1. The repeater input and output frequencies are different. 2. It is TRUE full duplex, simultaneously retransmitting what it receives, with only a few millisecond delay attributable to the bit regeneration process, no more than is seen with many analog repeaters' anti-kerchunk delays.
3. Contrary to what some self-serving groups/individuals have tried to claim, it is NOT store-and-forward. The bit stream is NOT stored at all before being sent to the bit regenerator. 4. It does NOT carry out point-to-point communications over amateur frequencies, but rather, over a LAN, WAN, or the internet. On the RF side, it is STRICTLY user-access. I maintain that it therefore does NOT meet the definition of an auxiliary station. 5. According to one of the postings on Icom's D-Star forums, the developer(s) of D-Star have ALWAYS envisioned and called it a repeater system, as does the current sole vendor, Icom. To answer someone else's questions: It walks like a duck. It looks like a duck. It quacks like a duck. Guess what? IT'S A DUCK!!! -----Original Message----- >From: Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Sep 5, 2007 8:21 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] D-Star systems as auxiliary stations? > > [snip] > >I would say if the input and output freqs are the same, it is NOT a >repeater. However, if the input and output are different, it may still >not be a repeater. Is it TRUE full duplex? Is it near real time vs. a >store and forward technique? I'm sure there's other questions that >should be asked as well. > >-- >Jim Barbour >WD8CHL
