Hi Alex - I don't think so. Once a server receives the packet it will not send on the same packet if it hears it come in from a different igate or server. Imagine this:
One server (we'll call it "A") has 5 different igates connected to it from one area and another server (we'll call it "B") has 5 more igates connected. This would represent a simplified (and probably exaggerated) version of what we have now. The way it works now, A hears a packet from K1ABC. It's not seen this packet before so it sends it to B. Shortly afterwards, A hears the packet from another igate. It's a duplicate so it's discarded. Shortly afterwards, B hears the same packet from one of the igates connected to it. It's also an duplicate so it's dropped. And so on. The totals: The packet is sent from A to B one time and from B to A zero times. In the event that A and B hear it at the same time it could be sent from B to A once as well, but no more. If we send *all* packets then the packet would be sent from A to B five times and from B to A five times. This is a 5-fold increase in traffic in the A to B direction and at least that in the B to A direction. Now imagine this on a larger scale. Thousands of stations. 30+? Servers. Hundreds of igates. This is starting to get off-topic for the list - if you'd like to continue the conversation please feel free to email me direct. On 8/25/07, Alex Carver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Matt Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 8/25/07, Alex Carver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > In that same train of thought, it would be nice if > > the > > > APRS-IS could show the duplicate packets instead > > of > > > discarding them. Then you possibly _could_ get a > > > better understanding of the RF network by watching > > how > > > a packet propagates and duplicates itself. > > > > Just imagine the additional load on the network if > > that were the case. > > In some areas a packet could be heard by many many > > different igate by > > the time it takes it two or three hops. That would > > easily have the > > potential of increasing the network traffic by 5x or > > more I would > > think. > > > The load is already there. The servers are comparing > all the packets looking for duplicates and then > discarding the duplicates. So the load on the network > shouldn't go up at all. Rather you'd simply be making > visible a portion of the traffic that is otherwise hidden. > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. > Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 > _______________________________________________ > Xastir mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir > _______________________________________________ Xastir mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
