44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

4 participants
3196 discussions

Re: [44net] Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 25 Apr '18

25 Apr '18

> FYI folks...I used to run proxies on my subnet in the past. The only > issue was, that since subnet is not not BGP, it was intended for your > use only (i.e. not using AMPRGW for Internet, but still able to use > EchoLink). I agree it is probably not a good idea to run proxies or relays on a network only connected via tunnels. That would pose a load on AMPRGW. In that case it would be better to run them there. But other volunteers in that area have now stepped up. > I used the Java JAR that was available form EchoLink (I understand you > have a C program). I also used the Linux version, but the EchoLink > Validators stated that should not be used without permission (and only > for conference servers). The Java version uses lots of resources... The C program was written to mimic the Java version closely but in a more efficient way, both because it is in C and because a single instance can run multiple proxies. Later I received the C source of the relay program from EchoLink and merged its functions with the proxy program so these can both run on the same system. This is in full agreement with EchoLink, and they very much welcome the hosting of proxies and relays around the world to help users that are on limited internet connections or are not proficient in configuring port forwarding on their routers. Fortunately in our circles we have people who understand the internet and its protocols. (vs the applications that are now called "the internet") Rob

1 0

Re: [44net] Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 25 Apr '18

25 Apr '18

> >/when the directory server is on AMPRnet, the problem with NAT between /> >/HAMNET and internet disappears / > I'm afraid, it would raise new issues... > For those who are planning to provide echolink proxy services (or any > other useful internet based amateur radio services) within the AMPRNet > by direct BGP, please ask for an /24-allocation within 44.190.0.0/16. > We will promote to all HAMNET users and sysops to route 44.190.0.0/16 to > their ISP rather than to their radio device on the roof. > Best case would be to host such services on non-44 IP-space at all. As you know, I don't agree with that. We should not segregate our addresses into different classes and force everyone into some class depending on what they want to do. It is a stopgap measure that will lead to endless changes and work, and it isn't even clear what "internet based amateur radio services" are exactly. For example, our repeaters are on Echolink on their AMPRnet address, they would be such services, we would have to route part of that space deeply into our network to get "special" addresses all the way there. Not going to happen! At the moment I am in contact with the Jonathan from Echolink and he is interested in setting up more relays as his existing relays in the US are getting overloaded. (he has temporarily moved some US users to our relays in Amsterdam) I think now that this is under change we could suggest moving everything to AMPRnet and it should solve the NAT problem there is now. Maybe the directory server could have both an AMPRnet and a public address to resolve remaining issues. Rob

5 4

Re: [44net] An apology for the Internet from the people who built it
by Rob Janssen 25 Apr '18

25 Apr '18

> "from the people who built it". Really? Gee, I don't remember any of those > names back in the early 80s (except for Stallman, but Emacs is not the > Internet). I fully agree! When I saw the list I immediately thought "those aren't the people who built the internet!" Not even the world wide web. Maybe Web 2.0.

2 1

New Mikrotik Vulnerability
by Nigel Vander Houwen 23 Apr '18

23 Apr '18

Hello All, We’ve (HamWAN) become aware of a new vulnerability on the Mikrotik devices that could allow an attacker to grab passwords off of the devices. If you block WinBox access you should be safe, but I’d recommend upgrading as soon as possible as well. More information about this vulnerability, as well as what versions are impacted, and what the patched version numbers are, are available from Mikrotik here: https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=133533 <https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=133533> Thanks, Nigel

1 0

Re: [44net] Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 22 Apr '18

22 Apr '18

> I found your C program in your follow up emails so seemed like I > should have everything I need. Sorry for the confusion, initially I > thought i needed to contact you for the C program. It probably wasn't clear in my first message... there is no need to contact me to deploy Echolink PROXY servers, the C program has been on my server for a long time (others are using it as well) and it can be installed on AMPRnet or commercial IP addresses alike. However, there are already quite some proxy servers and there is no immediate need for new ones, although they are always welcome. The call was mainly to get a number of new RELAY hosting sites, as there are currently not enough of them. Running PROXY servers is a good way to get some experience using the program, making sure it is started automatically and remains running, arranging for the extra addresses on the system (I do that using a script that does "ip addr add 44.137.75.$i dev eth0" in a loop, but it can be handled via the native network management of the distribution just as well. just don't create an extra interface for each) Once that is all clear and comfortable, RELAY servers can be configured (about 10, but in such areas as the US west coast maybe 5 is better as there are several volunteers now) and then you can contact me or K1RFD with the IP addresses so that they are going to get registered so they are really used. This is not required for PROXY servers, these register themselves automatically. Rob

