>
>"The tyranny of the installed base"
>
>It's the thousands of Kenwood and Yaesu all-in-one APRS radios,
>embedding unchangeable copies of the archaic 35-year-old 1200-baud
>AX.25 protocol, that provide a powerful dis-incentive to change.
>
>Unless the FCC takes action in the way they did for digital TV (i.e.
>ban analog transmission after a certain date) and decrees a
>drop-dead date for AX.25, I don't any significant uptake of newer,
>faster, more robust protocols anytime soon.
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>
>
>--
>
>Stephen H. Smith wa8lmf (at) aol.com
>Skype: WA8LMF
>EchoLink: Node # 14400 [Think bottom of the 2-meter band]
>Home Page: http://wa8lmf.net
>
> Long-Range APRS on 30 Meters HF
> http://wa8lmf.net/aprs/HF_APRS_Notes.htm
>
>"APRS 101" Explanation of APRS Path Selection & Digipeating
> http://wa8lmf.net/DigiPaths
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
Robert Bruninga
2014-07-13 14:33:41 UTC
Permalink
I'm sorry to have to offer this rebuttal. The problem with this scheme is
that it assumes every packet is of equal value, and its goal is to maintain
a constant level of loading on the network independent of any "value" to
the users or the situation. This is an anathma of human communication and
can be considered almost as a classic definition of maintaining noise level
rather than information throughput...

Only the sender of a packet knows its immediate value, and only the sender
knows where he wants it to go. The digipeaters are stupid, or a better way
to say it is that they should do what they are told by the sender.

Bob, WB4APR

On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Mark Cheavens <mcheavens-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months being
> paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the current
> problem and what we should work together to first come up with a needs list
> and to secondly work to solve the issue.
>
> While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are many
> new users and it might be time for a reminder.
>
> The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently available
> (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or clones, as well
> as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.
>
> The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the TNC-2's
> have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.
>
> As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end users
> (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should be in many
> different operating environments and parts of the country.
>
> Solution:
> Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
> - (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)
>
> The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based upon
> the current load of the network.
>
> The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay it to
> see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.
>
> The digipeater will have to know:
> It's location
> It's PHG (coverage area)
> How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
> It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and antenna
> elevation above that terrain).
> List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
> - That list will also keep track of the packet location
> Current channel loading
>
> We need the digi to decide!
>
> Examples:
> If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location and
> the location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from this
> station in X minutes the packet should be repeated!
> (x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it has
> heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).
>
> - If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a packet
> was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the packet be
> digipeated?
> - Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel loading
> is zero, then why not! (Private or test network)
>
> If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the packet
> be digipeated?
> - Was it heard directly?
> - Was it digipeated by another digi?
> - What is the channel loading?
> - Is the station moving or fixed?
> - How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?
>
> ----------------------------
> With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on a
> modern solution.
> - Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small
> single board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
> - An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)
>
> The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but simply to
> point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed and begin to
> think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to have "path" problems.
>
> Respectfully,
> Mark Cheavens
> KC5EVE
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
Jason KG4WSV
2014-07-13 17:13:39 UTC
Permalink
Bob, when is the last time you have actually _used_ a path other than
a standard WIDEn-n or staten-n variant?

More to the point, when is the last time you've actually _needed_ to
source route a packet?

-Jason
kg4wsv
Robert Bruninga
2014-07-18 06:58:02 UTC
Permalink
WHen was the last time you dialed 911?
I assume zero. Therefore we dont need it right?

Bob, Wb4aPR


On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Jason KG4WSV <kg4wsv-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Bob, when is the last time you have actually _used_ a path other than
> a standard WIDEn-n or staten-n variant?
>
> More to the point, when is the last time you've actually _needed_ to
> source route a packet?
>
> -Jason
> kg4wsv
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
Jason KG4WSV
2014-07-18 10:45:51 UTC
Permalink
> On Jul 18, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> WHen was the last time you dialed 911?
> I assume zero. Therefore we dont need it right?

You are equating source routing with 911 service?

I assume this response is to avoid admitting you have never used it, never needed it, and you are holding back the entire APRS network infrastructure to preserve a feature you think you might need one day.

-j
Robert Bruninga
2014-07-18 14:29:13 UTC
Permalink
I use source routing frequently. Rather than shotgunning my APRS packets
in all directions, If I am doing something special (quite often actually) I
will chose specific digipeaters by callsign to get my packte going in the
right direction and then let it go out from there.

Or the opposite, do a generic 1 or 21 hops to cover the area where I am
operating but then letting it go one more hop to a known intended area.

This is common when one is in the highest density of APRS traffic in the
country, and it makes no sense to flood the greater mid-atlantic when a
smart selection of an entry in the DIGI field can tailor the path to only
the area of interest.

Some people can just plug-n-play, but some others like to understand the
network and hone their skills to use it effectively.. - by choosing where
their packets go --

Bob, WB4APR
Bob, Wb4APR


On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Jason KG4WSV <kg4wsv-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> > On Jul 18, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > WHen was the last time you dialed 911?
> > I assume zero. Therefore we dont need it right?
>
> You are equating source routing with 911 service?
>
> I assume this response is to avoid admitting you have never used it, never
> needed it, and you are holding back the entire APRS network infrastructure
> to preserve a feature you think you might need one day.
>
> -j
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
AC
2014-07-18 19:44:09 UTC
Permalink
The Internet can get my packets going in the right direction to the
destination I want and yet I don't need to source route to do it. I
tell the Internet where the packet should go and the Internet routers
decide how best to get the packet to my destination.

