I had reached out to the good people at GL.iNet and asked for help getting
one of their openWRT routers to run my 44 net assignment. I referred them
to the page explaining openWRT setup (
wiki.ampr.org/wiki/Setting_up_a_gateway_on_OpenWRT) and requested they
compile an executable for the processor in the router.
Apparently they did it. It will be a bit before I can try to configure it
but its a one click installation. It's available to anyone with a GL.iNet
router product, just navigate to Applications -> Plugins and Update, then
navigate to the R section. I have a screencap of all the dependencies it
installed if anyone is interested.
I reached out to them because I've failed on my previous attempts to set up
an EdgerouterX for my assignment... I am by no means a network engineer,
this is my foray into getting a gateway going. If anyone could confirm this
works that would be great. If you're willing to help me get mine going that
would be even better.
Tracy N4LGH
Greetings to all, just to inform you that returning to teamwork at AmprNet,
Venezuela is connected again, renewing some things in my local structure
with the JNOS Linux program through yv5kxe.ampr.org (44.152.0.60).
We are especially grateful to Chris - G1FEF who personally granted the
possibility of this YV return on this network after 20 years.
We are in settings, I am mainly working to adjust my old JNOS to the new
dynamic of AmprNet especially to the RIP44d update that does not work in
JNOS doing it manually, I am working on a project to use other compatible
hardware to achieve other gateways for use APRS and the DXCluster yv5kxe.
73 de Gabriel YV5KXE
yv5kxe.ampr.org
Is anyone familiar with ripd on the ubiquiti series of routers?
I have a test device edgerouter pro that I am attempting to get working however I am unable to route through the ipip tunnel that has been built per both wiki articles.
Any pointers would be appreciated.
Many thanks,
Elias
Sent from my iPhone
Hi there
Is it possible to announce same Address Block from two different sites ? with preferred way for one site ?
The idea is to have redundancy in case that one site connectivity fail the traffic will pass to the other site automatically
Both site will be connected by radio as well so Network connectivity will not stop
I know that BGP support it is it also the way in the AMPRNET BGP announcement ?
Has anyone done it ? or doing it in the AMPRNET community ?
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
Hi there
Who deal today with BGP announcement procedure ?
We want to start announce part of our 44 net BGP
i started the procedure with Brian
who take care of it now ?
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
http://www.ronen.org
> On Thu, 2020-03-12 at 11:30 -0500, Shawn M Garringer via 44Net wrote:
> > I am wondering if anyone else is seeing the following: starting on 5
> > March 2020 and continuing through the present I have detected a large
> > spike in inbound traffic to several of my AMPR 44 IP addresses (on
> > 44.50.1.0/24). The spike has been large enough that my logging ELK
> > stack is struggling to keep up.
> A good number of folks have seen a spike in scans by botnets spoofing
> IPs but not just on 44-net. Commercial ISPs have seen similar spikes of
> traffic and have taken proactive measures to try and halt these brute
> force attacks.
I see no visible increase in the traffic graphs for our internet gateway,
but of course I do confirm that there is a continuous stream of port scanning
going on, partly from individuals and partly from jerks like censys.io,
shodan.io, stretchoid.com, binaryedge.ninja etc etc who are continuously
scanning the internet for vulnerabilities and keep searchable databases
where their users can instantly locate who is running e.g. a MikroTik
router when there is a new known vulnerability (of course only when it
its firewall is not properly configured).
All this together is responsible for 1-2 Mbit/s of traffic on our /16.
So yet, it is quite noticable. Of course we do not log all that, but
we do have some auto-block features that trigger when people scan for
wellknown ports (like mentioned above) within unassigned address space.
Rob
Hello group,
I am wondering if anyone else is seeing the following: starting on 5
March 2020 and continuing through the present I have detected a large
spike in inbound traffic to several of my AMPR 44 IP addresses (on
44.50.1.0/24). The spike has been large enough that my logging ELK
stack is struggling to keep up.
This traffic is coming from the public internet. Most of these are
looking at standard ports 443, 80, 25, and 22.
