44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3198 discussions

Re: [44net] Iperf server for public use
by Rob Janssen 23 Jul '15

23 Jul '15

> Subject: > [44net] Iperf server for public use > From: > "Assi Friedman" <assi(a)kiloxray.com> > Date: > 07/23/2015 05:50 PM > > To: > "'AMPRNet working group'" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > Folks: > I'll leave the iperf server running on kk7kx.ampr.org for the benefit of the > community. I combined both to operate on port 7000. To connect, use the > following basic syntax: > TCP: iperf -c kk7kx.ampr.org -p 7000 > UDP: iperf -u -c kk7kx.ampr.org -p 7000 > If you do use it, please be considerate. > Thank you, > Assi kk7kx/4x1kx Still no connectivity whatsoever with your system.... No ping, no tcp, no udp. This is from 44.137.0.0/16. How do you route there? Rob

1 0

Re: [44net] iperf
by Steve L 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

I noticed the same thing, unable to reach kk7kx.ampr.org I am running iperf on the same ports (till my next reboot) on 44.92.21.35, which should be reachable both ways for anyone who cares to mess around. Note: the gateway this host is behind is a residential cable modem 15/1 Mbps, nothing impressive. ________________________________ >> Subject: >> Re: [44net] Packet loss through UCSD? >> From: >> Assi Friedman <assi at kiloxray.com> >> Date: >> 07/21/2015 06:28 AM >> >> To: >> AMPRNet working group <44net at hamradio.ucsd.edu> >> >> >> Oops, left out the host name: kk7kx.ampr.org >> TCP -> port 7000 >> UDP -> port 7001 >> Thanks, >> Assi >> kk7kx/4x1kx > >It does not reply at all, not even to ping. >The tunnel endpoint can be pinged.

1 0

Re: [44net] Packet loss through UCSD?
by Rob Janssen 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Packet loss through UCSD? > From: > Assi Friedman <assi(a)kiloxray.com> > Date: > 07/21/2015 06:28 AM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > Oops, left out the host name: kk7kx.ampr.org > TCP -> port 7000 > UDP -> port 7001 > Thanks, > Assi > kk7kx/4x1kx It does not reply at all, not even to ping. The tunnel endpoint can be pinged. Rob

1 0

Re: [44net] Packet loss through UCSD?
by Assi Friedman 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

What is the AMPRGW machine based on? Assi -----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+assi=kiloxray.com(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+assi=kiloxray.com@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Brian Kantor Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 10:32 PM To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> Subject: Re: [44net] Packet loss through UCSD? (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ > > On 2015-07-20 17:41, Assi Friedman wrote: > >> and rather poor packet loss. Are there any issues or QoS policies > >> implemented on the amprnet router at UCSD? There's no QoS policy in effect, but 'amprgw' is getting hammered at the moment, with inbound packet drops peaking in the 25% range so performance is going to be horrible. 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. There's not much we can do about this in the short term. Long term includes a higher-performance machine with faster network interfaces. - Brian _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net

3 3

Re: [44net] Packet loss through UCSD?
by Assi Friedman 21 Jul '15

21 Jul '15

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.

2 1

Some hosts from net, rest masq'd?
by Rob Janssen 20 Jul '15

20 Jul '15

> 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

1 0

Some hosts from net, rest masq'd?
by Steve L 19 Jul '15

19 Jul '15

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

1 0

Issues setting up tunnel gateway
by Chris S. Munz-Michielin 15 Jul '15

15 Jul '15

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||||

4 4

Re: [44net] What's a goot 44.x test peer
by Steve L 15 Jul '15

15 Jul '15

Assi, You can test against: 44.92.21.35 reachable both ways 44.92.21.50 reachable only from 44net Steve, KB9MWR

1 0

What's a goot 44.x test peer
by Assi Friedman 15 Jul '15

15 Jul '15

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)

3 2

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net