From: Michael J. W. <wol...@ms...> - 2001-07-25 20:57:20
|
I know this may be an easy question, but can anyone tell me if APRSd can = monitor multiple TNC ports? I have three serial ports in my Linux box, but currently only use one = for 144.390 and use another linux box for ISS monitoring on 145.800 and = yet another APRSd box that is not currently connected to APRS.net but is = up is for an HF monitoring rig. I would like to combine these all onto the one michigan.aprs.net box = with three serial ports being monitored. Not we would have to add code to APRSd pry to distinguish gate to RF to = select which ports you want it to go say TNC1,TNC2,TNC3 or ALL or just some. That was NWS WX alerts only go = to 144.39 and not my TNC hooked to ISS, which is receive only anyways, = but will be soon monitored to transmit when ISS is in sight. Also, my = HF station I do not want transmitting WX alerts and other stuff for = local 144.390 that comes like MSGs and stuff. Any thoughts on this being implemented or is it? Thanks for your help, just compiled the latest APRSd on = michigan.aprs.net working better. Mike Wolthuis kb8zgl |
From: Dennis H. N. <n2...@n2...> - 2001-07-25 21:24:11
|
I am not a programmer and cannot offer my services, but I do have a request and would be happy to discuss it further with someone that is working on that part of the code. It is in reference to the internet to RF messaging. The problem I am having is that because of either propagation or improper path selection, my igate hears a packet from distant stations and attempts to pass traffic to that station as if it was local. The message will in most cases never reach its party as those stations are far beyond my two digi hop. In most cases those stations are served locally by another Igate or are actually in direct contact with the messaging station on RF. |
From: Hamish M. <ha...@cl...> - 2001-07-25 22:32:28
|
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 05:24:06PM -0400, Dennis Hudson, N2LBT wrote: > It is in reference to the internet to RF messaging. The problem I am having > is that because of either propagation or improper path selection, my igate > hears a packet from distant stations and attempts to pass traffic to that > station as if it was local. The message will in most cases never reach its > party as those stations are far beyond my two digi hop. In most cases those > stations are served locally by another Igate or are actually in direct > contact with the messaging station on RF. Yes, that's how it is supposed to work. (If it has heard a station locally within the history time period, it will send messages for that station from Internet to RF.) How do you want this changed? 73 hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> |
From: Dennis H. N. <n2...@n2...> - 2001-07-26 15:26:00
|
On 7/25/01 6:32 PM, "Hamish Moffatt" <ha...@cl...> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 05:24:06PM -0400, Dennis Hudson, N2LBT wrote: >> It is in reference to the internet to RF messaging. The problem I am having >> is that because of either propagation or improper path selection, my igate >> hears a packet from distant stations and attempts to pass traffic to that >> station as if it was local. The message will in most cases never reach its >> party as those stations are far beyond my two digi hop. In most cases those >> stations are served locally by another Igate or are actually in direct >> contact with the messaging station on RF. > > Yes, that's how it is supposed to work. (If it has heard a station locally > within the history time period, it will send messages for that station > from Internet to RF.) How do you want this changed? > > > 73 > hamish Thanks for replying Hamish, I realize that the code is working, but circumstances have presented themselves frequently that cause the original plan to appear to malfunction in our area. As far as I know I perceive the following to be true, and therefore am wondering if it is worth looking at. I will elaborate on our local APRS LAN and what type of packets cause trouble here. In New England we have the problem of many bumps or hills (we call them mountains) at similar elevation which force us to use many digis where others can get away with one "super digi". There are many APRS populated areas separated by only 60-70 miles and a digi or two for each area. The IGates have paths that cover the local area usually a path of DIGI1,WIDE. Although I envisioned an IGate for each of these populated areas, they have not caught on as quickly as I hoped. The packets/scenario I see as a problem is a mobile or fixed station that exceeds my UI TNC/IGate path. What I call a DX station 3,4,5,6,7 hops away is heard by my IGate and aprsd automatically tags that as a local station. If aprsd was "smart" and adjusted the path to actually send