[EAS] IPAWS and NOAA

[Rich Parker]

Maybe I'm missing something here - but why bolt more lipstick on this
pig of an EAS system - since for most of us, 99.99999% of our alerts
come from NWS (not counting tests, but even those), why not change up
things and design a proper system based upon the NWS polygon system.
Then our 'location codes' in our EAS boxes could be the polygons, or
groups of polygons for our particular areas of coverage.

I can't see trying to fix one broken system by trying to fix another
broken system when the technology (and presumably a lot of the coding)
already exists.....

And bonus, since (as I understand it) the polygon definitions also
lend themselves to .shp (GIS type Shape Files) they could easily be
ported into Google Earth, Maps, or Bing for far more detailed
alerting.

It seems outrageous to me that we have something called CAP (uh,
doesn't that mean COMMON ALERTING PROTOCOL) that is anything but
'common' to all the various players - NWS, WEA, EAS.....  How about we
fix that before we go mucking about with the NWS systems?

Rich Parker
Director of Engineering
CoastAlaska, Inc.
*EAS Curmudgeon - "Because if it ain't broken, it ain't EAS"

On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 2:26 PM Sean Donelan <sean at donelan.com> wrote:
[snip]
> I prefer putting most of the conversion work at the NOAA/IPAWS interface
> instead of thousands of EAS boxes in the field. Its easier to fix, when
> something needs fixing. I know, programmers will freakout the first time
> they hear this, because that is not how it is normally done.
>
> New alert channels should be able to support full digital CAP
> distribution, and use the CAP message ID to de-dup. Only those alert
> channels needing backwards capability to de-dup EAS/WRSAME ZCZC strings
> would need separate URLs and local CAP message queues.