[App_rpt-users] Echolink Link Status

[Jim Duuuude]

Actually, at this moment tis ENTIRELY cosmetic.. :-)

JIM

Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 18:16:42 -0600
From: kt9ac at ameritech.net
To: telesistant at hotmail.com
CC: app_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Echolink Link Status



  


    
  
  
    Thanks for all your hard work Jim! 

    

    If anyone is worried about how our nodes look on Echolink (the
    [0/20] thing), inside /etc/asterisk/echolink.conf is a line called
    "maxstns" that we can change. I set mine to 1 and still was able to
    outbound connect to two Echolink nodes at the same time, so its
    mostly cosmetic.

    

    

    Tony

    

    On 01/22/2011 04:14 PM, Jim Duuuude wrote:
    
      
      Our architecture for Echolink differs a great deal from most
      others. Since there is no sane

      reason in the universe to do otherwise, our Echolink presence is
      both more-or-less a "conference",

      since it will ALWAYS accept multiple inbound connections and tie
      them together (as any connection

      is on an app_rpt node), and have the ability to support multiple
      outbound connections (also tied together

      with everything else on the app_rpt node) simultaneously. There is
      no reason to create "artificial"

      limitations of this nature.

      

      Since the Echolink reporting system is really designed for
      implementation that basically do

      "one thing at a time", there is only a concept of a single status
      message. To make a (rather

      feeble) attempt at "fitting into the mold", I decided to report
      the "inbound" status when there

      are no outbound connections active. If outbound connections are
      active, it reports the information

      for the last one connected (if multiple outbound connections are
      active).

      

      Therefore, by definition, the node can *never* be "busy" according
      to the Echolink reporting

      definition of "busy". 

      

      And yes, the "20" means "of 20 maximum connections". However, the
      connection limit was never

      implemented (after all, I try to avoid artifical limits on
      things). If and when there is a compelling reason

      do to so, I will. Currently, the system will take as many
      connections as there is bandwidth and CPU power for.

      

      JIM WB6NIL

      

      

      > Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 14:26:22 -0600

      > From: kt9ac at ameritech.net

      > To: app_rpt-users at ohnosec.org

      > Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Echolink Link Status

      > 

      > Just updated my test system to 0.281 and verified that when
      idle it 

      > shows a [0/20] next to my QTH. When connected, shows the "In
      conference 

      > with..." status.

      > 

      > Does this mean we can host 20 connections from Echolink per
      Allstar 

      > node? Also, when would the "ON" versus "BUSY" flag change.

      > 

      > I don't use Echolink a lot, but its interesting...

      > 

      > Thanks,

      > Tony

      > 

      > On 01/21/2011 11:26 PM, K&R Yoksh wrote:

      > >

      > > ----- Original Message -----

      > >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:27:15 -0800

      > >> From: Jim Duuuude

      > >> Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Echolink Link Status

      > >>

      > >> Chan_echolink now supports proper display/reporting
      to the echolink 

      > >> server stuff.

      > >

      > > Hello Jim (and the group),

      > >

      > > Many thanks for this great addition!

      > >

      > > 73.

      > >

      > > Kyle

      > > K0KN

      > >

      > > _______________________________________________

      > > App_rpt-users mailing list

      > > App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org

      > >
      http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users

      > >

      > _______________________________________________

      > App_rpt-users mailing list

      > App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org

      > http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users

     		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20110122/4ed6c753/attachment.html>