44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3196 discussions

RIPE Atlas Probe on 44net?
by Bryan Fields 06 Jun '15

06 Jun '15

I was at NANOG 64 <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog64/home> this week and picked up an Atlas Probe from RIPE. <https://atlas.ripe.net> I've got it online here on my 44net space in Florida. https://atlas.ripe.net/probes/18550/ Don't know if anyone else has one online on 44net, or the AMPRnet, but it might be of interest to the group. You can also sign up and get a probe, might be cool to have a few spread out on the BGP speakers and at the main gateway. They are trivial to configure, DHCP and then it manages it self from there. 73's, W9CR -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

1 0

Strange Broadcasts...
by jerome schatten 06 Jun '15

06 Jun '15

So on my jnos machine, every minute without fail, I see the following broadcast on tun0: Fri Jun 5 14:22:01 2015 - tun0 recv: IP: len 168 81.174.253.193->192.168.1.149 ihl 20 ttl 243 tos 160 prot IP IP: len 148 44.131.160.1->255.255.255.255 ihl 20 ttl 64 DF prot UDP UDP: len 128 5678->5678 Data 120 0000 ..<.....teqgate01....6.27....MikroTik....."".....ILXI-T3GZ....RB 0040 1200......................Ug.....ipip-ampr-24.85.103.226 Fri Jun 5 14:22:01 2015 - tun0 recv: IP: len 168 81.174.253.193->192.168.1.149 ihl 20 ttl 243 tos 160 prot IP IP: len 148 44.131.160.1->255.255.255.255 ihl 20 ttl 64 DF prot UDP UDP: len 128 5678->5678 Data 120 0000 ..<.....teqgate01....6.27....MikroTik....."".....ILXI-T3GZ....RB 0040 1200......................Ug.....ipip-ampr-24.85.103.226 (encap) 44.131.160.1->255.255.255.255 DF UDP 0000 ..<.....teqgate01....6.27....MikroTik....."".....ILXI-T3GZ....RB 0040 1200......................Ug.....ipip-ampr-24.85.103.226 Fri Jun 5 14:22:01 2015 - tun0 sent: IP: len 148 44.131.160.1->255.255.255.255 ihl 20 ttl 63 DF prot UDP UDP: len 128 5678->5678 Data 120 0000 ..<.....teqgate01....6.27....MikroTik....."".....ILXI-T3GZ....RB 0040 1200......................Ug.....ipip-ampr-24.85.103.226 Why is this happening? Anyone else seeing this stuff? Best, jerome - ve7ass Vancouver

3 4

Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS
by Rob Janssen 03 Jun '15

03 Jun '15

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS > From: > Tom Hayward <esarfl(a)gmail.com> > Date: > 06/02/2015 10:01 PM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > >> I'm not sure if this is how everyone does it, but we (HamWAN) had to >> make DNS changes via our regional coordinator. We would construct an >> email in AMPR DNS robot format and send it to him, then he would >> forward it to the robot. This added quite a bit of latency (half day >> plus) to our updates and quite a workload for our regional coordinator >> (our network is growing fast). I think when you are responsible for some subnet and you have frequent updates, it would be trivial to get you registered as submitter of updates to the DNS robot. Also, there should be DNS update functionality in the portal and it should be possible to be a regional coordinator there, so you can approve the updates for your network. However, that function is still not completed. I think that when problems are encountered, solutions should be sought that result in a clear and workable solution for everyone, not a fork of the main system. Effort spent on running a DNS for a subdomain had better been spent on a usable update mechanism for the main DNS. Rob

1 0

Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS
by Rob Janssen 03 Jun '15

03 Jun '15

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS > From: > Brian Kantor <Brian(a)UCSD.Edu> > Date: > 06/02/2015 04:08 AM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > There are seven AMPR.ORG and 44.in-addr DNS servers located around the > world. The chance that all of them will be down at once is close to zero. > We allow people to AXFR their content so it is perfectly possible > to have a redundant DNS server on your local net which can answer queries > regarding those zones even if you are partitioned from the Internet somehow. > Indeed... I don't see a reason to have a private nameserver for a subdomain either. The ampr.org nameserver works well, it allows updates, maybe the only thing that could be nice is the ability to set TXT and other records. Having a subdomain just makes things more complex. The only reason I did a replication of the zone is that a local amateur who is running a newscast was telling the world that one of the advantages of AMPRnet/HAMNET is that it would continue to work when Internet was down. I explained him that it is not that straightforward as we depend on Internet services, most notably DNS. I thought a bit and decided to load the ampr.org zone in a nameserver on our gateway that already is working as a caching resolver for our 44.137.0.0/16 subnet. I think now it will resolve ampr.org names even without a connection (although I have not fully tested that yet). Of course only those names that are in the ampr.org zone, not those that are below a subdomain served by some other server. But we cannot cache the entire world's DNS, and only the ampr.org zone should be sufficient to connect most wellknown systems. I did not use AXFR, I download the zone from ftp://hamradio.ucsd.edu/pub/ampr.tar.gz Both methods have their advantages/disadvantages, I think. Rob