1 0

Re: [44net] Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 22 Apr '18

22 Apr '18

> I like to help with this as well. Please let me know the details on how to > setup your C program. I know I am a bad writer, but I'm afraid you have to do with what is already in the README file and what I explained here on the list. Note it isn't really a beginner project, it assumes you are familiar with running a Linux system and compiling your own software on it. As a baseline, you are supposed to know what to do when you find a .tar.gz file and seeing that it contains a README, a .c file, a Makefile and an example configuration file. When there are obvious omissions, I am willing to update the README. Rob

2 1

44net IPIP tunnels may now be illegal in Russia
by Brian Kantor 22 Apr '18

22 Apr '18

44net IPIP tunnels may now be illegal in Russia. This is really not news, in that it's almost a year old, but I just became aware of it: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/government/russia-passes-bill-banning… Russian users of 44net should be aware of this. - Brian

1 0

Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 22 Apr '18

22 Apr '18

For some time we have been hosting Echolink proxies and relays on the system that is the gateway for 44.137.0.0/16 (BGP routed) in Amsterdam, Netherlands. We use a /24 subnet for that. Such proxies and relays facilitate the use if Echolink by users and repeaters that are behind NAT or are otherwise firewalled. About 100 repeaters around the world use our proxies, and over 600 users of the mobile app use our relays. Each Echolink proxy and relay requires a different IPv4 address. This can be a static address on internet, but often people have no /24 to spare for such things. AMPRnet provides the required address space. (unfortunately with an unintended side-effect, but in general it works well) For performance of the Echolink system it would be best when there are more places with a similar setup, distributed around the globe. Are there other BGP-routed sites outside Europe where such a service could be run? I have written a C program for this, that uses considerably less resources than the original Java software. On a 2.67GHz XEON server it causes a load around 0.05 for our 200 proxies and 10 relays. Of course it makes some network traffic, about 3 GB/day for the relays and similar for the proxies. When you have your gateway located in a suitable datacenter and are interested in such a setup to facilitate Echolink, please send me an e-mail and I can provide more info. Maybe we could even get the whole echolink.org infra hosted on AMPRnet space, which would solve the problem there now is with partially connected AMPRnet networks. (when the directory server is on AMPRnet, the problem with NAT between HAMNET and internet disappears) Rob

14 20

Re: [44net] Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 22 Apr '18

22 Apr '18

> This is not a special problem for the 44.190 space. It affects every > direct connected 44 announcement for those users that cannot use IPIP > tunneling because they don't have a plain IPv4-connection. In Europe it > is very common to give normal customers a so called "DS-Lite Connection" > or a plain IPv6-connection. Everything that must be reached in the > IPv4-world from those custumers sites mostly goes through this ugly > "carrier-grade-nat (CGN)" which in most cases doesn't work very well for > our special needs. IMHO the preferred solution for this is to setup regional routing points where IPIP (and preferably BGP announcement) is possible, and where those users that have limited internet connections can connect via a VPN technology that still works for them. This way, their HAMNET traffic can be forwarded untranslated. It is the method that we use, and various others do it as well. As was shown before on this thread, VM/VPS services that can be used for this are widely available. And those do not suffer from having CGNAT or dynamic addresses. At least not yet. Rob

1 0

Re: [44net] Echolink proxy/relay hosting
by Rob Janssen 22 Apr '18

22 Apr '18

> Wasn't the idea to 44.190.0.0/16 subnets available via BGP? If so, why > would there be NAT? Of course for directly connected networks there will be no NAT, but there are those networks that are connected to internet via consumer internet connections (and no IPIP tunneling) and the traffic from those networks to the 44.190 space will pass through NAT routers. Rob

2 1

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net