If I want to reach multiple people at once it does that, too, it's
called a broadcast packet (or a multicast packet for a finite list of
targets) and it knows how to route those, too, and much more
intelligently than I could on the fly.

If a digi in the middle of my routed path goes down, then a smart digi
network will be able to heal itself and route the packet around the dead
node without me having to know it's dead. Source routing doesn't allow
that (even Internet source routing had the same problems -- think about
all the UUCP mail that was lost because a node in the middle was dead
and you didn't or couldn't know)

I don't have to source route and I don't need to source route yet I have
an excellent grasp of how the network works and how to work within it to
do anything needed that might be remotely special. There's a reason the
Internet ditched it as TCP/IP, BGP, RIP, OSPF and other protocols made
things much smoother both for the end user and the network maintainers.

The APRS network would benefit from the same. If I want to reach an
IGate, then I should only need to specify a path of "IGATE" and let the
network handle it. Likewise if I intend to send a message, then I
should only need to specify a path of the end user's call (much like I'm
specifying the email address of this list) and the system will get the
message there by its own determination. I don't care how my email is
making it to the list, I just want it to get to the list.

For general area coverage it would just need to be some kind of standard
but specialized targets. For example, perhaps I want everyone within 20
miles of my station. Maybe the target would be "20MI". Since my
position is known because it's in the packet and a digipeater already
knows its own location, a smart digipeater could decide to forward to
the next or not depending on its distance from me.

This could apply to a digipeater, too. If I specify a digipeater's call
as the target then I'm stating "Please route my packet to this
digipeater for broadcast". If I specify more than one digipeater or
more than one end user call, then that's a multicast. I don't need a
path, I just need the destinations.

Maybe a slightly modified version of the "20MI" target for regions
without specifying a digipeater. Perhaps something like 315-04520MI
means hop to anyone that lies between the bearings 315 degrees and 045
degrees (so everyone north of me no farther than NW or NE). If the
receiving station is inside those bearings and within the 20 mile range
then repeat the packet otherwise drop it.

It would certainly be simpler for a drive cross country to program
"IGATE" once than to change over and over as I change regions.


On 2014-07-18 07:29, Robert Bruninga wrote:
> I use source routing frequently. Rather than shotgunning my APRS packets
> in all directions, If I am doing something special (quite often actually) I
> will chose specific digipeaters by callsign to get my packte going in the
> right direction and then let it go out from there.
>
> Or the opposite, do a generic 1 or 21 hops to cover the area where I am
> operating but then letting it go one more hop to a known intended area.
>
> This is common when one is in the highest density of APRS traffic in the
> country, and it makes no sense to flood the greater mid-atlantic when a
> smart selection of an entry in the DIGI field can tailor the path to only
> the area of interest.
>
> Some people can just plug-n-play, but some others like to understand the
> network and hone their skills to use it effectively.. - by choosing where
> their packets go --
>
> Bob, WB4APR
> Bob, Wb4APR
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Jason KG4WSV <kg4wsv-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>> On Jul 18, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> WHen was the last time you dialed 911?
>>> I assume zero. Therefore we dont need it right?
>>
>> You are equating source routing with 911 service?
>>
>> I assume this response is to avoid admitting you have never used it, never
>> needed it, and you are holding back the entire APRS network infrastructure
>> to preserve a feature you think you might need one day.
>>
>> -j
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aprssig mailing list
>> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
Mark Cheavens
2014-07-19 01:16:17 UTC
Permalink
Bob,
What I have suggested would not eliminate
"source" routing, but only be a better/smarter
system based solution for "generic" paths.
- A specific source routed packet could be given
HIGHER priority based upon that alone.
- Think if you were in DC, but needed to "flood"
or try to flood packets a few 100 miles away.
- You could "source route" to that area
(with the highest priority) and then "flood" from that point around.

I like the idea.

Mark Cheavens
KC5EVE

At 09:29 AM 7/18/2014, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>I use source routing frequently. Â Rather than
>shotgunning my APRS packets in all directions,
>If I am doing something special (quite often
>actually) I will chose specific digipeaters by
>callsign to get my packte going in the right
>direction and then let it go out from there.
>
>Or the opposite, do a generic 1 or 21 hops to
>cover the area where I am operating but then
>letting it go one more hop to a known intended area.
>
>This is common when one is in the highest
>density of APRS traffic in the country, and it
>makes no sense to flood the greater mid-atlantic
>when a smart selection of an entry in the DIGI
>field can tailor the path to only the area of interest.
>
>Some people can just plug-n-play, but some
>others like to understand the network and hone
>their skills to use it effectively.. Â - by choosing where their packets go --
>
>Bob, WB4APR
>Bob, Wb4APR
>
>
>On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Jason KG4WSV
><<mailto:kg4wsv-***@public.gmane.org>kg4wsv-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 18, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Robert Bruninga
> <<mailto:bruninga-***@public.gmane.org>bruninga-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > WHen was the last time you dialed 911?
> > I assume zero. Â Therefore we dont need it right?
>
>You are equating source routing with 911 service?
>
>I assume this response is to avoid admitting you
>have never used it, never needed it, and you are
>holding back the entire APRS network
>infrastructure to preserve a feature you think you might need one day.
>
>-j
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
><mailto:aprssig-***@public.gmane.org>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
Richard Sharp, KQ4KX
2014-07-13 20:25:16 UTC
Permalink
I too have to agree with Bob. A properly educated user originating a packet should be able to control their packet dissemination.



