Keith VE7GDH wrote: > Variability might be an issue. If the time could be set remotely with a > SETTIME message, accepting it only from those on the AUTHLIST > would be good enough for me. >
Variability would also be an issue with an APRS-messaged "cmd SETTIME", but I don't think we're really worried about down-to-the-second accuracy here. With the examples I've seen of time-based scripts, accurate to a minute or two is probably sufficient. I'll throw my hat in the remote SETTIME message restricted to those sources on AUTHLIST and the other security around remote command execution via APRS messages. Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Adding my $0.02 for whatever it's worth in today's economy
