44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3196 discussions

Re: [44net] Cisco router Config File for use as Gateway
by Rob Janssen 23 Feb '16

23 Feb '16

> What happned if I want to connect your DMR repeaters to ours (we have one DMR connected to the MARC network) and my DMR sit on Non AMPR adress ? I am not an expert on the DMR network, but I think it works with a "master" server that everyone connects his repeater to. We are running the BrandMeister master server. It is not the MARC network, it is an open network. (a 3rd network exists, it is called DMR+ ) Our new master server (currently being setup) is dual-homed, it has both an AMPR and a normal IP address. However that does not really matter as our AMPR addresses are BGP routed on internet as well. > as for the P25 it is a solution that was done by by few hams last year it consist of a server software Free one (i know of only one server currently and there are about 13 repeaters connected world wide ) you can read it herehttp://communications.support/threads/4798-IP-link-Quantar-V-24-systems-using-Cisco-routers Ok, it apparently has a serial port and the Cisco routers are used to tunnel that over IP. Nice when you already have them, if not I would go for a Raspberry Pi and a USB Serial cable. Much cheaper, much more power efficient. A 2600 or 2800 can do more useful things than working as a serial server, but of course it can do this and routing in parallel. The DMR and D-Star repeaters have an ethernet connection so they are easier to integrate with the network. We also have some Yaesu System Fusion repeaters (they are cheap), but this is crap. No network interface. They require a separate box to interface to the outside world. This still has no network interface, it has USB. Then you need a computer with USB and network to connect it. But this computer has to run Windows :-( Not good for a repeater site... And the whole thing is far, far from finished. Updates to implement even basic functionality are being promised and then being postponed all the time. I think it will not be usable before some amateurs roll up their sleeves and re-do the entire software, much like DMR+ and BrandMeister. > I still didnt leave the Cisco Gateway idea i will get tomorrow hopefully Cisco 2800 and see if it can work with 300 Tunnels if not it will go to the P25 connection Project Please understand that (also written by Brian in the meantime) that your router will never be able to perform this task standalone, you will need to have a second computer that is reconfiguring the router all the time, for every change in IP address of a gateway or other change in the gateway list you will need to make a config change. A good script can do that automatically, but you will need something like a Raspberry Pi to run it on. And the Raspberry Pi can do a better job itself, because it can track the AMPR RIP packets and does not need to download the encap file all the time. > however some good guy saw my request on the local hams facebook about the Pi Board (with the link you provided) and willing to give me a configured board for tests , if it will be reliable it tern out that ill leave the cisco idea Reliability will not be a problem (unless you have a bad SD card or bad powersupply). The only thing to worry about is if you can sysop the system on the long run. I.e. install updates sometimes, configure firewall rules as needed, etc. This will require some study but it is part of the fun, I think. > one more question (Personal one) are you the Rob Jebsen who was involved in the Jnos Software long ago ? I think I used one of your Jnos version the call sign was PE1CHL in the Days that our gateways was a Jnos/Dos Yes I am the same person, see mail address. I was not active with JNOS but I maintained a version of KA9Q NET that was used on many hybrid IP / NET/ROM nodes and BBS systems. I still run that program on the hosted Raspberry Pi that is also my gateway. Rob