3 2

Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS
by Rob Janssen 02 Jun '15

02 Jun '15

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS > From: > Don Fanning <don(a)00100100.net> > Date: > 05/28/2015 02:45 AM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Bryan Fields<Bryan(a)bryanfields.net> wrote: > >> >>> > >That is not true at all. The previous paragraph states that it must >>> > >process the entire FQDN and not many any inferences as to the domain's >>> > >relationship with the FQDN. >> > >> >I'd like to try it out then, as I'm certain this doesn't work that way in >> >most >> >resolvers for MX's. I've run into it before even. >> > >> > > I can tell you that GMail's MX RR's work in this fashion. I don't need to > know their A record for my DNS. I just add their CNAME'ed MX records to my > domain files and my mail shows up. And my domain isn't hosted by them. > Just my mail hosting. > > https://support.google.com/a/answer/33915?hl=en Indeed, it is allowed to have some record like: sub.domain IN CNAME another.domain with another.domain IN MX 10 hostname But that is not what I mean. What is NOT allowed (by the spec) is to have: name IN MX 10 mail mail IN CNAME some.mail.server So you can have a CNAME pointing to MX, but not MX pointing to CNAME. Also, I don't understand the relation to the Google example. The support page you mention gives a list of MX records with names that are all A and AAAA records, no CNAME involved at all. In practice, it appears that the CNAME works with some mail transfer agents. But bind9 is complaining. The literal IP address in an MX record results in 2 warnings, one that there is an address in the MX record and another that the 111.222.333.444.ampr.org is not defined. This of course is because an address is not expected there, and it is treated as a domain name relative to the $origin of the zone. When your server has no associated name, of course you can assign one within ampr.org. Also, when you want your server to SEND mail in addition to RECEIVING it, you need to have a name and a matching reverse, or many spamfilters will just drop your mail on the floor. Rob

11 23

Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS
by William Lewis 28 May '15

28 May '15

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying people should ignore the RFC1035 standards. I'm just saying its possible. The one's I'm aware of are all companies using 'In-House' mail systems designed to either keep the mail staying in-house, and/or prevent outside mail from getting in. But, as pointed out, this group should be following the RFC1035 standard. ---------- Wm Lewis (KG6BAJ) AMPR Net IP Address Coordinator - Northern and Central California Regions (A 100% Volunteer Group) (530) 263-1595 (Home/Office) ______________________________________________ ---------- This message is for the designated recipient only and MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of this E-mail is prohibited. At 03:48 PM 5/27/2015, you wrote: >(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) >_______________________________________________ >On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 3:41 PM, William Lewis <kg6baj(a)n1oes.org> wrote: > > Where you say "Owners, please update them with a proper hostname instead of > > the literal IP address." I would like to point out that it is entirely > > possible to have an IP address that has no HOSTNAME assigned to it at all. > > The most common are used for mail. I use 2 that are setup this way for > > security reasons. > >MX records must point to a hostname. Here's a good description of why: >http://serverfault.com/a/663122 > >But the bottom line is: it's the spec. > >Tom KD7LXL >_________________________________________ >44Net mailing list >44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu >http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net

3 8

Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS
by Rob Janssen 28 May '15

28 May '15

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS > From: > Rob Janssen <pe1chl(a)amsat.org> > Date: > 05/25/2015 09:18 PM > > To: > 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu > Over the past few days, I have found and deleted about 2000 bad MX records and 935 bad CNAME records. It appears that in the past some standard procedure has inserted many records like this: callsign IN A 44.x.x.x callsign IN MX 10 callsign Later, apparently the IN A records have been deleted during some cleanup, but the IN MX records remained. They of course serve no function, and bind9 complains when the zone is loaded. Furthermore, a large number of records like this existed: something IN CNAME callsign Again, the corresponding callsign has been deleted in the past (its A records, and now also the dangling MX) and that CNAME points to nothing. I have removed those as well. There was a number of records like this: callsign IN MX 10 44.x.x.x This format is not allowed. A hostname should appear instead of the literal IP address. I have changed the records to have the corresponding hostname from the ampr.org zone. Errors that still remain are: records of the format: callsign IN MX 10 111.222.333.444 (referring to a public IP) Those are: *.xe2mbq IN MX 5 200.23.120.6 *.xe2yun IN MX 10 200.23.120.6 grr.kc8lcp IN MX 10 204.227.124.61 ka9kim IN MX 30 207.74.35.36 kc5ghg IN MX 20 206.61.58.173 linux.n8ivx IN MX 10 209.4.74.218 n5dbx IN MX 20 206.61.57.1 n8ivx IN MX 10 208.231.146.247 pacgate.zl1udy IN MX 0 202.14.100.2 ur4wwe IN MX 20 194.44.138.1 us5we IN MX 20 194.44.138.1 va3hum IN MX 20 206.248.184.186 va3yh IN MX 20 206.248.184.186 ve3fub IN MX 20 206.248.184.186 wb5fro IN MX 20 206.61.58.173 yo3ru IN MX 10 141.85.43.57 Owners, please update them with a proper hostname instead of the literal IP address. Also, these names are used in records like: callsign IN MX 10 name but the name refers to a CNAME, not to an IN A record. This is not allowed by the spec, although it usually works. If possible, change the MX to have a hostname that points to an A record. The illegally used CNAMEs are: alcoy athnet bbs.vk2czr club.oh1rbi ea4rct edugraf etxgate.nb5i g0wfs gateway.n8xja gb7sol-10 gb7tvg gw.ir3ip haifa hougw2 hougw jh3qnh ka7oei kb7yw kj7pf mail.ncpa mx2.ir3ip poagw pp5dq pp5dq-gw pp5mcb-gw-7 pp5uf router.kl7eet va3lug ve3cgr ve3mch ve3uow ve6lip vk2pk vk2yui vk5lz vk5tty w7yg wa7ipx wa7slg Of course there is still lots of other out-of-date info in the DNS, but now at least it is more standards compliant. Rob

