Ok, well here is the problem. The misconception that the call routing creates a one sided conversation across a reflector. It does not. We tested this last Saturday and all repeaters hear both side of the conversation. That's why I don't understand why anyone would want to block the call routed call.
With the solution (non-solution in my opinion) If all repeaters were linked to a reflector then call routing would cause a lot of one way conversations or conversations that are only heard on one of many linked repeaters. I think that would be more disruptive. Now a situation would be created where two [arties are talking on one repeater , nobody can hear them on the reflector and so another conversation could start on a different linked repeater and disrupt the first conversation. I say leave things the way they are. It works just fine! Fran _____ From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Langdon Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 10:51 PM To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Wouldn't It Be Nice ? At 12:19 PM 8/10/2009, you wrote: >So what! They can't push a couple of buttons IF they want to talk back!!! > >It doesn't seem to disrupt anything in my opinion! I agree with Nate, it seems a simple solution to handling the different traffic types. If UR = CQCQCQ, then it's fair game for DPlus. If UR = anything else, then ignore it and assume G2 routing is handling the traffic. It's not a perfect fix, because there still may be a conflict between linked and routed traffic at the gateway where someone is callsign routing while linked to a reflector (or another gateway), but it does stop the linked reflector/gateway from getting one sided QSOs. It's a solution that could play nice for those that want to leave their gateway permanently linked to something, with users able to make a routed call wherever, without disturbing that link. In summary, I think Nate's idea is an excellent one. 73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL http://vkradio. <http://vkradio.com> com
