44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3198 discussions

Re: [44net] Mikrotik RouterOS script update
by Rob Janssen 23 Dec '17

23 Dec '17

> You can, but please do not. > It will enable neighbor discovery on new tunnels, which is not desired > and creates useless traffic. > There are no functional changes except this. > Marius, YO2LOJ When researching this matter (I wanted to enable neighbor discover on new L2TP tunnels internal to our network) I found that this command line can disable it by default: /ip neighbor discovery settings set default=no default-for-dynamic=no The "default" is for manually created interfaces like IPIP tunnels, the "default-for-dynamic" is for dynamic interfaces like the server-side of L2TP tunnels. With this command issued once, the discovery should be off on new tunnels on versions < 6.41 However, this command no longer exists in 6.41 ! Now, setting of discovery is done using an interface list with the members of the list participating in discovery (or the non-members, there is an inversion operator) So look in the "ip neighbor" discovery settings to see how the interfaces are now set, there can be an interface list "discover" (the new default) or there can be something like "!dynamic" which results in discovery on all non-dynamic interfaces (the old default). When it says "!dynamic" it is better to change that to "discover" and put only your local interfaces in that list. Rob

1 0

OSPF Multicast traffic from 44.162.0.1
by Marc, LX1DUC 23 Dec '17

23 Dec '17

Good afternoon, I was updating my 44net IPIP Gateway and I noticed I received OSPF Multicast traffic from 44.162.0.1: OSPF hlo (a=254 r=44.162.254.33) (76 bytes) from 44.162.0.1 to 224.0.0.5 on ampr0 Could the OP please de-activate OSPF (or set as passive) on the IPIP interfaces? Vy 73 and merry Christmas de Marc, LX1DUC

1 0

RIP44 vs RIP v2
by Tom Cardinal 22 Dec '17

22 Dec '17

What are the differences between RIP44 and RIP v2? Is the RIP44 protocol documented anywhere? I'm learning more and would like to crack into the differences between the protocols. --tom n2xu

4 4

retirement
by Brian Kantor 21 Dec '17

21 Dec '17

I am retiring from UCSD, after 47 years on campus. My new mailbox is brian _AT_ bkantor.net. Future emails from me will usually come from there, although some may come from my @ucsd.edu address for the next few weeks as I transition various functions to the new mailbox. The old UCSD address will forward to it for a while. I will continue to use the @ampr.org address for some AMPRNet and ARDC business. Amprgw (gw.ampr.org) will continue to operate as it has for some time as part of the CAIDA research group continuing measurement and analysis of dark networks project. No changes in its operation are planned. I will still be managing the amprnet-related portions of the amprgw system, and AMPRNet in general, as before. This mailing list will not be affected, as it is not hosted at UCSD. - Brian

18 17

DMCA
by Brian Kantor 19 Dec '17

19 Dec '17

Those of you in the USA (and elsewhere) who are providing networking services or connectivity to others should be aware of possible liability under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and similar laws in other countries should one of the people you are providing service to misbehave and commit a copyright violation, such as posting copyrighted material on your or their own server, or operating a peer-to-peer (BitTorrent, etc) node that is distributing copyrighted material. It could be expensive. I recommend you read up on this. A place to start is the Wikipedia article on the OCILLA (Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limit… Best wishes for a happy holiday season to all. - Brian

2 1

Not a Peep From Coordinator
by Jason Smith 14 Dec '17

14 Dec '17

What steps should be taken to get a hold of my coordinator? I've been trying to get my block back in order for over a month now and I've not made any progress at all. Thanks KD4CBM

