@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of john_ke5c
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 8:35 PM
To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Native D-STAR vs. DPLUS linking (was: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Signal
Distance)
But to those of us who truly do wish to communicate
You missed the whole point.
You and Ed seem to advocate that DPLUS is the only legitimate way to
talk across the D-STAR network and have at least alluded that you would
like callsign routing banned. For those cases where it makes better
sense, it is the right solution, and it is part of the
At 04:20 PM 5/18/2009, you wrote:
You missed the whole point.
You and Ed seem to advocate that DPLUS is the only legitimate way to
talk across the D-STAR network and have at least alluded that you would
like callsign routing banned. For those cases where it makes better
sense, it is the right
john_ke5c wrote:
Callsign routing to a long haul truck driver who is in range of a DStar
repeater say 5% of the time, and whose whereabouts even then would be known
only if he remembered to key up?
Well, that is like making the argument that there shouldn't be
defibrillators on
But to those of us who truly do wish to communicate with an individual
(as with those of us who are trained on AEDs), it is nice to have the
capability when wanted/needed.
Oh I generally agree. I was just emphasizing how non sequltur the attempted
analogy with debfibrillators on airplanes
Source routing to an individual callsign (native D-STAR) has its purpose
as well. If the station (callsign) that I want to talk to is attached
to a traveler, say a long haul truck driver or a road warrior, then
simply calling the station using callsign routing makes more sense.
Callsign
--- In dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com, john_ke5c k...@... wrote:
Callsign routing to a long haul truck driver who is in range of a DStar
repeater say 5% of the time, and whose whereabouts even then would be known
only if he remembered to key up?
Well, that is like making the argument that