There have been recent and strong claims saying that receive-only (rx-only) iGates destroy the two-way messaging feature of APRS. This has been claimed in blog posts and facebook threads. Some people ask me if this is true.
No, it is not true. Receive-only iGates do not break messaging if there are transmit-capable igates nearby, and those transmit-capable iGates are connected to an APRS-IS server which has a full APRS feed. All aprs.net and aprs2.net servers, where iGates normally connect, do have a full feed. No problem!
 |
| Messaging would work from 1650m / 5400 ft above Vihti, even in the presence of RX-only iGates, as long as there is at least one TX-capable iGate. |
If there are no transmit-capable (TX) iGates around, two-way messaging will not work, of course. Having a transmit-capable iGate would therefore be better, but receive-only iGates are easier to set up technically, they are cheaper (receivers are practically free now), and licensing for automatic transmitters is difficult in many countries. Where transmit-capable (TX) iGates are present, receive-only iGates do not break the TX iGates, they just improve reception coverage. For messages, too.
Just to make it perfectly clear: If there are TX iGates present, additional RX-only iGates improve messaging performance. For the RF-to-IS direction (and ACKs for the IS-to-RF messages).
The common incorrect claim is that the APRS-IS server sends the message only to the latest iGate which heard a station. In fact, the APRS-IS servers (both javaprssrvr and aprsc) send the messages to all iGates which heard the station recently. In aprsc, "recently" means "within 3 hours", and I believe javaprssrvr uses something similar.
The server maintains a list of recently heard callsigns independently for each iGate client. There's a separate list of heard stations for each iGate client. When the server has a packet to pass on, it will look at all connected clients, and for each client, if the recipient of the message is found from the list of recently heard stations, the message will be sent. The scanning will not stop; the message will be given to all clients which heard the station.
I can confirm that we have written the software to do it like this, and since it is open source, you can see the code yourself. The automatic test case also validates that the server keeps working that way, so that there won't be a bug creeping in the future to break it accidentally. I've also tested that javaprssrvr behaves like this – I've run the test cases against it to confirm compatibility.
There may be problems when there is a server with a filtered feed involved (possibly a server software running at the "client" without having a full feed), but those are rare and known to be problematic. All Tier2 servers have a full feed (aprs2.net ones), and so do the core servers.
The real problem is that a user, seeing one-way beaconing to the APRS-IS works, may well expect two-way messaging to work too. And when it doesn't work, there's only a timeout, no immediate feedback saying "sorry, this won't work now", which is what a sensible system would do today.
Even in that case, an rx-only igate is better than nothing! I wouldn't be so harsh against them, since the step from RX-only to TX-capable may be a bit difficult for many.
Bottom line:
In each area, there should be one TX igate, maybe two. More may create QRM as the same messages will be transmitted from APRS-IS to RF many times. RX igates will not break messaging if there are TX igates around – they just improve RX coverage.
In each area, there should be one TX igate, maybe two. More may create QRM as the same messages will be transmitted from APRS-IS to RF many times. RX igates will not break messaging if there are TX igates around – they just improve RX coverage.
 |
| This picture may at first seem irrelevant, but it does show me working VHF in AM (122.825 MHz), and Flarm on 868 MHz to OGN (which runs aprsc). Flarm antenna visible in top left corner. |