[Cluster-tech] PC41 replacement

[Lee Sawkins]

Lee Sawkins wrote:

> Dirk Koopman G1TLH wrote:
> 
> Lee Sawkins wrote:
> > Hi Dirk and others.
> >
> > I would like to replace the PC41 protocol for CC Clusters.  Dirk, some
> > time ago I remember you mentioning you were looking into replacing PC41s
> > as well.  I have heard nothing recently.  If you have a design for your
> > protocol, I would like to see it.  Perhaps I could use it.  Otherwise,
> > what I am proposing to do is introduce a PC91 message, similar to the
> > existing PC92/PC93 messages.  Will this cause anyone a problem?  If not
> > a PC91, then any suggestions to another message number?  If Spider sees
> > this message, could it at as a minimum decrement the hops and pass it on
> > to other Spider clusters as well as CC Clusters?
> >
> > This message would include all the data currently passed in PC41s and be
> > expandable to include other items if desired.  ie IOTA number, RDA etc.
> >
> > The format I plan to use would be of the type
> >
> > PC91^VE7CC-1^65205.01^version^VA6AAA^1^Lee^2^Maple Ridge BC^3^49 11 N
> > 122 30 W^4^VE7CC-1^5^CN89^H99^
> >
> > These items are ^orig node^time^PC91 protocol version^user call^item 1
> > of PC41^item 1 data^item 2 of PC41^item 2 data^... up to item 5 data of
> > PC41 and then additional items not currently included in the PC41
> > protocol.
> >
> > It would be optional how many items of data are passed in one message.
> > A minimum of one and a maximum of all items.  Each item type (name,
> > location etc) would be identified by the number immediately proceeding
> > it.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> 
> I would rather not use PC91, just in case there are still some old (pre
> 1.54) DXSpider nodes out there that still use it. I will get back to you
> on a number (probably PC94). I would like fewer fields:-
> PC91^VE7CC-1^65205.01^version^VA6AAA^1Lee^2Maple Ridge BC^349 11 N 122
> 30 W^4VE7CC-1^5CN89^H99^
> 
> i.e. the first digit/letter is the field type/name. 
> 
PC94 is ok with me.
It's easier to parse in VB with more fields, but no problem to do what
you want.

> and I am presuming that "version" would be a number (eg '1' or maybe '5')?
Yes, an integer number.

> 
> and not all fields need be populated.
OK

> 
> and ^2^ means that field type 2 is now empty.
Ok

> 
> Dirk G1TLH
 
Lee