> Bill V WA7NWP wrote:
> >> For purposes of original path analysis based on the finally IGated
> >> packets, is the second rule really necessary? It totally removes the
> >> fact that the station originally asked for a WIDE2-something and makes
> >> it appear as if the station is requesting only certain digis.
> >> Traceability was one of the reasons for th change to WIDEn-N.
> > In a previous discussion, I was in the minority thinking that the tiny
> > bit of info lost was more than made up for by shortening the resulting
> > packet. The info isn't really lost -- it's just in the packet before
> > being digipeated and not afterwards so it's available if somebody is
> > really analyzing things.
> It's lost from the perspective of APRS-IS based analysis. It would only
> be present within simplex of the station before the digipeat and lost to
> stations that can only hear the digipeater.
You only lose the info of what the path started with -- you still know
it was two hops and who the digipeaters were. That's only when it's a
used two hop packet that makes it to the IGate first -- any 0 or 1 hop
packet will have the W2 info. I suggest it's more important to
optimize on the air RF conditions (shorter packets) than to preserve a
miniscle bit of info on the APRS-IS. APRS-IS is already known as
only marginally useful for analyse projects because so many packets
are dropped as duplicates.
Funny in a way that I argue for shorter packets here since I'm still a
fan of much longer non Mic-E packets which have real time stamps...
Bill - WA7NWP