Gating IS to RF using APRSIS32

[W5BFF]

I've tried asking Google, and it seems this question has been asked, but I can't find a real definitive answer.

Here's my set up:

My server is running APRSIS32 with internet and RF (Kenwood TK705 and PK88)

My mobile laptop is running APRSIS32 with RF and no internet (Kenwood TK705 and PK88)

On my server, I can see other APRS stations in my area, but they're all TCPIP based.

On my mobile laptop, I can only see my server.

iGating RF to IS seems to be quite easy, and seems to be what APRSIS32 was built for... but digipeating the TCPIP stations to RF doesn't seem to be happening. I've checked both boxes on my server (IS to RF and RF to IS).

What am I doing wrong??

 

[n9mxq]

APRSIS32 has no provision to gate IP to RF. Last I knew the author had concerns on how to properly filter what was sent and the feature wasn't high on his TODO list.

Are you looking to just send locals to RF? Sending everything from IP to RF would be an easy way to overwhelm the RF network..

UI-View will allow you to send pre-defined stations to RF from IP... The linux APRS flavors might as well, but I've never poked at one.

 

[AK9R]

You do not want the APRS-IS data stream going out on RF, unless it is very carefully filtered, as it will flood the local network.

Typically, the only information that should be I-gated IS to RF is APRS messages.

 

[W5BFF]

Sheesh!

I've asked this question elsewhere, and have received similar replies.

I ABSOLUTELY DO want to do this. I'm not stupid, and I know what I'm doing.

There is ZERO "RF Network" here for me to over load. What I can't see on my mobile laptop is ANY OTHER STATION than my server because... well... my server is the only other APRS device in my entire county that's on RF. There are a couple of weather stations, and my wife is using APRSDroid over TCP/IP.

To date, the ONLY RF communications using APRS in this county has been my laptop and my server.

APRSIS32 seems to filter IP traffic well enough by limiting the stations I see to the map/zoom view... I don't see why I can't hack the XML to have it pass that traffic over RF. I just don't know how to do it.

 

[n9mxq]

It's not as easy as "hacking the xml" it takes coding in the program itself to set up the proper forwarding.

As I said, UI-View will allow you to gate SPECIFIC calls to RF. There is no provision to gate EVERYTHING to RF due to the fact you'd probably cook a radio in under half an hour doing that. The radio would never unkey, and if it did, it would rekey before any local RF stations could get a packet out.

Maybe you keep getting the same answers everywhere, because it's the RIGHT answer. Just because it's not the answer you want, will not change the answer.

 

[W5BFF]

Maybe you keep getting the same answers everywhere, because it's the RIGHT answer. Just because it's not the answer you want, will not change the answer.

SMH. Here's another "non answer" for the WHY (you shouldn't) instead of the HOW.

I'd really rather not continuing the arguing WHY I should or shouldn't do this. I simply want to know HOW I can.

But since I can't seem to get past that here, please allow me to quote someone who's doing EXACTLY what I'm wanting to do:

How is IS->RF harmful? With the right filtering, it does not place much extra load on the network, and allows people that have a smart phone to beacon their locations.

I run a TX igate (KD8TWG-1). I have the filters set to only cover a very specific area, and it works very well. I am only transmitting about 15 packets per minute. Seems to work well for us.

Now, he's doing with aprx (for Linux) what I'm wanting to do with APRSIS32.

If it ABSOLUTELY can't be done with APRSIS32, I'm fine with that answer... if you ABSOLUTELY know it can't be done. I really don't want to run Linux in a VM to accomplish this task.

 

[n9mxq]

SMH. Here's another "non answer" for the WHY (you shouldn't) instead of the HOW.

If it ABSOLUTELY can't be done with APRSIS32, I'm fine with that answer... if you ABSOLUTELY know it can't be done. I really don't want to run Linux in a VM to accomplish this task.

Guess this thread can be closed. Since we cannot answer ABSOLUTELY..

You can gate IS-RF with UI-View for Windows by specifying which calls to gate..

Can you gate the whole IS stream to RF, not that I know of (or would want to attempt)

Can we give you the answer you want.. Well, there's the only ABSOLUTE I can give you.. NO.

 

[K5MPH]

You can do what you want to,you will need to switch over to UI-view in order to port out to Rf .........
-

 

[AK9R]

I simply want to know HOW I can.