It seems to me the real “problem” we are experiencing is either inconsiderate or uninformed users that are utilizing the APRS network with no regard for others.



Since the vast majority of these airborne ops are using the dumb tracker equipment perhaps there should be a prominent description in the manuals for these types of equipment provided by their manufacturer. Particularly, what NOT to do if using them airborne.



Every year during the Sun-N-Fun fly-in I see countless airplanes on my local APRS map with the “default” land based paths. Clearly, these ops are simply buying these trackers (possibly preconfigured) and using them. Usually, when I see an airplane on my map just passing through the local network flooding is only for a short time. But during the weeklong fly-in there are multiple planes up flying around the area beaconing. Oh, and look up their callsign on QRZ.com and of course – NO email address listed. Or, they’re using the plane’s tail number as a tactical callsign and may or may not have their actual callsign listed in the payload.



Richard
Mark Cheavens
2014-07-13 23:03:50 UTC
Permalink
So as you move from area to area around the
country you know the system layout and loading
and change your path accordingly?

I know that 99+% of "users" do not change from day to day, minute to minute.

The system should do that dynamically.

To answer Bob's concern about "importance" of the
packet. If the packet is a new and unique packet,
then it would automatically have a higher
priority than a redundant packet sent within a short period of time.
- If "Importance" is the concern, then a bit could indicate the importance.

As a sysop of many digi's, I would immediately
upgrade my radio's. We are talking about under
$150.00 for either a Tracker3($95.00) (If new
firmware were written for it to support a new
methodology) or for a TNC-Pi and a Raspberry Pi.

"Existing" paths would still work during the
transition. In high density area's the transition could occur first.

If a local sysop can't afford that "minor"
investment in an upgraded infrastructure, then
I'm sure other users in the area could come
together to support it. Donate the old TNC to a home station that needs it.

Mark
KC5EVE

At 03:25 PM 7/13/2014, Richard Sharp, KQ4KX wrote:
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0031_01CF9EB7.082F8710"
>Content-Language: en-us
>
>I too have to agree with Bob. A properly
>educated user originating a packet should be
>able to control their packet dissemination.
>
>It seems to me the real “problem” we are
>experiencing is either inconsiderate or
>uninformed users that are utilizing the APRS
>network with no regard for others.
>
>Since the vast majority of these airborne ops
>are using the dumb tracker equipment perhaps
>there should be a prominent description in the
>manuals for these types of equipment provided by
>their manufacturer. Particularly, what NOT to do if using them airborne.
>
>Every year during the Sun-N-Fun fly-in I see
>countless airplanes on my local APRS map with
>the “default” land based paths. Clearly,
>these ops are simply buying these trackers
>(possibly preconfigured) and using
>them. Usually, when I see an airplane on my
>map just passing through the local network
>flooding is only for a short time. But during
>the weeklong fly-in there are multiple planes up
>flying around the area beaconing. Oh, and look
>up their callsign on QRZ.com and of course – NO
>email address listed. Or, they’re using the
>plane’s tail number as a tactical callsign and
>may or may not have their actual callsign listed in the payload.
>
>Richard
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
Jason KG4WSV
2014-07-13 23:42:19 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Mark Cheavens <mcheavens-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> We are talking about under $150.00 for either a Tracker3($95.00) (If new
> firmware were written for it to support a new methodology) or for a TNC-Pi
> and a Raspberry Pi.

Probably not even that much - if the existing TNC can be forced into
KISS mode permanently, a microcontroller bolted to the serial port
could be the brains of the device.

I'm not convinced the R-Pi is ready for a non-climate controlled
application. But I haven't used one, so I could be wrong.


-Jason
kg4wsv
John Galvin
2014-07-14 00:09:32 UTC
Permalink
Looks to me that a small modification to the TNC hardware would put it
in permanent "KISS" mode. I did something similar to a TNC for use with
the old weather decode broadcasts.

John - N5TIM


On 7/13/2014 6:42 PM, Jason KG4WSV wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Mark Cheavens <mcheavens-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> We are talking about under $150.00 for either a Tracker3($95.00) (If new
>> firmware were written for it to support a new methodology) or for a TNC-Pi
>> and a Raspberry Pi.
> Probably not even that much - if the existing TNC can be forced into
> KISS mode permanently, a microcontroller bolted to the serial port
> could be the brains of the device.
>
> I'm not convinced the R-Pi is ready for a non-climate controlled
> application. But I haven't used one, so I could be wrong.
>
>
> -Jason
> kg4wsv
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
Jeff Dugas (Mobile)
2014-07-13 16:20:38 UTC
Permalink
I must agree with Bob.

The sender of the packet should control where it goes. There is already basic guidance out there, specifically on the APRS web site (http://www.aprs.org).

Specific guidance on paths is provided ( http://www.aprs.org/fix14439.html) as well as for balloons/aircraft (http://www.aprs.org/balloon).

Depending on the purpose of the communication, The sender may have a bona fide need for a specific path, or no path at all.

If I want to send a letter to Aunt Annie, I address it specifically to her. If I am a congressman who wants to send a something to everyone in my in my district, I address it accordingly. And any situation in between.

The aforementioned analogy is not perfect, but suffice it to say, when communicating, it is up to the sender to determine the proper audience.

