"Tony Langdon, VK3JED" <vk3jed@...>
At 11:51 AM 5/23/2012, you wrote:
"this is something that should have been done ten years ago"D-STAR was developed a long time ago, technology has moved on since, also.
What concerns me more is the (political) resistance to allowing interoperability/gateways between systems. The transcoding, gateways and transports themselves are all relatively minor feats in comparison. All it takes is "someone" saying they won't allow gating from IRLP to Echolink, Echolink to D-Star, or P25 to whatever, and a segment becomes isolated. We're our own worst enemy and we'll pay for it in real dollars.Agree totally. To me, the ultimate aim is to have a
I don't want to have to take three HT with me when I leave the house, or have a rack of three mobile rigs in the car. I also don't want my investment in D-Star to become worthless.I had the same issue back in 2002, when I was running IRLP and Echolink on a single antenna, which meant that two of the 3 ports on my triplexer were taken up with links! As I was the main user, there had to be a better way. I wasn't the only one who thought this, and a few people put their heads together and came up with EchoIRLP, which allowed the same analog endpoint to be used for both networks. With digital, there's no common medium until you get to the end user radio itself, so you either need a multiprotocol radio, or you need infrastructure which can route across networks (and willing network administrators!). At least with digital, it should be possible to transparently carry IDs from end to end, leaving only the need to cross from network to network, and transcoding the audio where necessary.
If the gateways can be built out of something like the UDR, then that could push the protocol conversion as close to the edge of the network as possible, which might scale better, as well as minimising issues of "We don't want XXX on our network!".
73 de VK3JED / VK3IRL