4 3

hu.ampr.org DNS
by Rob Janssen 26 May '15

26 May '15

> Subject: > [44net] hu.ampr.org DNS > From: > Norbert Varga <nonoo(a)nonoo.hu> > Date: > 05/25/2015 11:37 AM > > To: > 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu > > > Dear 44net, > > First of all, hello to everybody on the list, I've just subscribed. > We're currently building the hamnet network in Hungary, now we have some > working links, tunnels and hosts which I've already added to the hamnetdb. > > I saw that some host names can be resolved using "regular" internet DNS > servers, like router.db0ajw.ampr.org can be resolved to 44.225.36.129 using > Google's 8.8.8.8 DNS server. > > My question is that how can this be accomplished? If we have a DNS server > which can resolve our hosts to IPs and backwards, can one of the AMPR DNS > servers be set up to transfer our zones? > > I saw that the portal has a DNS section but it's not live yet. > > Thanks for the help and 73s de HA2NON Do you have a reason to use a subdomain .hu.ampr.org instead of putting the Hungarian callsigns directly under .ampr.org as almost everyone else is doing? You can easily submit your DNS records to the ampr.org DNS service. This is accomplished using a mail robot where you can mail your zone changes and that will put them in the flat .ampr.org zone. You can also arrange that NS records for hu.ampr.org are put in the ampr.org DNS. Then all requests for callsign.hu.ampr.org will be referred to your servers. Of course your servers have to be available both on amprnet and on internet. This is now done by Germany, Spain and Sweden. (but I do not see a compelling reason to do that) Rob

4 4

Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS
by Rob Janssen 25 May '15

25 May '15

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Bad MX records in the ampr.org DNS > From: > John Ronan <jpronans(a)gmail.com> > Date: > 05/25/2015 11:00 AM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > On 25/05/15 09:52, Rob Janssen wrote: >> linux.ei2edb.ampr.org/MX 'ei2edb.ampr.org' has no address records (A or AAAA) >> os2.ei2edb.ampr.org/MX 'ei2edb.ampr.org' has no address records (A or AAAA) >> ei7gm.ampr.org/MX 'bbs.ei7gm.ampr.org' is a CNAME (illegal) >> ei7gm.ampr.org/MX 'dubbbs.ei7gm.ampr.org' has no address records (A or AAAA) >> 486.ei9fk.ampr.org/MX 'ei9fk.ampr.org' has no address records (A or AAAA) > Delete them, > > They are all ancient DNA. > > Regards > John > EI7IG After consulting Brian I have deleted all MX records that point to names for which no address record exists, including 4 of the above. 867 records in total. Looking at CNAME and dotted address in MX records will be the next step. Note that an MX record must have a hostname that in turn has A and/or AAAA records. So MX records that contain e.g. "44.0.0.1" are not allowed. Neither are MX records that have a name that in turn is a CNAME pointer. Most mail software will probably handle those bad MX records, so I have not yet deleted them. I advise those that make use of their MX records to fix them (replace the IP address with a hostname that resolves to that address, and replace a name that refers to a CNAME with the name that the CNAME points to). Then I can check things again in some time. Rob

1 0

hu.ampr.org DNS
by Norbert Varga 25 May '15

25 May '15

Dear 44net, First of all, hello to everybody on the list, I've just subscribed. We're currently building the hamnet network in Hungary, now we have some working links, tunnels and hosts which I've already added to the hamnetdb. I saw that some host names can be resolved using "regular" internet DNS servers, like router.db0ajw.ampr.org can be resolved to 44.225.36.129 using Google's 8.8.8.8 DNS server. My question is that how can this be accomplished? If we have a DNS server which can resolve our hosts to IPs and backwards, can one of the AMPR DNS servers be set up to transfer our zones? I saw that the portal has a DNS section but it's not live yet. Thanks for the help and 73s de HA2NON -- Norbert Varga http://www.nonoo.hu/

2 1

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net