Jeff
N5TEV

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Robert Bruninga <***@usna.edu> wrote:

>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>***@tapr.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
Jason KG4WSV
2014-07-13 17:16:33 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Jeff Dugas (Mobile)
<N5TEV-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> If I want to send a letter to Aunt Annie, I address it specifically to her.


This analogy is nowhere near describing ARPS.

If you do it Bob's way you not only include Aunt Annie's address, you
tell the postal service which postal facilities to use and which roads
to take.

We will never get APRS into the 20th century of networking until Bob
and others can let go of source routing.

-Jason
kg4wsv

(yes, I know were are in the 21st century. That's how far behind APRS is.)
Christopher Snell
2014-07-13 18:24:59 UTC
Permalink
I believe that the biggest problem with the current path system is
education. As Jeff N5TEV points out, there are lots of online resources
that provide information on paths. The problem is that they are poorly
organized and poorly designed. www.aprs.org ranks high in the Google
index and no slight to Bob but it's a mess, having seen decades of
append-only editing. There's no basic I'm-brand-new-to-APRS tutorial
front and center on the site. Instead, you have a 1990's-WWW-style mass of
links without any categorization and with little indication of what's
important to the new user and what's not. The balloon page is a great
example of this: http://www.aprs.org/balloons.html It's 23 years of
W3ADO launch information and when you finally scroll to the very bottom,
you find the balloon-specific path and packet rate information that every
new balloon flier needs.

The wiki is a great start but needs some work. There's a page with
suggested path settings but no explanation of how a path works that answers
basic new user questions like, "what does WIDE2-1 mean?"

I think this could all be fixed by giving the wiki some much-needed love
and by promoting good newbie practices on www.aprs.org by providing a
prominent link (front and center) to a new user tutorial on the wiki.

Chris NW5W


On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Jeff Dugas (Mobile) <N5TEV-***@public.gmane.org>
wrote:

> I must agree with Bob.
>
> The sender of the packet should control where it goes. There is already
> basic guidance out there, specifically on the APRS web site (
> http://www.aprs.org).
>
> Specific guidance on paths is provided ( http://www.aprs.org/fix14439.html)
> as well as for balloons/aircraft (http://www.aprs.org/balloon).
>
> Depending on the purpose of the communication, The sender may have a bona
> fide need for a specific path, or no path at all.
>
> If I want to send a letter to Aunt Annie, I address it specifically to
> her. If I am a congressman who wants to send a something to everyone in my
> in my district, I address it accordingly. And any situation in between.
>
> The aforementioned analogy is not perfect, but suffice it to say, when
> communicating, it is up to the sender to determine the proper audience.
>
> Jeff
> N5TEV
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
> Robert Bruninga <bruninga-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> I'm sorry to have to offer this rebuttal. The problem with this scheme is
> that it assumes every packet is of equal value, and its goal is to maintain
> a constant level of loading on the network independent of any "value" to
> the users or the situation. This is an anathma of human communication and
> can be considered almost as a classic definition of maintaining noise level
> rather than information throughput...
>
> Only the sender of a packet knows its immediate value, and only the sender
> knows where he wants it to go. The digipeaters are stupid, or a better way
> to say it is that they should do what they are told by the sender.
>
> Bob, WB4APR
>
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Mark Cheavens <mcheavens-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months
>> being paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the current
>> problem and what we should work together to first come up with a needs list
>> and to secondly work to solve the issue.
>>
>> While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are many
>> new users and it might be time for a reminder.
>>
>> The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently available
>> (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or clones, as well
>> as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.
>>
>> The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the TNC-2's
>> have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.
>>
>> As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end users
>> (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should be in many
>> different operating environments and parts of the country.
>>
>> Solution:
>> Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
>> - (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)
>>
>> The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based upon
>> the current load of the network.
>>
>> The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay it to
>> see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.
>>
>> The digipeater will have to know:
>> It's location
>> It's PHG (coverage area)
>> How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
>> It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and antenna
>> elevation above that terrain).
>> List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
>> - That list will also keep track of the packet location
>> Current channel loading
>>
>> We need the digi to decide!
>>
>> Examples:
>> If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location and
>> the location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from this
>> station in X minutes the packet should be repeated!
>> (x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it has
>> heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).
>>
>> - If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a packet
>> was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the packet be
>> digipeated?
>> - Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel loading
>> is zero, then why not! (Private or test network)
>>
>> If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the packet
>> be digipeated?
>> - Was it heard directly?
>> - Was it digipeated by another digi?
>> - What is the channel loading?
>> - Is the station moving or fixed?
>> - How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on a
>> modern solution.
>> - Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small
>> single board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
>> - An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)
>>
>> The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but simply to
>> point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed and begin to
>> think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to have "path" problems.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Mark Cheavens
>> KC5EVE
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aprssig mailing list
>> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
Steve Noskowicz
2014-07-13 22:18:11 UTC
Permalink
 
I don't seem to always get through the sig. 
 
