On Friday, October 22, 2010 04:41:42 pm Peter Elke wrote:
Hmm,
This is very bad news...
Maybe, and maybe not. It could end up being good for AllStarLink and EchoLink. It's possible that without so many IRLP nodes already in existance, that IRLP might be standing alone at some point. It's just starting to hit me how scary powerful and flexible AllStarLink is, being built on top of Asterisk.
I would think that connecting a single app_rpt node to IRLP would not violate their rules. There are a number of IRLP node emulators that just make sure that echolink in not currently in use before allowing IRLP.
It's the many to many and many to one connection possibility that is the cause for concern, and one incident that soured Mr. Cameron on AllStarLink. With each AllStarLink node being able to be a hub, that is not something IRLP can do now. IRLP uses an out dated interface (parallel port!) afterall. I refused to play by heavy handed rules and not have flexibility, which is why I am here (AllStarLink #2392/EchoLink #541558) now. I think AllStarLink is way under publicized and people just don't realize how powerful and flexibile it is. Of course, like with any tool, that power can be weilded for good or evil.
Their rules disallow interconnections to foreign networks, it should not disallow connecting to a app_rpt system used only as a repeater controller with a few local radios (during the IRLP session).
True, but some minds still need to come out of the caves and see the light. :D Until then, we do what we do and have more fun doing it. :D
The IRLP system is a bit too heavy for me, you need a controller, their card and a PC.
For a simplex node, the requirements are no heavier than for AllStarLink. Repeaters are another story, of course.
I recall they even set up a flag for "experimental nodes" in the IRLP database.
Yes, they do, and I rejected that possibility for myself. I want a fully functional legit node, which is what I have now, still in two networks. I am finding there are not too many places I care to go on IRLP anyways. :) 8-Dale
-----Original Message----- From: app_rpt-users-bounces@qrvc.com [mailto:app_rpt-users-bounces@qrvc.com] On Behalf Of Tony Langdon, VK3JED Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 4:11 PM To: kb8ude@gmail.com; app_rpt mailing list Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Discontinuance of IRLP support
At 09:53 AM 10/23/2010, kb8ude@gmail.com wrote:
That is unfortunate. It also explains why. requests to him for a node number were ignored. Too many times the needs (wants) of the few (one) get in the way of progress.
I got on-board with the app_rpt project because it offered a way to give our users a way to access three different networks cheaply rather than duplicating hardware to achieve the same result. I won't be constructing a new system to fill the gap, that's for sure.
Actually, it could be done on an existing IRLP node in theory. A bit of a kludge, but EchoIRLP interfaces thebridge to existing IRLP software, and so I'm sure Asterisk could be interfaced to the IRLP software in a similar fashion. Not the nicest way to do things, but theoretically possible, and would be IRLP compliant. The AllStar side wouldn't need any hardware, since it would be using the radio/interface that IRLP uses.
EchoIRLP, even though it's a bunch of shell scripts is GPL, so feel free to play. :)
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
_______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@qrvc.com http://qrvc.com/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users _______________________________________________ App_rpt-users mailing list App_rpt-users@qrvc.com http://qrvc.com/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
-- I can handle complexity. It's the simple things that confound me. Open your mind, Read, Learn, Think, Apply. 73, from NPKT! http://www.hybotics.com - NEW main site Just because we can, does it follow that we should?