Are you a member of the APRSISCE Yahoo Group? Since the author of the program is a regular poster in that group, if there is an answer to your question, that would be the place to ask. When you ask there, you might preface your question by stating that you understand the potential negative impact on the RF network and that the RF network in your area is sparsely used.

 

[W5BFF]

Are you a member of the APRSISCE Yahoo Group? Since the author of the program is a regular poster in that group, if there is an answer to your question, that would be the place to ask. When you ask there, you might preface your question by stating that you understand the potential negative impact on the RF network and that the RF network in your area is sparsely used.

I'm not a member of any yahoo groups... because it's yahoo. I may have to bite the bullet and create an account (dangit) or reactivate my old account (double dangit)... but I hate yahoo. I figured the software developer "hung out" somewhere... I just didn't know where. Thanks.

You can do what you want to,you will need to switch over to UI-view in order to port out to Rf .........
-

My only opposition to using UI-View is the fact that further development died with the developer (by his request). That being said, I'm not 100% opposed to switching to UI-View to run my my server... but APRSIS/32 just seems so robust, I can hardly believe this functionality is so.... impossible.

I read up on configuring aliases (Configure Aliases - APRSISCE/32 The future of Amateur Radio APRS) where the developer mentions filtering for the purposes of gating IS to RF... and even hacked the xml file to download the development version. I have the pre-configured aliass enabled, but that's where everything seems to stop. But, then, it doesn't look like any further releases of the software have happened since 2012, so while development may not be dead (like UI-View), it seems like it's been put on the 'back burner'.

Just for grins, I tried hacking the xml using the digiform entry to convert TCPIP* to WIDE1-1 with no luck... it seems passing messages from IS to RF is hard-coded into the binary,and getting any other traffic originating in the IS port to go out over RF is not gonna happen... at least in this version.

<sigh> I know I'd have written it a little differently... :/

 

[AK9R]

But, then, it doesn't look like any further releases of the software have happened since 2012, so while development may not be dead (like UI-View), it seems like it's been put on the 'back burner'.

The last development version that Lynn released was 2014/11/14. Work on the program has kinda slowed down since most of the bugs have been squashed. Lynn also got distracted by an Android version of the program he was working on last year.

 

[AK9R]

BTW, a couple of comments about the "K5HCM VHF" beacon that you are injecting into the APRS-IS:

1. Typically, voice repeater objects use the repeater frequency as the object name. So yours might be "443.300AT" for the 443.300 repeater in Atlanta. The beacon comment would then be "T100 +500". An object with a a name, instead of a frequency, usually indicates a voice station that is on the frequency, not repeater, though you could send "K5HCM VHF" as the object name with "443.300MHz T100 +500" as the comment to be fully compliant.

2. I question the need to send a repeater object only over APRS-IS. The whole idea behind repeater objects is to let travelers, those who are using APRS over RF, know about the local voice repeaters. To that end, sending a repeater object over RF makes sense, but a repeater object sent over IS probably won't be seen by RF users (which may take us back to your original question).

 

[W5BFF]

The last development version that Lynn released was 2014/11/14. Work on the program has kinda slowed down since most of the bugs have been squashed. Lynn also got distracted by an Android version of the program he was working on last year.

Ah! So you're right. I saw that 2012 date in a different place. I have the 2014 version.

BTW, a couple of comments about the "K5HCM VHF" beacon that you are injecting into the APRS-IS:

1. ...though you could send "K5HCM VHF" as the object name with "443.300MHz T100 +500" as the comment to be fully compliant.

That's what I did so the "tune" feature on some of the APRS radios would work. (...although I think I swapped the PL with the offset when I hacked the xml. I'll have to double check that.)

2. I question the need to send a repeater object only over APRS-IS. The whole idea behind repeater objects is to let travelers, those who are using APRS over RF, know about the local voice repeaters. To that end, sending a repeater object over RF makes sense, but a repeater object sent over IS probably won't be seen by RF users (which may take us back to your original question).

I just copied/pasted the club object I created (that I *DO* want to inject into IS) and didn't turn that little flag off. Whoops.

It's the server that's doing the beaconing, so it's going out on RF and IS. I turned it off. Thanks for pointing it out.

...and good morning! You were already destinated by the time I got your message.