When I couldn't find a Beginner Guide, I gave considerable thought while putitng mine together and have always welcomed suggestions...
  http://k9dci.home.comcast.net/APRS%20Beginner%20Guide%20-%20K9DCI%20Ver%205-1.pdf 
 
73, Steve, K9DCI

From: Christopher Snell <chris.snell-***@public.gmane.org>
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List <aprssig-***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal



I believe that the biggest problem with the current path system is education.   As Jeff N5TEV points out, there are lots of online resources that provide information on paths.   The problem is that they are poorly organized and poorly designed.   http://www.aprs.org/ ranks high in the Google index and no slight to Bob but it's a mess, having seen decades of append-only editing.   There's no basic I'm-brand-new-to-APRS tutorial front and center on the site.  Instead, you have a 1990's-WWW-style mass of links without any categorization and with little indication of what's important to the new user and what's not.   The balloon page is a great example of this: http://www.aprs.org/balloons.html    It's 23 years of W3ADO launch information and when you finally scroll to the very bottom, you find the balloon-specific path and packet rate information that every new balloon flier needs.

The wiki is a great start but needs some work.  There's a page with suggested path settings but no explanation of how a path works that answers basic new user questions like, "what does WIDE2-1 mean?"   

I think this could all be fixed by giving the wiki some much-needed love and by promoting good newbie practices on http://www.aprs.org/ by providing a prominent link (front and center) to a new user tutorial on the wiki.

Chris NW5W



On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Jeff Dugas (Mobile) <N5TEV-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

I must agree with Bob.
>
>The sender of the packet should control where it goes. There is already basic guidance out there, specifically on the APRS web site (http://www.aprs.org/).
>
>Specific guidance on paths is provided ( http://www.aprs.org/fix14439.html) as well as for balloons/aircraft (http://www.aprs.org/balloon).
>
>Depending on the purpose of the communication, The sender may have a bona fide need for a specific path, or no path at all.
>
>If I want to send a letter to Aunt Annie, I address it specifically to her. If I am a congressman who wants to send a something to everyone in my in my district, I address it accordingly. And any situation in between.
>
>The aforementioned analogy is not perfect, but suffice it to say, when communicating, it is up to the sender to determine the proper audience.
>
>Jeff
>N5TEV
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
>Robert Bruninga <bruninga-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
>I'm sorry to have to offer this rebuttal.  The problem with this scheme is that it assumes every packet is of equal value, and its goal is to maintain a constant level of loading on the network independent of any "value" to the users or the situation.  This is an anathma of human communication and can be considered almost as a classic definition of maintaining noise level rather than information throughput...
>
>Only the sender of a packet knows its immediate value, and only the sender knows where he wants it to go.  The digipeaters are stupid, or a better way to say it is that they should do what they are told by the sender.
>
>Bob, WB4APR
>
>
>On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Mark Cheavens <mcheavens-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months being paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the current problem and what we should work together to first come up with a needs list and to secondly work to solve the issue.
>>
>>While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are many new users and it might be time for a reminder.
>>
>>The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently available (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or clones, as well as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.
>>
>>The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the TNC-2's have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.
>>
>>As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end users (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should be in many different operating environments and parts of the country.
>>
>>Solution:
>>Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
>>- (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)
>>
>>The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based upon the current load of the network.
>>
>>The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay it to see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.
>>
>>The digipeater will have to know:
>>It's location
>>It's PHG (coverage area)
>>How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
>>It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and antenna elevation above that terrain).
>>List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
>>- That list will also keep track of the packet location
>>Current channel loading
>>
>>We need the digi to decide!
>>
>>Examples:
>>If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location and the location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from this station in X minutes the packet should be repeated!
>>(x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it has heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).
>>
>>- If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a packet was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the packet be digipeated?
>>        - Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel loading is zero, then why not! (Private or test network)
>>
>>If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the packet be digipeated?
>>- Was it heard directly?
>>- Was it digipeated by another digi?
>>- What is the channel loading?
>>- Is the station moving or fixed?
>>- How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?
>>
>>----------------------------
>>With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on a modern solution.
>>- Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small single board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
>>- An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)
>>
>>The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but simply to point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed and begin to think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to have "path" problems.
>>
>>Respectfully,
>>Mark Cheavens
>>KC5EVE
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>aprssig mailing list
>>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
Bill Vodall
2014-07-13 16:52:56 UTC
Permalink
> Only the sender of a packet knows its immediate value, and only the sender
> knows where he wants it to go.

When we send an IM on a smart phone, or an Email on the web like these
APRSSIG postings - how do we set the path we want the data to take?

Bill
Tom Hayward
2014-07-13 20:07:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Bill Vodall <wa7nwp-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> Only the sender of a packet knows its immediate value, and only the sender
>> knows where he wants it to go.
>
> When we send an IM on a smart phone, or an Email on the web like these
> APRSSIG postings - how do we set the path we want the data to take?

ARP, IP (DHCP and BGP make this automatic), DNS, application-layer
authentication and databases--all of these layers work together to
route your message for you. This is possible because over the last 30
years technology has advanced and commercial high speed data networks
have been built. Hams have simply been left in the dust, still using
technology from the 1980s. If you want to play with modern
applications on ham radio, you're going to have to go down a few
layers and improve the infrastructure first.

I think the point you're getting at is that AX.25 isn't an optimal
protocol choice for APRS. There are some other great tactical
information protocols out there--I am impressed by many of the
features of AIS.

Tom KD7LXL
Keith VE7GDH
2014-07-14 14:55:05 UTC
Permalink
Tom KD7LXL wrote...

> I am impressed by many of the features of AIS...

