Sounds like an excellent research topic for a UCSD summer intern.
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
It's hard to see precisely what's happening but it looks like multiple hosts
(possibly a botnet) are sweeping through the 44/8 range looking for
something.
> Subject:
> [44net] Some hosts from net, rest masq'd?
> From:
> Steve L <kb9mwr(a)gmail.com>
> Date:
> 07/19/2015 09:29 PM
>
> To:
> "44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
>
>
> I had a guy ask me who I don't think is on this list yet, if its
> possible so have some 44 ips behind his gateway reachable from the
> public net, and all the remaining to use masquerading rather than the
> default 44/8 UCSD route. I told him I am sure it can be done.
>
> I am sure there is more than one way to do this. Here is what I came
> up with, I mark the traffic type by matching source address (I am
> using some hosts on my lan to test). Set a rule for that, and then
> finally set a route based on that rule.
I am doing that on my system as well, but rather than using a separate rule that
is matched by the mark, I use the mark to enable the masquerade in POSTROUTING.
(using a -m mark --mark 1 match)
But of course it can be done either way.
Rob
I had a guy ask me who I don't think is on this list yet, if its
possible so have some 44 ips behind his gateway reachable from the
public net, and all the remaining to use masquerading rather than the
default 44/8 UCSD route. I told him I am sure it can be done.
I am sure there is more than one way to do this. Here is what I came
up with, I mark the traffic type by matching source address (I am
using some hosts on my lan to test). Set a rule for that, and then
finally set a route based on that rule.
Here is what I have:
http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/wapr/tcpip/startampr-n3fe
I am not sure I am doing it right as the iptables marking and ip rules
are a little greek to me. I am looking for input, suggestions etc.
There may even be a much easier way that I haven't thought of.
It seems to work, but I have said that before and turns out I was
logged into something other than what I thought for testing. Seems a
bit sluggish from the net though, but maybe there is just congestion
right now.
Thanks
Steve, KB9MWR
Hi everyone,
I'm just starting to setup an AMPRNET node and am running into some
difficulty setting up a Linux gateway using the rip44d daemon and was
hoping someone has some pointers.
I've been following this guide:
http://wiki.ampr.org/index.php/Ubuntu_Linux_Gateway_Example and start
running into trouble once I try and get the rp daemon running. I've
managed to download and extract the latest tar file from:
http://www.yo2loj.ro/hamprojects/ampr-ripd-1.13.tgz and it seems to
compile and install fine. The next step, according to the guide, is to
run ./find_pass.sh but when I do that I get the error:
Tunnel socket: Setting SO_BINDTODEVICE: No such device
I took a look at the contents of the find_pass.sh file and it seems to
contain the command ./ampr-ripd -d -i ampr0 so I decided to run
./ampr-ripd -d -i eth0 from the command line and I get the message:
Waiting for RIPv2 broadcasts...
but it never prints out the "secret" password. I am running Debian
Jessie as my OS and have registered a gateway on the ampr portal. Just
wondering if there's something obvious I'm missing here?
Cheers,
Chris
VE7ALB in Victoria BC||||
Folks:
I am trying to bring my 44 host back online but am having some issues (not
receiving IPIP traffic from mirrorshades.)
What's a good 44 peer I can test traffic from Internet->44.x to and 44.x ->
44.x. Not planning on flooding, mostly pinging.
Thanks,
Assi (kk7kx.ampr.org)
I would be interested in testing this as an endpoint. Let me know what you
need from me, on or off the list!
Thanks!!
Rod Ekholm - KC7AAD
Spokane, WA
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:00 PM, <44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> wrote:
> Send 44Net mailing list submissions to
> 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 44net-owner(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of 44Net digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. BPQ and 44 IP's (William Lewis)
> 2. Re: BPQ and 44 IP's (Don Poaps)
> 3. Re: BPQ and 44 IP's (John Wiseman)
> 4. Re: BPQ and 44 IP's (Demetre - SV1UY)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 20:27:34 -0700
> From: William Lewis <kg6baj(a)n1oes.org>
> To: 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
> Subject: [44net] BPQ and 44 IP's
> Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.2.20150713202554.01c5e1c8(a)mail.n1oes.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
>
> I'm hearing that the latest BPQ software can do 44.x.x.x IP Addressing?
