Private Installations Revisited

The place to get information and ask questions about everything to do with properly and successfully editing the Waze Map.

Use this forum for all general editing questions, and the sub-forums for specific types of Waze Map Editor features.

Moderators: Unholy, bextein

Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Tue Jun 24, 2014 10:56 am

The prefferred treatement for larger private installations set forth in the wiki here is as follows:
Each entrance to the installation should be connected by a one-way split road entering and exiting the installation. The entering one-way road will include one private road segment. The exiting one-way road will be of one segment using the appropriate type of that road (usually street, primary street, or minor highway). This structure often mimics the actual lanes for such installations.


There is currently a report that a user has difficulty routing onto the NSA campus on Ft Meade. The NSA Campus is essentially a nested security zone within Ft Meade, so you need to cross two private road segments to reach the campus. Currently, the routing server more often than not times out when routing onto the NSA campus.

I asked Noam to look into this. The reply is that the timeouts are caused by the private roads. They are working on a permanent solution. In the meantime the routing team suggests making only the exit segments from private installations private and not the entry ones.

I have made this change to Ft Meade and we will see if it makes a difference.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:55 pm

Yes, I mean two non-contiguous private road segments.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Wed Jun 25, 2014 6:46 pm

It does appear that there are other issues at that destination.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Thu Jun 26, 2014 12:10 am

vectorspace wrote:As I recall someone was marking vast areas of Ft Meade as private roads.

Well that was the guidance for private areas when the current properties of private roads were introduced.
vectorspace wrote: We have learned from txemt and Driving79 that this causes problems in residential areas, so it would on bases. I am considering changing the Private Installations guidance because of their work.

Seems to me that the private road type is intended for exactly this purpose. If it causes problems, seems to me we really need to raise that with the routing staff at waze.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Thu Jun 26, 2014 12:16 am

The this I referring to is marking vast areas of Ft Meade as private roads.

Seems to me that the private road type is intended for exactly the purpose of marking private areas. If marking private areas with private roads causes problems, it still seems to me that we really need to identify such problems to the waze routing staff.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Thu Jun 26, 2014 6:09 pm

I'm in full agreement that we ought to understand how private roads function. I'm all for gathering all the information we have. But if we determine that private roads aren't functioning in the manner that waze has indicated they are intended to function, then I do think we should raise that issue with the programmers. I'm not saying we have to be paralyzed waiting for a response if there is an issue to be raised.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Thu Jun 26, 2014 9:37 pm

vectorspace wrote:Agree.... think we ought to fix the issue temporarily in the map and raise the issue to Waze.

txemt wrote:But is there an issue with private roads pertaining to military bases?

Agree with txemt, I'm not sure there is anything that needs fixing. I'll likely look to see if any issues arise with the private roads on the exits and then put them back on the entrances just to confirm that the timeouts don't return.

PhantomSoul wrote:Ok, let me see if I understand this correctly:

From what I know about Private Road (and Parking Lot Road works like this too, I think), there's a stiff penalty assessed to any route through a junction that involves going from any of the "public" road types to either Private Road (PR) or Parking Lot Road (PLR), AND vice versa. This means if you apply the single-PR per gateway checkpoint method to a base that has a main gated area and 1 inner gated area, you will incur this "transition penalty" between PR and the public road types 4 times - twice at the outer gateway when you enter and exit the PR segment, and twice again at the inner gateway when you enter and exit that PR segment.

Again agee with txemt. My understanding is that the transition penalty is only assessed once going from the PR or PLR to another road type.
PhantomSoul wrote:Now, is it possible when we test this for origins that are a relatively shorter distance from the base, it works fine, but if we try to route to it from, say 100 or more miles away, the combined 4 PR/PLR transition penalties, along with any other routing "scores" figured from calculating a route, cause an overflow situation? It sounds to me, based on the way PR/PLR is intended to be used, that Waze does not ever expect to encounter the transition between those two types more than twice: once if your origin is in a PR/PLR network to get you to public roads, and a second time if your destination is closer to a PR/PLR than any public road.

I really think waze only expects to ever encounter one transition if your origin is in PR or PLR network.
PhantomSoul wrote:Finally, is it possible that LiveMap or WME have bigger overflow thresholds than the Waze Client, which is optimized for the limited hardware and energy consumption of a smartphone? This would mean that certain routes calculated successfully on LiveMap or WME might time out in the Waze Client.

You're getting beyond my knowledge, but I was under the impression that when possible the route is calculated on the server side and sent to the client.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:00 am

vectorspace wrote:I might not be understanding the logic here. You seem to be implying that along a path there is some maximum penalty upon which Waze aborts routing. Perhaps this is true, but I have not encountered this in the past.

I am pretty sure that there is a maximum something upon which Waze aborts routing. But there are several limitations on routes that are not necessarily penalty based, such as the limitation on routes that are too long as compared to the straight line distance between the origin and destination. So I'm not sure what all beyond just routing penalties contributes to an aborted route. However, this didn't seem to be an aborted route. When I ask for an overly circuitous route or even a route from Philadelphia, PA to Williamsburg, VA I get a message "Could not find route." However, in this instance I got either a message "Routing server timeout" or "Routing service timed out. Please try again later." These time out messages seem to be caused by different issues than Waze aborting the route.


vectorspace wrote:My assumptions from these tests were that Waze will find a route if it exists no matter what the penalty, that the penalty of a private segment is fairly extreme (at least equivalent to hundreds of miles of regular road), and that the accumulation of penalty can go very high and still route without giving up.

You do get to a point where waze will give up. For instance waze can't find a route from Washington, DC to Ocean City, MD if I have avoid toll roads on.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby CBenson » Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:18 pm

So the routing at Ft. Meade with the private roads on the exits rather than the entrances seems to be working fine. I can route on and off the NSA campus and the remainder of Ft Meade and can not route through these areas as expected. I have no problems with long distance routes that begin in the third level security zone and travel long distances. For example, I can route from the close NSA parking lots to Camp Beauregard or MacDill AFB without issues. Seems to me that private roads on the exits works identically in practice to private roads on the entrances.

Given that the tile changed the gates at the same time it corrected the corrupt segment, there is no reason to conclude the private roads on the exits are an improvement. Thus I plan to switch the private roads back to the entrances to make sure that the routing issue does not return and to comply with current practice. If anyone would like me to leave Ft Meade in its current state for a longer period of time for any further testing, let me know.
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
 
Posts: 10330
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 9:13 pm
Location: Crownsville, MD, US
Has thanked: 1055 times
Been thanked: 2353 times

Re: Private Installations Revisited

Postby DwarfLord » Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:33 pm

Can you clarify that the issue is with needing to cross two non-contiguous private segments? I think that's what you mean, just want to be sure.
DwarfLord
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:01 pm
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, California USA
Has thanked: 1088 times
Been thanked: 1475 times

Next

Return to Waze Map Editor

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users