That is an understatement! 9600 bps and collision avoidance (pun
intended), 4500 time slots per minute or with Self-Organized Time
Division Multiple Access (SOTDMA) for collision avoidance (pun intended)
with 2250 time slots every 60 seconds... or up to 37.5 beacons per
second. Admittedly, this is easier with no digipeaters involved, but it
is very impressive.

--
73 Keith VE7GDH
Bill Vodall
2014-07-14 17:59:56 UTC
Permalink
>> When we send an IM on a smart phone, or an Email on the web like these
>> APRSSIG postings - how do we set the path we want the data to take?
>
> This is possible because over the last 30
> years technology has advanced and commercial high speed data networks
> have been built. Hams have simply been left in the dust, still using
> technology from the 1980s. If you want to play with modern
> applications on ham radio, you're going to have to go down a few
> layers and improve the infrastructure first.

Exactly. The technology in the network does what it needs to do and
shields the user from the complexity.

Tom >> There are some other great tactical information protocols out
there--I am impressed by many of the
>> features of AIS.


Keith > That is an understatement! 9600 bps and collision avoidance
(pun intended), 4500 time slots per minute or with Self-Organized Time
Division Multiple Access (SOTDMA) for collision avoidance (pun
intended) with 2250 time slots every 60 seconds... or up to 37.5
beacons per second.

Too bad we didn't have a low priced small data radio with 9k6 (at
least) ready to go to experiment with this. You know - like the
T3-9670... :)

Bill
Andrew Pavlin
2014-07-14 19:01:02 UTC
Permalink
You mean like the 70cm "brick" data radio that NW Digital Radio is making (the UDRX-440)? Not sure if that price is low enough, but it already has a computer built into it (which saves on that cost re: the T3-9670).


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Vodall <wa7nwp-***@public.gmane.org>
Sender: aprssig-bounces-***@public.gmane.org
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:59:56
To: TAPR APRS Mailing List<aprssig-***@public.gmane.org>
Reply-To: TAPR APRS Mailing List <aprssig-***@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Paths - Solution proposal

>> When we send an IM on a smart phone, or an Email on the web like these
>> APRSSIG postings - how do we set the path we want the data to take?
>
> This is possible because over the last 30
> years technology has advanced and commercial high speed data networks
> have been built. Hams have simply been left in the dust, still using
> technology from the 1980s. If you want to play with modern
> applications on ham radio, you're going to have to go down a few
> layers and improve the infrastructure first.

Exactly. The technology in the network does what it needs to do and
shields the user from the complexity.

Tom >> There are some other great tactical information protocols out
there--I am impressed by many of the
>> features of AIS.


Keith > That is an understatement! 9600 bps and collision avoidance
(pun intended), 4500 time slots per minute or with Self-Organized Time
Division Multiple Access (SOTDMA) for collision avoidance (pun
intended) with 2250 time slots every 60 seconds... or up to 37.5
beacons per second.

Too bad we didn't have a low priced small data radio with 9k6 (at
least) ready to go to experiment with this. You know - like the
T3-9670... :)

Bill
Bill Vodall
2014-07-14 20:04:30 UTC
Permalink
> You mean like the 70cm "brick" data radio that NW Digital Radio is making (the UDRX-440)? Not sure if that price is low enough, but it already has a computer built into it (which saves on that cost re: the T3-9670).

Similar. The T3-9670
(https://www.argentdata.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=22&products_id=171&osCsid=8migob6r9m260tv4p95ldlbks5)
is $72, a computer (TL-MR302 for $40) and a GPS would be a low power
super smart tracker. There was a version of the T3-9670 with a built
in GPS for a little more but I didn't see it on the Argent page today.
The mythical (Hi John/Bryan) UDR-X could be a smart hub/digi for
this new system.


Bill


> Keith > That is an understatement! 9600 bps and collision avoidance
> (pun intended), 4500 time slots per minute or with Self-Organized Time
> Division Multiple Access (SOTDMA) for collision avoidance (pun
> intended) with 2250 time slots every 60 seconds... or up to 37.5
> beacons per second.
>
> Too bad we didn't have a low priced small data radio with 9k6 (at
> least) ready to go to experiment with this. You know - like the
> T3-9670... :)
Kris Kirby
2014-07-15 15:30:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014, Tom Hayward wrote:
> ARP, IP (DHCP and BGP make this automatic), DNS, application-layer
> authentication and databases--all of these layers work together to
> route your message for you. This is possible because over the last 30
> years technology has advanced and commercial high speed data networks
> have been built. Hams have simply been left in the dust, still using
> technology from the 1980s. If you want to play with modern
> applications on ham radio, you're going to have to go down a few
> layers and improve the infrastructure first.

OSLR makes it a little different as well. And we've got the entire
44.0.0.0/8 space to play with, which was seemingly ignored by HSMM.

> I think the point you're getting at is that AX.25 isn't an optimal
> protocol choice for APRS. There are some other great tactical
> information protocols out there--I am impressed by many of the
> features of AIS.

To be fair, we have limitations that the FCC didn't burden Part 90 with,
or at least ignored enforcement on, such has "FM Modulation index shall
not exceed 1.0", which was ignored by the FLEX protocol and Motorola's
trunking protocols as long as the occupied bandwidth matched the
licensed bandwidth. FSK (GMSK) and AFSK got us this far, it's far
overdue that we start moving to more bit-dense modulation like 4FSK.
Telephone modems hit 56K, but with 16- and 24-bit sound cards, we should
be able to approach channel capacity that over a full-quieting FM link
(S/N is often 20dB or better). We are generally limited to the amount of
bandwidth available for a "communications quality" signal, i.e.: similar
to bandstopped AM for telephonic speech.