1 0

Cisco router Config File for use as Gateway
by Rob Janssen 23 Feb '16

23 Feb '16

> I'm trying to understand why you change the net so I need separate tunnel > to every GW. > In this case what are the benefit of using 44 net instead of "regular" ip ? > i think that adding some main GW (maybe main router to each country ) and > by that add the connectivity to 44 networks easily and every endpoint will > take care to single tunnel. That is exactly what we did here in the Netherlands. We put a machine in a datacenter that serves as an IPIP gateway for 44.137.0.0/16, and everyone who is interested in a simple tunnel can get a connection to there using one of the VPN techniques that are more in use today: OpenVPN, IPsec tunnel, GRE over IPsec transport, or also IPIP. And, this system routes towards the radio network that is in quick development right now. (Ubiquiti and MikroTik equipment for 6cm) The provider XS4ALL that hosts this system also advertises the 44.137.0.0/16 space on their routers using BGP (in close cooperation with Brian Kantor), and they statically route this traffic to the machine. So we are directly reachable from Internet as well. We explicitly chose this method because we are no experts on Internet BGP and those people at the provider are, it is their daily business. We run BGP on the 44-network as well (the radio side), but that is a different thing. There is no BGP communication across our gateway. The machine is a HP Proliant DL380 server so it is not as failure prone as the home PCs that Ronen has used. And just this weekend I have migrated it to a newer HP server that we installed with VMware ESXi on which this is one of the Virtual Machines, now we will soon install VMware ESXi on the old machine as well and we will have failover capability (manually operated cold standby, for now). We also host Echolink Proxy and Relay servers and several services related to the new digital modes, like a BrandMeister Master server, D-Star reflectors, etc, on other Virtual Machines on the same server. Of course the advantage of an IPIP mesh direct to every gateway is that there is no central point of failure. When our gateway is down, we mostly become isolated. When a gateway serving only a local subnet would be down, the other gateways can still communicate amongst eachother. That is one reason that architecture was chosen. This has not "changed". It has always worked like this. However, not everyone has understood that, and they believed that they could just send all traffic to the UCSD gateway (which is the gateway for the entire 44.0.0.0/8 subnet towards internet), and it would forward it to the proper destination. That was always a bad thing to do, because you would load that single system with all the traffic. But it worked. Now it does not work anymore and you have to do the right thing: route the traffic to where it has to go. This of course also means it will work better, because when you send traffic to a regional system it will no longer travel via California, and you will have a much shorter delay. Using our architecture it is still possible for a Dutch station to setup IPIP routing for their local subnet, because they will just become part of the IPIP mesh and the Dutch gateway is also part of that mesh. Traffic will still flow correctly. However, it is no longer a good idea to run IPIP on a regional gateway (as someone asked for this weekend), because the individual VPN routes are not known to that gateway and the routing for those will break. Therefore we route those regional gateways using BGP (on private AS numbers) so they receive all routing information dynamically. For that, they are connected to the gateway using GRE. (the situation was explained off-list to the one asking here) Of course setting this all up requires a bit more knowledge of routing and a lot more perseverance than configuring a simple IPIP gateway on a Raspberry Pi. Linux routing is really powerful, also when compared to the most established professional routers. But you have to read documentation, sometimes written by Russian and Japanese volunteers and researchers, not having English as their main language (just like me). It can be challenging, but I thing it is very rewarding to get it operating perfectly. It is like building your own station for amateur radio: some people like to build from small parts, others from a kit, and some like to buy a shiny box. They all enjoy the hobby, but building from small parts is not for everyone. To me, finding out how to do it is a big part of all the fun, and the end result ("what are the benefit of using 44 net instead of "regular" ip ?") is much less important. That is why I do not always understand those that just want directions on how to do it and copy what someone else has tinkered with. Sure it will bring you online quickly, but then leave you with the question what to do next. Rob

2 1

Re: [44net] Cisco router Config File for use as Gateway
by Rob Janssen 23 Feb '16

23 Feb '16

> Of course that following should be a route command for every 44 net gateway No... A separate "interface Tunnel" command for every 44 net gateway, and a separate route command for every subnet routed via those gateways. In all, you will need 324 "interface Tunnel" commands (each with the 5 subcommands) and 512 "route" commands to describe the IPIP network as it is today. Your 1005 router has not enough memory capacity to hold all that. I could understand you when you had a 3800 series or similar. But this one... really no! It has been end-of-life for over 10 years and it really is not up to par for this kind of job. (if any Cisco is, because this is a job not suited for general-purpose routers) Rob

3 2

Re: [44net] route lines from encap file for CISCO Router
by Rob Janssen 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