>
> Can anyone confirm this?
>
> If so, I have a friend in Nevada that wants to set up his BPQ station to
> link with me using our 44.x.x.x numbers.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> ----------
>
> This message is for the designated recipient only and MAY CONTAIN
> PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
> If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and
> delete the original.
> Any other use of this E-mail is prohibited.
>
> Wm Lewis
>
I'm hearing that the latest BPQ software can do 44.x.x.x IP Addressing?
Can anyone confirm this?
If so, I have a friend in Nevada that wants to set up his BPQ station to
link with me using our 44.x.x.x numbers.
Thanks,
----------
This message is for the designated recipient only and MAY CONTAIN
PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and
delete the original.
Any other use of this E-mail is prohibited.
Wm Lewis
Greetings,
I've been forced to change my main router to shorewall (I can go
another route, but right now I'm just evaluating the situation),
and as a result I have lost a few things that I have become a
bit too used to over the past few years. Like having a DMZ host
direct to my JNOS and being able to pass ip-ip direct to it.
I have not figured out how to dmz to my jnos (2 ports on the
shorewall, not 3) yet or how to pass ipip through ...
Anyone on the list done this already ?
I would appreciate some working examples, thank you.
Maiko Langelaar / VE4KLM
21st Century and SMTP ??
Pretty wrong, so I think you don't know anything about H-Addressing.
First off, SMTP (email) is just like someones home phone number. If you
dial the wrong phone number, you either get the wrong house, or you get
none at all. Same with email. If you don't have the 100% correct email
address, the message doesn't get through at all, or winds up in the wrong
persons in-box.
With H-Addressing, YOU DON'T HAVE TO KNOW THE EXACT ADDRESS!
That's one of the many beautiful things about packet messaging forwarding.
Let me explain.... My packet address looks like this
KG6BAJ(a)KG6BAJ.#NCA.CA.USA.NOAM.
The ".#NCA.CA.USA.NOAM" is the Hierarchical part of the address. The
".#NCA"denotes SUBSECTION of the state (in this case Northern CAlifornia),
then the state "CAlifornia (.CA)", then the Country (.USA), then the
continent of North America (.NOAM).
With HAddressing, Someone really doesn't need to know the precise address
like you do with phone & email (The SMTP you refer too). Someone wants to
send me packet mail, they really only need just a part of my address, which
they could guess by running my callsign through something like QRZ. Someone
could send me a packet mail addressed to "KG6BAJ@.#USA.NOAM" (notice the
huge difference from KG6BAJ(a)KG6BAJ.#NCA.CA.USA.NOAM).
Properly configured NOS/FBB/Misc full service BBS's then can at least
determine that the message is intended for USA, in North America, and
forward the message along.
Since my BBS is in fact located within USA, in North America, then I'll get
the message, and drop it in the correct mailbox.
Try doing that with an SMTP (email) message. Just won't work.
To those who don't fully understand the brilliants of Hierarchical I
suppose it would seem antiquated. But nothing else gets that message
through like packet radio and H-Addressing.
And one another note, you state all NOS stations run SMTP. Also not true.
It depends on if the sysop has built it in at time of compiling it features.
And..... not all Full-Service BBS's run NOS.
Bill Lewis,
KG6BAJ
At 05:51 PM 7/10/2015, you wrote:
>Jerry, Are you talking about the BBS Hierarchical Addressing Protocol that
>is common with people running NOS BBS'es?
>ftp://ftp.tapr.org/bbssig/recommendations/hierarchical
>In all honesty from what I remember it's a lot of manual configuration,
>that really seems quaint to me since all the NOS programs also speak SMTP,
>the standard today.
>
>It would seem the same could be accomplished using SMTP standards by
>setting up some mail aliases. I'm going to recommend the TAPR NOS-BBS list
>for (Hierarchical forwarding) things of the non 21st century:
