Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- packet:digipeating [2024/04/08 20:25] – m0lte
+++ packet:digipeating [2024/04/08 20:25] (current) – m0lte
@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 APRS makes extensive use of digipeating- actually using it as a kind of multicast, unlike how it works in connected mode.
-In connected-mode packet, while it can occasionally be useful in specific situations, **digipeating is generally discouraged**. This is for two reasons:
+In connected-mode packet, while it can occasionally be useful in specific situations, **digipeating is generally discouraged**. This is for three reasons:
   - it is less efficient in terms of airtime
   - it is less reliable in terms of robustness
-  - it is generally not needed - there are other means to achieve the same end result which are more efficient and reliable.
+  - it is generally not even needed - there are other means to achieve the same end result which are more efficient and reliable.
 The reason for both the efficiency and reliability issues are related. It is less efficient because with digipeating, in an example with three stations in a chain, station X needs to orchestrate retries between station Y (which X can hear) and station Z (which station X cannot hear). It is less reliable because, with digipeating, if any part of the chain breaks down and causes retries, every station needs to be involved in recovering, which introduces far more opportunities for further failure and collapse of the session than if each individual link in the chain were modeled as its own independent connection.