Steve Dimse wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:
SD> The problem is that from practical standpoint you just can't do
SD> that. There are too many people involved in APRS to start
SD> over. We still get people who whine because they are using a 6
SD> year old version of APRSdos, and it isn't working right
SD> because the protocol changes. There are almost a thousand
SD> owners of the Kenwood HTs that would need to upgrade. There are
SD> more than a thousand users of the Mic-E and MIM that would need
SD> to upgrade. How many thousands of TNC's?
The first thing you do when designing any protocol is provide for a protocol
version number, a frame length specifier, and finally an extension mechanism.
This allows new innovations to be added to the protocol without breaking older
implementations. Tying upper layer functionality to lower layer issues, such
as whether the link layer is using datagram or virtual circuit mode, is an
obviously bad idea. Protocols which have been properly designed from the
beginning should be workable over nearly any reasonable transport mechanism.
SD> One of the things you have to promise to become an "official
SD> APRS software author" is never to release your source code.
Really? That's insidious. What could be the point of that?
-- Mike