It would be nice to see a nationwide "high-speed" infrastructure on a
band besides 2m. As I understand it, many amateurs near the Pave Paws
installations don't have 70cm as an option at all. 70cm would be
preferable since the required antenna aperture is smaller, and the
general coverage mostly equal to 2m. 900 MHz tends to be LOS and highly
cellular, and 222MHz still has "large" antennas.

For that matter, 2400 or 3600 bps should have been the norm, not 1200
bps. Both will fit through a radio configured for voice. Flex is 1600
bps with a deviation of 1600 Hz or 4800 Hz (thus, "four levels" can be
discerned post-discriminator: a 1/0 from the data slicer and a
loud/quiet from a comparator -- 4FSK).

One individual told me he was able to connect using a modem over a
full-duplex phone patch at 14.4Kbit/s.

And yes, collisions need to be dealt with somehow or someway. AX25
results in either a copied packet or a trashed packet. IP is far too
chatty for simple communications, particularly when tunneled through
AX25 (it should be UI frames, like APRS), and is limited by the
subnetting practices of the local network. D-Star does not cope with
hearing packets addressed to another repeater.

Then there's the hidden node problem... Timeslotting is nice but makes
things technically complex, and the least common denominator here is a
TNC-type device attached to a random radio. Surely one can come up with
a protocol and convince a Chinese manufacturer to implement it.

It's possible to do what I call "sortacasting", where two sets of
repeater frequencies are used across a state, alternating the use of a
frequency to curvature of the earth and repeater coverage. That doesn't
work in all situations; even the WiFi guys figured out that with three
non-overlapping channels you could occasionally fit a fourth or fifth
channel into the mix. We've been lucky that 144.39 is far enough away
from some repeater inputs, so sites can be collocated, but not all
repeater inputs are, i.e.: 144.63 MHz. (2m should have never had a
600KHz split, but I digress.) In less populous states, "sortacasting"
may work well -- it largely depends on the sites chosen and the terrain
covered. It's basically two full-duplex SFNs alternating.

I've done a few cross-country drives, and the least common denominator
of 1200 bps on 144.39 MHz has paid off in my tracks. I run 25W mobile
into a 1/4-wave whip, and on the cross-country trips, it was on top of
the vehicle. My interest is more in seeing where we have coverage and
where we don't; 25W with 0dBd antenna will get out of valleys on
occasion where 5W or 10W with a 3dBd antenna won't.

--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR
Disinformation Architect
Jason KG4WSV
2014-07-15 16:02:06 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Kris Kirby <kris-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> And yes, collisions need to be dealt with somehow or someway. AX25
> results in either a copied packet or a trashed packet.

Some folks (cubesat, IIRC) created a backwards compatible FEC wrapper
for AX.25 and called it FX.25.

-Jason
kg4wsv
Bill Vodall
2014-07-15 16:30:33 UTC
Permalink
>> And yes, collisions need to be dealt with somehow or someway. AX25
>> results in either a copied packet or a trashed packet.
>
> Some folks (cubesat, IIRC) created a backwards compatible FEC wrapper
> for AX.25 and called it FX.25.
> kg4wsv

Also the new sound card AX25 modem developers (DireWolf, UZ7HO) have
implemented some wrong-bit correction code which significantly helps
in the number of packets decoded.

Bill, WA7NWP
Jim Conrad
2014-07-13 17:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Mark and the List;

Been reading the recent threads about the path issues and I'm a long
time lurker and end user. I moved from Virginia to Rural North
Carolina a few years ago and have APRS coverage issues where I live
now. I want to put up a digi and an igate at my house. At present I
have a 40 foot telephone pole to work with. Lots of available
computers, familiarity with Linux and a bunch of old TNCs (Old
PK-232s, not MPX, PK-900, MFJ 1278, KAM and a HAL DSP4100.

I'm looking for some advice as to how to proceed. My location is
35.39174, 78.94038 if you want to see what paths are already in place.

If anyone could suggest the most cost effective reuse of my existing
equipment and the best software to implement my goal of an APRS digi
and igate I would appreciate it. I've looked at Bob's page and the
various wikis which are loaded with information but nothing
consolidated that would make my learning curve less steep.

I would rather do it right the first time then cause problems for
what is already here in my area as limited as that is.

Suggestions and comments are most welcome.

73's
Jim - N4WFP


At 09:53 AM 7/13/2014, you wrote:
>With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months
>being paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the
>current problem and what we should work together to first come up
>with a needs list and to secondly work to solve the issue.
>
>While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are
>many new users and it might be time for a reminder.
>
>The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently
>available (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or
>clones, as well as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.
>
>The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the
>TNC-2's have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.
>
>As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end
>users (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should
>be in many different operating environments and parts of the country.
>
>Solution:
>Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
>- (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)
>
>The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based
>upon the current load of the network.
>
>The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay
>it to see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.
>
>The digipeater will have to know:
>It's location
>It's PHG (coverage area)
>How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
>It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and
>antenna elevation above that terrain).
>List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
>- That list will also keep track of the packet location
>Current channel loading
>
>We need the digi to decide!
>
>Examples:
>If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location
>and the location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from
>this station in X minutes the packet should be repeated!
>(x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it
>has heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).
>
>- If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a
>packet was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the
>packet be digipeated?
> - Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel
> loading is zero, then why not! (Private or test network)
>
>If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the
>packet be digipeated?
>- Was it heard directly?
>- Was it digipeated by another digi?
>- What is the channel loading?
>- Is the station moving or fixed?
>- How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?
>
>----------------------------
>With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working
>on a modern solution.
>- Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small
>single board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
>- An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)
>
>The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but
>simply to point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed
>and begin to think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to
>have "path" problems.
>
>Respectfully,
>Mark Cheavens
>KC5EVE
>
>_______________________________________________
>aprssig mailing list
>aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig

<:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:>
Jim Conrad - jjc-ErPrAKjMEq9cr6bS+/***@public.gmane.org
757-560-5970 - 757-512-5710 Fax
Amateur Radio Callsign N4WFP
CAGE 0UD60 - http://www.oceanviewcom.com
Chris Howard w0ep
2014-07-13 17:55:31 UTC
Permalink
I ran a small digi in a fill-in location for a few years.

It was on a linux box running fedora/red-hat with soundmodem,
sound card, a homebrew radio interface and JavAPRSrvr software.
And I ran xastir as a local client.

There may be better ways to go these days, but at the time it was
cheap and reliable.


On 7/13/2014 12:31 PM, Jim Conrad wrote:
> Mark and the List;
>
> Been reading the recent threads about the path issues and I'm a long time lurker and end user. I moved from Virginia to Rural North Carolina a few years ago and have APRS coverage issues where I live now. I want to put up a digi and an igate at my house. At present I have a 40 foot telephone pole to work with. Lots of available computers, familiarity with Linux and a bunch of old TNCs (Old PK-232s, not MPX, PK-900, MFJ 1278, KAM and a HAL DSP4100.
>
> I'm looking for some advice as to how to proceed. My location is 35.39174, 78.94038 if you want to see what paths are already in place.
>
> If anyone could suggest the most cost effective reuse of my existing equipment and the best software to implement my goal of an APRS digi and igate I would appreciate it. I've looked at Bob's page and the various wikis which are loaded with information but nothing consolidated that would make my learning curve less steep.
>
> I would rather do it right the first time then cause problems for what is already here in my area as limited as that is.
>
> Suggestions and comments are most welcome.
>
> 73's
> Jim - N4WFP
>
>
> At 09:53 AM 7/13/2014, you wrote:
>> With the most common thread on the APRS sig over the last few months being paths I thought it time to remind everyone of why we have the current problem and what we should work together to first come up with a needs list and to secondly work to solve the issue.
>>
>> While I have brought this up on the list many years ago, there are many new users and it might be time for a reminder.
>>
>> The current system (Digi backbone) was built with the currently available (and surplus) old TNC's. Many at the time were TNC-2's or clones, as well as the then "modern" KPC-3 and 3+'s.
>>
>> The KPC-3+ have suffered from the delayed packet problem, and the TNC-2's have been implemented in many cases without UiDigi firmware.
>>
>> As a result we have been fighting for years to try and educate end users (the best of which are on this list) of what their path should be in many different operating environments and parts of the country.
>>
>> Solution:
>> Take "paths" and throw them out the window.
>> - (During the transition having a path will work with the "old" digi's)
>>
>> The number of times a packet is digipeated is network specific based upon the current load of the network.
>>
>> The Digipeater should decide whether to throw out the packet, delay it to see if it was heard by another digi, or digipeat it immediately.
>>
>> The digipeater will have to know:
>> It's location
>> It's PHG (coverage area)
>> How many hops it is to a reliable I-Gate
>> It's altitude (both average ground elevation for the area and antenna elevation above that terrain).
>> List of stations it has heard (MHeard)
>> - That list will also keep track of the packet location
>> Current channel loading
>>
>> We need the digi to decide!
>>
>> Examples:
>> If a digi hears a packet from one mile away (It knows it's location and the location of the packet), and it has not heard a packet from this station in X minutes the packet should be repeated!
>> (x is variable based upon the number of unique "direct" stations it has heard, and has the station moved more than Y distance).
>>
>> - If the station did not move (horizontally or vertically), and a packet was heard from the same station 10 seconds prior should the packet be digipeated?
>> - Normally most of us would say "no", but if the channel loading is zero, then why not! (Private or test network)
>>
>> If a digi hears a packet from a station 100 miles away, should the packet be digipeated?
>> - Was it heard directly?
>> - Was it digipeated by another digi?
>> - What is the channel loading?
>> - Is the station moving or fixed?
>> - How long has it been since THIS digi repeated the packet?
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> With modern TNC's available there is no reason not to start working on a modern solution.
>> - Existing TNC's could be used if put into KISS mode and using small single board computers such as a Raspberry Pi.
>> - An ideal solution would be a dedicated solution (Tracker3, TNC-X, etc)
>>
>> The idea of this email was not to list "all" of the needs, but simply to point out that until (WE) begin to think of what is needed and begin to think of the algorithms needed, we will continue to have "path" problems.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Mark Cheavens
>> KC5EVE
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aprssig mailing list
>> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
>> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
> <:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:>
> Jim Conrad - jjc-ErPrAKjMEq9cr6bS+/***@public.gmane.org
> 757-560-5970 - 757-512-5710 Fax
> Amateur Radio Callsign N4WFP
> CAGE 0UD60 - http://www.oceanviewcom.com
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig-***@public.gmane.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
Loading...