[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ✘AIS regressions

From: Lucien Van Elsen
Subject: Re: ✘AIS regressions
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 15:12:56 -0500

Apologies for the delayed response - yes, I think what you propose is for the best; ignore the extra fields, accept the valid/checksummed data.  Thanks!

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 6:57 PM Gary E. Miller <> wrote:
Yo Lucien!

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:52:48 -0500
Lucien Van Elsen <> wrote:

> The additional fields are described at
> - basically, deprecated and undocumented, but seen often enough in
> the wild.

Thanks for the quick pointer.  Since it is meta-data, and gpsd has been
ignoring it until now, is it best to just continue ignoring it and
accepting the valid checksummed data?

Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703  Tel:+1 541 382 8588

            Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
    "If you can't measure it, you can't improve it." - Lord Kelvin

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]