Re: Macro & Prefix formats for multi site programming In theory what Ed wrote is a very good idea... but...
The fly in the repeater soup is when you need (for more than one reason)to protect the command set from unauthorized commands. Once your problem fly (user) understands the prefix and command structure you're in deep kim-chi all the way through the system. If you live in a large Metro Area you quickly learn about problem users and disgruntled club ex-control operators with dtmf pads and way too much time on their hands. cheers, skipp > Ed Yoho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It becomes very cumbersome when you have more than a few sites. > My small linked system is currently using five 440 repeaters > and two 900 repeaters linked via duplex 420 equipment. Another > system I am a member of has approximately one hundred and fifty > sites that are linked together. It is much simpler to have a > standard command set that is replicated at each site so users > who move from one repeater to the next have just one command > set to learn. Then when controlling a distant site via the link, > the only difference is adding the site prefix to the user's > command sequence. Overall, it makes life much simpler. > Ed Yoho > WA6RQD > >>> Do you know if the software will accept site prefixing on a per >>> port basis (similar to Link-Comm or the old Palomar Telecom >>> controllers)? >>> This is a make or break for many system owners that have >>> multiple sites interconnected. >>> I have always been impressed with the S-COM products except >>> for this limitation on earlier products. >> I don't understand this myself. When you program a macro for >> something, you just make sure you use different commands for >> each site. What's the problem? >> About the only thing I could see would be the _capability_ to >> make the macro command more digits, maybe 8?
