[EAS] Overlap/monitoring issue

[Clay Freinwald]

Dave - 

EAS boxes have, as far as I know, work this way.   This is why we highly
encourage broadcasters to NOT sit on pending message until they have a
'natural break' in programming ...but rather get it on the air
ASAP...Otherwise that message is likely to be blown out by another.    I
agree it would be nice if these devices had multiple message storage
buffers.    That improvement would likely take a LOT off petitions to those
who make rules for these things.

Clay Freinwald

-----Original Message-----
From: eas-bounces at radiolists.net [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On
Behalf Of David Turnmire

I must say I'm surprised by this.  It was my understanding that the SAGE
(and other boxes) would "queue" incoming alerts, rather than have one 
trash another... or ignore the second.   I believe some decoders had a 
hardware limit of how many simultaneous alerts they could gracefully
accommodate (seems like I heard one box was limited to two simultaneous
alerts).  Having one alert interrupt another alert already in process seems
to me to be a faulty design.

Also, I can understand hardware limitations for the number of simultaneous
alerts received via RF/audio sources, but I wonder whether there is a
practical limit on the number of incoming CAP alerts.  I would think that
could easily be handled in software. Probably a moot point because I suspect
there are few stations monitoring more than a couple CAP servers, though
briefly for awhile I was monitoring three.

Perhaps Harold and the other decoder manufacturers monitoring this list
could comment on the above issues.

Dave

__________________________________________________________
The EAS Forum Discussion List is hosted by the BWWG (Broadcast Warning
Working Group). http://eas.radiolists.net Please invite your friends to join
our Forum! The sign up is at:
http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas
___________________________________________________________