> I relay don't know why you are so objecting a gateway with CISCO > I used to work a lot with Cisco when i have worked at the System team of Israel largest ISP . Because a Cisco is not suitable for setting up an IPIP gateway. It is reliable, but it cannot do this job. It can do other jobs but that is not relevant. You would not recommend a truck when someone asks what car to use to get to the office, either. > Indeed it is much more complicated these days that UCSD dont do anymore 44 net forwarding and a routing line needed for every gateway .. This is crucial. And also, the fact that more people now use dynamic addresses. > I get a very reliable solution with Zero money (my Cisco 1005 was taken from the trash cost me nothing) I recommend you to put it back there... and I think most people here will agree. The Raspberry Pi was developed 15 years after this box, has a 10 times faster CPU, 10 times more memory and uses a lot less power. (and costs less than a 10th of what this thing must have cost when it was new) > However im willing to listen to your advice and test the Rasberry Pi > If there is someone here that can direct me step by step until a working system and then i may consider testing it As I said, it can be found on www.ampr.org More specific, on this page: http://wiki.ampr.org/index.php/Ubuntu_Linux_Gateway_Example I have a Raspberry Pi running as a gateway for over 2.5 years now and it has been without any problem. It has never crashed. Good, because I have never touched it nor ever seen it. It has been mail-ordered and directly sent to a datacenter where it was powered up may 25, 2013 and has worked ever since (of course sometimes rebooted for updates). The above example was written by someone partly drawing from the example configuration I posted on this mailinglist some years ago. > Im not familiar with what have been told about the multi tunnel that a Cisco can not do ... (actually im not understand what the problem or the limitation is ) It is clear from your posted example (btw, it is not a good idea to post Cisco config files because now everyone can log in to your router, the passwords are in the config!). In a Cisco, a Tunnel interface has a "tunnel destination". One. But there are 324 tunnel destinations in the network. So you need 324 tunnel interfaces. In Linux, a single tunnel interface can serve as many destinations as you want, by setting a route with a nexthop that serves the function of the "tunnel destination" in Cisco. Every route has its own nexthop (gateway). And this route table can be updated automatically with ampr-ripd, so you never need to download any encap file. > I know that at least two gateways are running and operating currently with CIsco But most likely not a 1005! Rob

3 2

Re: [44net] route lines from encap file for CISCO Router
by Rob Janssen 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

> Hi there Cisco Gateways operators > Has anyone of you a Mechanism that take the encap fiile which is not a Cisco route routing line syntax and makes from it route lines for Cisco ? A Cisco cannot use route lines to operate a multipoint IPIP encap interface like Linux can (and JNOS). Marius has already explained that yesterday. I know it may be a disappointment to you, but your Cisco router really is not a good choice for use as an IPIP amprnet gateway. A Raspberry Pi will be much easier to get going, especially when you are not a software guy. And it will perform better in the real world where some people are on dynamic addresses, because the nice ampr-ripd software that Marius has written will automatically maintain the routes immediately when they are changing, instead of the oldfashioned method of downloading an encap file. (directions can be found how to do this on www.ampr.org, that you just need to copy and modify the IP addresses) Rob

3 2

Pings from 44.151.178.254
by lleachii＠aol.com 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

All, Is anyone else receiving pings from 44.515.178.254? Approximately two echo-requests are received every 2-5 minutes. - Lynwood KB3VWG

3 3

Pings from 44.151.178.254
by Rob Janssen 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

> Approximately two echo-requests are received every 2-5 minutes. I would not notice them in the 2 megabits/second of crap coming in all day... And certainly not worry. Rob

1 0

Configure tunnel on Pfsense
by Tal Raveh 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

Hello, I'm trying to configure my gateway to 44 net on my pfsense FW. I configure GRE tunnel: Remote tunnel endpoint IP address:169.228.66.251 Local tunnel IP address: 44.138.2.254 (my segment is 44.138.2.0 ) Remote tunnel IP address: 44.0.0.0/8 Mobile encapsulation: check (also try to unchecked) The firewall is open but i cannot ping any address on 44 net. any idea? Best Regards, Tal 4z7tal

6 5

ICMP: A small request
by Marius Petrescu 21 Feb '16

21 Feb '16

Since we are trying to tackle connectivity problems a lot of times, could you please enable ICMP replies on your gateways, at least for other 44net requestors? It will certainly not ruin the gateway’s safety and security and would help a lot other OMs. Tnx, Marius, YO2LOJ

4 3

another OpenWrt gateway
by Daftcho Tabakov 21 Feb '16

21 Feb '16

Hi, I have tried to put my gateway in a new box - my tp-link 1043 nd router. I used to use an old pc with Debian for this purpose. I followed this wiki article http://wiki.ampr.org/index.php/Setting_up_a_gateway_on_OpenWRT and i can ping to different 44net IPs from the router's console. The gateway's IP is 44.185.22.1 аnd I would someone to test if it is reachable. I am also a little bit confused how my other devices will connect to the gateway. There was a pptpd server on the pc and it was easy. Now there is another VLAN on the router and I assume that I need to configure some of the lan ports (the switch) to use this new VLAN. This is good for the local connections. Can I use again pptpd and connect to my gateway from Internet like I used to do? -- 73! Daftcho, LZ1DAF

5 9

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net