Again thanks for the help on trying to figure why the T2 is not sending out an 
ACK.
I have set up the T2 using WIDE1-1, Radio on and requested a local send me a 
message. 
I also set COMMENT to : Auto reply from KD5HTZ-9

The T2 is connected to the computer, HyperTerm is open MONITOR is ON, Radio on.

So if you want send a message you should get an auto reply.

Thanks
Adrian
KD5HTZ 

--- In [email protected], "Keith VE7GDH" <ve7...@...> wrote:
>
> Lynn KJ4ERJ wrote...
> 
> > The T2 RETRIES occurs for EACH retransmission of the Nuvi. I don't
> > recall exactly how many of those there are, but that's probably where
> > 6*4 (or whatever it is) came from.
> 
> I assume you meant "the T2 retries occur for each message". Yes, if
> Adrian had RETRIES set for 6 and sent 4 messages, there would be
> 6 * 4 transmissions as a result. My comments were for the information
> he quoted from aprs.fi. Not every one of Adrian's transmissions would
> have necessarily made it to an IGate.
> 
> Note to Adrian... look in the Nuvi's outbox. If you have messages
> "stuck" there because they didn't get an ACK, delete them. With RETRIES
> set to 6, the T2 will retry each one 6 times for each time the Nuvi
> sends it to the T2. Maybe that's why I was seeing multiple {message
> identifiers for an otherwise identical message... or did you actually
> send the same message multiple times?
> 
> Looking at http://aprs.fi/?c=raw&call=KD5HTZ-9&limit=1000
> 
> 2009-07-15 04:08:05 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test{aa
> 2009-07-15 04:08:44 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test{aa
> 2009-07-15 04:12:04 UTC: :K5MTS :test again{ac
> 2009-07-15 04:13:11 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test2{ad
> 2009-07-15 04:17:58 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test4{af
> 2009-07-15 04:24:25 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :this is a final test{ag
> 2009-07-15 04:32:55 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :testing again{ah
> 2009-07-15 04:33:42 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :testing again{ah
> 2009-07-15 04:51:05 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test5{aa
> 2009-07-15 04:52:23 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test5{aa
> 2009-07-15 04:57:42 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test 6{aa
> 2009-07-15 04:58:29 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test 6{aa
> 2009-07-15 05:24:57 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test{ab
> 2009-07-15 05:25:51 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test{ab
> 2009-07-15 05:30:26 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :testing again{ac
> 2009-07-15 05:31:14 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :testing again{ac
> 2009-07-15 05:32:20 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :testing again{ac
> 2009-07-16 01:13:50 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test 10{ad
> 2009-07-16 01:14:44 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test 10{ad
> 2009-07-16 01:45:44 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{af
> 2009-07-16 01:45:58 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ag
> 2009-07-16 01:47:07 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ag
> 2009-07-16 01:47:42 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ag
> 2009-07-16 01:47:59 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ah
> 2009-07-16 01:48:41 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ah
> 2009-07-16 01:49:58 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ai
> 2009-07-16 01:50:37 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ai
> 2009-07-16 01:51:13 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ai
> 2009-07-16 01:51:44 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ai
> 2009-07-16 01:52:35 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{aj
> 2009-07-16 01:53:07 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{aj
> 2009-07-16 01:53:43 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{aj
> 2009-07-16 01:53:46 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ak
> 2009-07-16 01:55:04 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ak
> 2009-07-16 01:55:40 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{ak
> 2009-07-16 01:55:47 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{al
> 2009-07-16 01:57:05 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{al
> 2009-07-16 01:57:49 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{am
> 2009-07-16 01:59:06 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{am
> 2009-07-16 01:59:43 UTC: :KD5HTZ-9 :test nuvl{am
> 
> Keeping in mind that these are just the messages tries that made it to
> an IGate... the message containing "test" with a message identifier of
> {aa shows up 6 times; message identifier {ab shows up twice; message
> identifier {ac (testing again) shows up 4 times; {ad (test 10) shows up
> 3 times; message identifier {af (test 4) shows up just once, but there
> is another message identifier {af (with a different message... test
> nuvi1) that shows up just once. Then there a whole bunch of messages
> containing the text "test nuv1" with various message identifiers... {af,
> {ag, {ah, {ai, {aj, {ak, {al, and {am. I don't know if Adrian entered
> the message "test nuv1" a whole bunch of times or if the Nuvi sent it
> multiple times to the T2 but perhaps didn't get an appropriate response
> from the T2.
> 
> Scott... does the Nuvi blindly send a message to the T2 just once, or
> does it "know" when the T2 has got the message from the Nuvi?
> 
> Adrian, it would appear that you aren't being heard by an IGate every
> time. This is actually normal. When you send a beacon or send a message,
> there's no guarantee that every transmission will be digipeated or that
> it will make it to an IGate either direct or via a digi. If you were,
> each message would show up there 6 times (with RETRIES set to 6) unless
> you actually heard the ACK coming back from a digi. If you wanted to run
> a test for a few hours, you could set the T2 to beacon every 10 minutes
> with the time stamp enabled, and some hours later, look at aprs.fi and
> see how many beacons were heard and how many were missed.
> 
> Your Nuvi / T2 is obviously capable of sending messages. I believe your
> original message was about whether your T2 was sending ACKs to messages
> that you had received. It would be really helpful if a friend nearby
> could watch on RF and just confirm that they saw you sending ACKS... or
> we knew when your T2 was active, I or someone else could try sending you
> a message to see if I received an ACK. This would also show up on
> aprs.fi if you made it to an IGate. This is dependent on your local
> IGate being correctly configured to send messages to local stations. You
> could take that uncertainty out of the equation by getting a local RF
> station to do the tests with you.
> 
> 73 es cul - Keith VE7GDH
> --
> "I may be lost, but I know exactly where I am!"
>


Reply via email to