2 1

GW Setup Problem
by Barış DİNÇ 13 Dec '17

13 Dec '17

Hi All, I am sure that this question is asked by many newbies but I have to ask it to bring up my gateway... :) I set up a gateway and coordinated the ip allocation with my regional IP coordinator. But, however, testing behind NAT or without NAT (directly machine connected to internet (a server on a colaction ISP)) didn't have success.. using ampr-ripd with compiled DEBUG options I cant get and response from the 44.0.0.1 For testting I just did # ifconfig tunl0 up 44.176.200.1 netmask 255.255.255.255 and tried #./ampr-ripd -d -v -i tunl0 the result is as follows but no success even if I wait for 2 hours... IS THERE A WAY TO TEST THIS RIPD CONNECTION ? (a tool or sniffing with tcpdump..) HOW CAN I BE SURE THAT I AM DOING EVERTHING RIGHT ? Do I have to do something for multicast domain (e.g. 224.0.0.9) Thanks Baris TA7W DEBUG OUTPUT: ------------------------ Using metric 0 for routes. Using TCP window 840 for routes. Using routing table 'main' (254). Can not open encap file for reading: /var/lib/ampr-ripd/encap.txt Max list size: 1000 entries Detected tunnel interface address: 44.176.200.1 Interface detected: lo, IP: 127.0.0.1 Interface detected: eth0, IP: 80.211.231.30 Interface detected: eth1, IP: 0.0.0.0 Interface detected: eth2, IP: 0.0.0.0 Interface detected: tunl0, IP: 44.176.200.1 Assigned tunnel interface index: 5 Local IPs: 127.0.0.1 80.211.231.30 44.176.200.1 NL sending request. NLMSG: get route (26) RTA type: 1 (8 bytes): 8 8 8 8 NL response received. NLMSG: request new route/route info (24) RTA type: 15 (8 bytes): 254 0 0 0 RTA type: 1 (8 bytes): 8 8 8 8 RTA type: 4 (8 bytes): 2 0 0 0 RTA type: 7 (8 bytes): 80 211 231 30 RTA type: 5 (8 bytes): 80 211 231 1 RTA type: 8 (28 bytes): 8 0 2 0 220 5 0 0 8 0 8 0 180 5 0 0 8 0 10 0 64 0 0 0 RTA type: 12 (36 bytes): 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NL sending request. NLMSG: get route (26) RTA type: 1 (8 bytes): 80 211 231 1 NL response received. NLMSG: request new route/route info (24) RTA type: 15 (8 bytes): 254 0 0 0 RTA type: 1 (8 bytes): 80 211 231 1 RTA type: 4 (8 bytes): 2 0 0 0 RTA type: 7 (8 bytes): 80 211 231 30 RTA type: 8 (28 bytes): 8 0 2 0 220 5 0 0 8 0 8 0 180 5 0 0 8 0 10 0 64 0 0 0 RTA type: 12 (36 bytes): 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Using gateway 80.211.231.1 for direct 44net endpoints via interface eth0. Setting routes (0). Creating multicast RIP UDP listening socket. Setting up multicast interface. Waiting for RIPv2 broadcasts...

5 13

Re: [44net] ping
by Bill Horne W4EWH 02 Dec '17

02 Dec '17

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:42:22 AM, Christopher Allsop wrote: >> Has the AMPRNet group considered/have they moved over to an online >> group instead of a mailing list? Perhaps something like Groups.io >> or even a Slack channel may provide some information. Even a Reddit >> group would allow information to be archived and searched later on. >> I've always found email groups to be difficult when you want to >> search for answers to questions already asked. On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Brian Kantor wrote: > This subject has been discussed to death in this group recently > and the decision was to stay with a mailing list. I propose that we start a Google group that accesses the Yahoo! copy of the rec.radio.amateur.digital Usenet archive and sends all responses to a new Listserv located at the RSGB via RFC1149 encapsulation. That way, we get the best of all possible worlds: a system that reflects ham radio's "can do" attitude and includes all the best parts of the amateur radio and the pigeon fancier hobbies. Bill, W4EWH

3 2

CalAmp Viper SC+
by Michael Fox - N6MEF 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

All, I've been looking for a way to get fast enough speed over RF to be able to use some more modern protocols, such as SMTP & POP3 for email with attachments. I had high hopes for some guys in the NW US, but . <sigh>. So, I started looking elsewhere and someone else here mentioned the DataRadio -> CalAmp Gemini. That particular radio was recently discontinued. But I found the CalAmp Viper SC+. There are several models. It can achieve up to 256 kbps, depending on band, channel configuration, etc. We would probably use the radio in the 70 cm band. My assumption was that any emission designators that they might use would most likely not be allowed in FCC Part 97. But they use emission designators .F1D. And what does FCC Part 97 say? 97.305(c): For the 70 cm band, it references 97.309(f)(6) and 97.309(f)(8). 97.309(f)(8): "A RTTY or data emission having designators with A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J or R as the first symbol; 1, 2, 7, 9 or X as the second symbol; and D or W as the third symbol is also authorized." How about that!? ...F1D fits that bill. Baud rate is also within FCC limits. So this looks like a real possibility. Price is steep: about $1400 list. But for our purposes, it fills a gap between 1200/9600 packet and WiFi, allowing for field deployment with a simple roll-up J-pole. And provides locations some basic IP connectivity even if they don't have line of sight for WiFi. If you're interested, check it out! BTW, for you non-US guys, they have international certifications. Check out the details via a local distributor. http://www.calamp.com/products/cellular-communication-devices-routers/router s/viper-sc-0 http://www.calamp.com/system/files/resources/hardware-spec-sheets/viperscplu sdatasheet.pdf http://www.calamp.com/references/manuals/Viper_SC_User_Manual.pdf Michael N6MEF

1 0

ping
by Brian 27 Nov '17

27 Nov '17

Is this list still active?

5 7

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net