These are being directed to IP addresses in my subnet that are not in
use, and therefore are being dropped (but logged) at the firewall.
Nothing is running on these IPs so there is no way the traffic is in
response to anything I can find coming from my network.
I realize devices periodically scan the "entire internet" but this is
more than that... in one day I saw 100,000 TCP SYN from a single public
IP address. That is a significant spike and I am not certain why they
sent so much traffic from a single IP to a single IP.
Wondering if anyone else is seeing the same?
73 DE KC0AKY
> So all traffic received on IPIP tunnels should be from net44 only in our case. Unfortunately not all of it is.
> Can you elaborate on the traffic that isn't, please?
> Is this traffic from another operator...or a non-operator?
> Can you also elaborate if this traffic forwards in any cases?
As I explained before, what I sometimes DO see is IPIP traffic from gateway A.B.C.D with an internal
packet with source A.B.C.D and destination 44.137.X.Y (inside our network). That traffic should have
been sent with source address 44.P.Q.R in the internal packet, where 44.P.Q.R is the net44 address
of that specific gateway at A.B.C.D.
As I got repeated logs in the firewall of these occurrences (one was from a Polish gateway, I remember)
I added a firewall rule to allow such traffic. The reply will of course be routed directly over
internet, not via the tunnel, so it is questionable if the connection would get established. Probably
not, when the user has the typical stateful firewall on his internet connection.
Yesterday I have removed the extra rule and I am watching the firewall log, but I have not yet observed
another instance of this error after about 12 hours. So maybe some people have woken up and fixed their
config already.
Rob
Rob,
You stated:
So all traffic received on IPIP tunnels should be from net44 only in our case. Unfortunately not all of it is.
Can you elaborate on the traffic that isn't, please?
Is this traffic from another operator...or a non-operator?
Can you also elaborate if this traffic forwards in any cases?
That's what we're tying to stop. Please note, I haven't identified this is related to any IPENCAP issue specifically (except that it appears we may have some operators that forward traffic not destined for them). While I understand your concern, I'm not sure it's related to IPENCAP 100%.
73,
- Lynwood
KB3VWG
> I'm now wondering how such a config is [incorrectly] made (i.e. the
inside Header has the incorrect SRC)....likely because of no route
policy...another discussion...
Easy: when you take a default Linux system and add something like IPIP
mesh with routes in the same table, and then you run services on the
same system, an outgoing connect to a system within net44 will just
consult the routing table, find an outgoing route and make a connection.
You then have to rely on the "source address selection" done by the
system, which may select your public IP as the source address.
This may also be configured in the service itself (when the socket is
not bound to 0.0.0.0 but to some specified address).
The outgoing connect will now be routed through the IPIP tunnel, but it
will have the public address as the source.
To prevent this, the service would have to be bound to the net44
address, or it would have to be set as a default source address in the
tunnel routes in the table.
When you run a separate system as the IPIP router and an AMPRnet
services host, you do not run into this problem because the services
host has the proper external address within net44 and the router will
not change it.
But with both combined in a single host, you can still get it working
correctly when you pay some attention. Which of course has to be done
when you want a single system that can both be a general-purpose
internet browsing system (directly via your ISP connection) and can be
an AMPRnet services host at the same time (also for services available
from public internet addresses). The routing has to be carefully set up
when doing this, and setting a preferred source address is only part of
that.
In our network the problem you mention w.r.t. AMPRGW does not occur
because internet traffic is routed directly to our gateway, not via an
IPIP tunnel.
The IPIP tunnel via AMPRGW only gets public internet traffic when our
BGP announcement is down for some reason, that is why I kept it
operational but it normally has zero traffic.
So all traffic received on IPIP tunnels should be from net44 only in our
case. Unfortunately not all of it is.
When I "just drop" the bad traffic it appears in a log and it appears
the originators of the traffic do not notice it, so it goes on and on.
As I mentioned, I sent mail to gateway owners about it, but it rarely
fixes the situation.
Rob