traffic for that station with DIGI1,DIGI2,DIGI3,DIGI4 I wouldn't have as much as a problem with this. Better yet, not RF gate messages for stations that have 5% or less chance of getting the traffic. But in most cases that gated packet will probably will get passed by another IGate, or even directly reach its party on RF. I realize the offending station is really to blame, and they should only be using paths that are necessary. Unfortunately it's very difficult to remind each an every operator about their paths on an everyday basis. And even then "DX" packets reach the local LAN due to propagation or experimentation by a APRS station. I would prefer the IGate to try to recognize the impossibility of trying to pass traffic to a station 5 hops or hundreds of miles away. I assume that a station is considered local if it is heard on any of aprsd's ports. What is the TTL for a station heard on one of these ports before it not considered a "local" anymore? Should I run a script to restart the IGate every few hours to overcome these problems? I often leave the aprsd code running for hundreds of hours at a time without rebooting. Mostly because I don't know how to program scripts to start and stop programs and the computer. -- Dennis, N2LBT Sysop aprsdALY IGate http://www.n2lbt.com n2...@n2... |
From: Hamish M. <ha...@cl...> - 2001-07-26 22:21:10
|
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:25:54AM -0400, Dennis Hudson, N2LBT wrote: > The packets/scenario I see as a problem is a mobile or fixed station that > exceeds my UI TNC/IGate path. What I call a DX station 3,4,5,6,7 hops away > is heard by my IGate and aprsd automatically tags that as a local station. > If aprsd was "smart" and adjusted the path to actually send traffic for that > station with DIGI1,DIGI2,DIGI3,DIGI4 I wouldn't have as much as a problem > with this. Better yet, not RF gate messages for stations that have 5% or > less chance of getting the traffic. But in most cases that gated packet > will probably will get passed by another IGate, or even directly reach its > party on RF. I realize the offending station is really to blame, and they > should only be using paths that are necessary. Unfortunately it's very > difficult to remind each an every operator about their paths on an everyday > basis. And even then "DX" packets reach the local LAN due to propagation or > experimentation by a APRS station. I would prefer the IGate to try to > recognize the impossibility of trying to pass traffic to a station 5 hops or > hundreds of miles away. OK, I understand the scenario. I'll forward it to the other developers and we can think about implementing something in the future. It might be variable paths (which is not too easy unless you are using aprsd with AX.25 sockets; a TNC in command mode is a nuisance for this), or it might be some way to ignore stations which are too many hops away, or both. I don't think there's anything we can do about the odd packet which arrives by good propagation. But that shouldn't be too regular. > I assume that a station is considered local if it is heard on any of aprsd's > ports. What is the TTL for a station heard on one of these ports before it > not considered a "local" anymore? Should I run a script to restart the IGate > every few hours to overcome these problems? I often leave the aprsd code > running for hundreds of hours at a time without rebooting. Mostly because I > don't know how to program scripts to start and stop programs and the > computer. aprsd looks in the history list for local stations, so the TTL is the same as the expiry time for the history. ("expire" command in aprsd.conf). regards Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> |
From: Hamish M. <ha...@cl...> - 2001-07-25 22:31:23
|
On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 04:57:23PM -0400, Michael J. Wolthuis wrote: > I know this may be an easy question, but can anyone tell me if APRSd can monitor multiple TNC ports? No. I was working on it a while ago but haven't finished it. It might happen some time in the next few months though. > I have three serial ports in my Linux box, but currently only use one for 144.390 and use another linux box for ISS monitoring on 145.800 and yet another APRSd box that is not currently connected to APRS.net but is up is for an HF monitoring rig. > > I would like to combine these all onto the one michigan.aprs.net box with three serial ports being monitored. You could run three copies of aprsd on the same PC, linked by TCP ports (just as you probably link them now?). cheers Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> |
From: Bill V. <wa...@ya...> - 2001-07-28 16:49:58
|
> You could run three copies of aprsd on the same PC, linked by TCP > ports > (just as you probably link them now?). > > > cheers > Hamish I tried this. It was weird and things quit working. I think there's some lock files or Mutex's that aren't unique per process so it gets confused when two aprsd's are running at the same time. Bill, WA7NWP __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ |
From: Hamish M. <ha...@cl...> - 2001-07-29 00:39:30
|
On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:49:57AM -0700, Bill Vodall wrote: > I tried this. It was weird and things quit working. I think > there's some lock files or Mutex's that aren't unique per > process so it gets confused when two aprsd's are running > at the same time. Weird. I thought all that stuff should be independent between process group. (All of aprsd's threads show up as separate processes on linux.) As long as all of the ports and writeable-data-files are unique I think it should work. cheers Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> |
From: Brian D H. <bdh...@c4...> - 2001-07-29 03:00:57
|
By way of example you'd want to have each copy of aprsd you want to run in seperate directories. Something like: /usr/local/aprsd1 /usr/local/aprsd2 /usr/local/aprsd3 You may also be running into a problem with attempting to bind to the same ports. You can edit the config file to change the ports (or disable them) for the extra aprsd's. 73/N5VFF ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hamish Moffatt" <ha...@cl...> To: <apr...@li...> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 6:08 PM Subject: Re: [Aprsd-users] Can APRSd monitor multiple TNC ports > On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:49:57AM -0700, Bill Vodall wrote: > > I tried this. It was weird and things quit working. I think > > there's some lock files or Mutex's that aren't unique per > > process so it gets confused when two aprsd's are running > > at the same time. > > Weird. I thought all that stuff should be independent between > process group. (All of aprsd's threads show up as separate processes > on linux.) > > As long as all of the ports and writeable-data-files are unique > I think it should work. > > cheers > Hamish > -- > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> > > _______________________________________________ > Aprsd-users mailing list > Apr...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/aprsd-users > |
From: Hamish M. <ha...@cl...> - 2001-07-29 03:20:51
|
On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:01:10PM -0600, Brian D Heaton wrote: > By way of example you'd want to have each copy of aprsd you want to run in > seperate directories. Something like: > > /usr/local/aprsd1 > /usr/local/aprsd2 > /usr/local/aprsd3 > > You may also be running into a problem with attempting to bind to the same > ports. You can edit the config file to change the ports (or disable them) > for the extra aprsd's. Yes, you must change all ports. The http and trace ports (14501 and 14502) run even if disabled in the configuration file. You can only change their port number. Dale did this deliberately, IIRC. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> |
From: Bill V. <wa...@ya...> - 2001-07-29 03:23:26
|
I had separate directories and I was using different AX25 ports. I also had different TCP ports assigned including a couple that are hardcoded. It seemed to work - but something on the first instance quit after launching the second. And the second was acting strange. My final solution was to run it on a separate Linux box. Bill - WA7NWP --- Brian D Heaton <bdh...@c4...> wrote: > By way of example you'd want to have each copy of aprsd you want > to run in > seperate directories. Something like: > > /usr/local/aprsd1 > /usr/local/aprsd2 > /usr/local/aprsd3 > > You may also be running into a problem with attempting to bind to > the same > ports. You can edit the config file to change the ports (or > disable them) > for the extra aprsd's. > > 73/N5VFF > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hamish Moffatt" <ha...@cl...> > To: <apr...@li...> > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 6:08 PM > Subject: Re: [Aprsd-users] Can APRSd monitor multiple TNC ports > > > > On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 09:49:57AM -0700, Bill Vodall wrote: > > > I tried this. It was weird and things quit working. I think > > > there's some lock files or Mutex's that aren't unique per > > > process so it gets confused when two aprsd's are running > > > at the same time. > > > > Weird. I thought all that stuff should be independent between > > process group. (All of aprsd's threads show up as separate > processes > > on linux.) > > > > As long as all of the ports and writeable-data-files are unique > > I think it should work. > > > > cheers > > Hamish > > -- > > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <ha...@de...> <ha...@cl...> > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ |