67i, waypoint, send
67i, waypoint, send
no , there is no drwback
it simply needs a way of authorization to be given to a certain IR device to request position from other device. This is not done by simply changing something small in the FW. You need to have some control media to provide verification, create some kind of access code possibly, with which the requesting device would show that it is allowed to do so and on the other side, the pinged device would have to authorize this particular device to not only send him a message, but also initiate sending data back.
Not so simple probably, it has to be agreed between the two devices in advance and such information needs to be stored somewhere, to be defined if this is one time use, or multiple use, or for certain time and will expire after so and so long.
To use simply the address can not be done, as this would mean that one can for ever push the distant device to send you data.
This would not comply with any data protection law.
Imagine, you have an email address of someone, and by having it will simply allow you to get some confidential data from his computer or phone. Or you have some phone number and by this you can initiate what ever on the phone with that number.
The second reason is the general spam avoidance, as in this kind of satellite communication which are charged by byte volume, any transmission being initiated by other party, but being charged to my account, must have rather solid barriers
This would definitely lead to some larger development, as original IR designs were strictly prohibiting such function.
Not subject is the actually never really working ping function, even when authorized to do so, it all very seldom results in requested information being returned. I think one of 10 attempts will result in some position being returned after loooong time.
There used to be even a function where wayponits created could be delivered directly by the mapshare function (well this is kind of desktop function) but this never did work, so it was finally given up by the devs.
Sorry, skyeye. I don't see much validity to your objections. Why do you think Garmin would need some new tracking system to manage which individual devices can ping which other devices?
I realize the rollout part of my recommendation might be tricky since both pinging device and pinged device would have to be updated, but there are easy ways to deal with that, e.g. announcing a future activation date.
And if InReach-to-InReach spam were thought to be a potential problem, as you seem to think, Garmin might need to give users some way to designate the 'pingability' of their devices. But there are any number of easy ways to do that without Garmin establishing infostructure to track individual device privileges. For instance, device owners could be given control of their devices' InReach-to-InReach addresses. Or the firmware in the 'pinging' device could direct the ping request to the 'pinged' devices MapShare page pinging function. Or users could be given the ability to specify a 'ping address' that the 'pinging' device user would have to know. All these are one-time changes that don't require anymore ongoing data maintenance than already exists, and there a probably even easier ways than the ones I listed.
More importantly, your objection assumes some economic incentive for InReach-to-InReach spam. And that's hard to imagine since InReach-to-InReach communication is already restricted. It can only be initiated by an InReach device with an active subscription.
The thing is, that sending a message to other device from an IR device is clearly possible, since it is covered by the contract of the sending device and thus costs resulting from it are charged to the sending device.
Not so when the recipient is this way forced to send a message. This is blocked by all ways IR communication takes place. Short message, email, , simply nobody can force your device to send message. Unless it is let say administrator of an account for example.
If a user grants permission to someone to force his device to send messages, this needs to be at garmin database which is then deciding if particular action is allowed or not. It is not matter of a device, it is a function of garmins databases and rights being stored there. So it has so far nothing to do with the device itself. It is garmin, who is being charged by Iridium all the bytes and garmin has to know where they did spent them and whom to pass on the charges. They have to keep track of all bytes travelling over the Iridium and have also provide authentication to the iridium for all their devices.
So there would have to be new database for such priviledges set up on the garmins database with a way the 'ping recipient' would be able to grant permission to a specific IR device.
So the idea of setting your device to be allowed to receive and answer any such pings is nothing to be done on the device itself. No IR devices can be configured to do anything on their own, all functions need to be passed to Iridium so they can decide if this and that byte will be transported and from where to where.
Anyway, the current entry in the mapshare is covered also partially by the mpashare consens, giving already some warming. But as you see, it has nothing to do with the device and its firmware, this funktion exists from begining of IR. Unfortunately, it never really did work. I am admin of 3 prof accounts, tried lot of times to ping some of our unit, very seldom I did get answer after waiting hours and hours for it. If successful, an asterisk was placed at this position on the map. Unfortunately this marks can not be deleted, yes they are there for ever. Trying the delete it will just return an error. Nobody at garmin seems to be able to delete those marks. So yes, there is some functionality somewhere, no one knows whare it is and who it works.