Re: Verified vs Confirmed on LoTW
|
+ AA6YQ comments below
The big issue is the obsolete software used for the DXCC records.
The DXCC records are maintained on a legacy FoxPro database that
will only run on Windows 95 (97?) and earlier. ARRL have only
one computer that will run that orphaned operating system and
it has no available (up to date) anti-virus and/or firewall for
that OS.
As such, the DXCC records can no longer reside on the ARRL LAN
and automatic data transfer from Online DXCC ("Easy DXCC") and
LotW ... in addition automatic data (status) transfer to LotW is
not possible. Data from Online DXCC/LotW must be batch exported
to portable media, that media must be virus checked on a stand
alone computer before being loaded (and processed) one application
at a time on the DXCC system. Periodically, updated user records
are exported to portable media from the DXCC system, virus checked
on the stand alone system and imported to LotW to update user
records there.
Obviously, there are several "choke points" in the current system
and increased opportunity for data entry errors (like tagging
LotW credits as card credits) ... as well as delays due to the
batch export/validate/import ... export/validate/update processes.
+ Recall that just as the extension of LoTW to support WAZ was wrapping up in early 2018, ARRL management re-assigned the two developers that had been dedicated to LoTW to "higher priority tasks". One task was the deployment of the off-the-shelf Personify association management software package, whose stated objective was to enable ARRL members to renew, shop, and donate in a single transaction; that took another 4 years to accomplish. The other higher priority task was an internal effort to re-implement the DXCC system, which failed outright. + I was not aware that the ARRL's solution to the "FoxPro on Windows 95" problem was a sneaker-net connection between the DXCC system and LoTW. ? ? 73, ? ? ? ? ? ? Dave, AA6YQ
|
