--- In [email protected], James Ewen <ve6...@...> wrote:
> > It is not a good idea for a digipeater to delay a packet by 15 seconds. > > 15 seconds would be a very long stand by time. In reality, the hold > off time would only need to be a few seconds. I would think that 5 > seconds would be a top end standby time waiting for a main digipeater > to make noise. With a proper digipeater configuration, the main > digipeater should key up immediately after hearing a packet that is > asking for a hop. No hold off or wait time. The delay before a SMART > fill-in digipeater would step up should be in the neighborhood of a > second or two at most. > James, I must apologize here and read closer. My response was in respect reading a ~15 second delay in the original post which triggered my reaction. It was the original post by KC8RYW and chopped off in susequent posts that referenced the following: >>> KC8RYW wrote: >>>It'd work something like this: >>> >>>1) A mobile user sends out something WIDE2-2 >>>2) The Tracker2 hears this packet >>>3) The Tracker2 doesn't hear anyone else digi the packet within, >>>say, 15 >>>seconds >>>4) The Tracker2 assumes the packet wasn't digipeted, so it repeats it, >>>even though the Tracker2 is alias WIDE1. Now I will stay on topic relative to this description. How are you going to identify the low power tracker? I think a low power tracker would already be using WIDE1-1 for its first hop. If a "fill-in" digi digipeats anything other than a missed WIDE1-1 on the first hop it may add additional congestion under some conditions, because it cannot hear that the station may have already raised 2 distance wide area digipeaters. I am certainly in favor of a "fill-in" that does not digipeat a WIDE1-1 hop if a WIDEn-N or other digi has already digipeated the first hop. This is certainly welcomed. A "fill-in" digi should never act on anything than the first hop. Typically, a higher powered station with a better antenna will be using WIDE2-2. Most low power stations will have WIDE1-1 for their first hop. How do you propose a smart "fill-in" would properly select a low powered tracker from a high powered station using WIDE2-2 for their path? A band opening would be an intesting event if a smart "fill-in" acts on the first hop of a WIDE2-2 path. If a DX station raised all the smart "fill-in" stations under this scenario I think RF bandwidth would be wasted on a wider scale on distant networks. 73's, Tim - N8DEU
