44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3196 discussions

Re: [44net] Portal
by SP2L-wp 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Hello Andrew et al. I would like politely remark, that although I participate in portal.ampr.org development, my only task (so far) to which I volunteered, is polish language version of portal.ampr.org Surely, working closely with the source code of portal I spotted some minor mistakes, misprints and so on which I always passed to Chris for review. But to be candid, myself I introduced to the code (fortunately ONLY in polish language version!) some mistakes which made this part of code temporary unusable; Chris needed to correct them! All of us, we are just(?) human beings. We make mistakes, we forget things... Also, all of us, we have our private life, family, health problems... And what Chris perfectly pointed out, sometime life unexpectedly, without any excuse - intervenes! Thus making our life much harder and tough... With best regards from Gdynia. _____ Tom - SP2L (ex sp2lob) __________________________ Send from Sony Xperia Z1 http://aqua-mail.com

1 0

Re: [44net] Portal
by Bryan Fields 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

On 2/26/15 4:25 PM, Andrew Ragone (RIT Student) wrote: > To clarify, too, this would be not only for the portal but the website as > well ... in which everyone could contribute to web content / wiki to > describe aspects of 44net and IP in Amateur Radio. have you seen http://wiki.ampr.org/index.php/Main_Page ? -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

1 0

Re: [44net] 44.151.29.29/32 F4LTS
by Rob Janssen 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

> Subject: > [44net] 44.151.29.29/32 F4LTS > From: > "Marc, LX1DUC" <lx1duc(a)laru.lu> > Date: > 02/14/2015 12:21 AM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Good evening, > > is Eric F4LTS on this list or does anybody have his contact data? > > Eric has added network 44.151.29.29/32 with Gateway 44.151.29.29, once > the IPIP interface on my router comes up, the route for > 44.151.29.29/32 via 44.151.29.29 comes up, which in turn takes down > the interface which disabled the route, which allows the interface to > come up... a fine loop. > > I had to filter his network 44.151.29.29/32 from the results I fetch > via the API in order to keep my log size down. > > I'm not sure if the portal should allow the gateway for a network to > between inside that same network. I think it makes no sense but please > correct me if I'm wrong. > > 73 de Marc, LX1DUC It is certainly not correct... fortunately ampr-ripd ignores such routes after it was found that other people (like SA0BXI) had created them and they caused encapsulation loops. But of course you are right, the portal should simply refuse to store such incorrect information in the first place. It should issue an error message that makes the user think again about what they have requested. I am a bit disappointed about the progress in the portal development. Sure it can happen that people are temporarily busy and have to postpone things a bit until more time is available, but the portal as it is now has halted the development of amprnet and left everything in a stalemate situation. The DNS part needs to be finished, the allocation of subnets has to be much more flexible, overrides have to be made available to coordinators, and some address management tools have to be added. When it is decided that this cannot be done in the time available to the developer, it may be better to switch to another management system like the hamnet-db. 73, Rob

3 2

question about iptables command not being accepted
by Rosalio Salas 21 Feb '15

21 Feb '15

In the wiki example... http://wiki.ampr.org/index.php/Ubuntu_Linux_Gateway_Example Under Protecting the Gateway... The following OUTPUT command is not accepted. sudo iptables -A OUTPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT The error reads: "iptables version 1.4.14 can't use -i with output" Any suggestions? -- Leo , N5JEP

2 4

Re: [44net] Linux files purity...
by Bryan Fields 15 Feb '15

15 Feb '15

I'd propose a purity test. 😀 On February 15, 2015 12:35:30 PM EST, Mitch Winkle <mitchwinkle(a)gmail.com> wrote: >(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) >_______________________________________________ >Being a ^M "offender" I can tell you that the ax.25 and Uronode and >axMailFax software have no issues with said ^M characters in the >axports >file. The blank line issue has been well known for years but to my >recollection, only for NetROM's nrports file. I (until yesterday) had >a >blank end line on my axports file to no detriment. > >Tom thank you for following your hunch, and hopefully we can get that >documented for the "fbb" script for us newby types. > >Mitch >

2 1

Linux files purity...
by SP2L-wp 15 Feb '15

15 Feb '15

To whom it may concern. As some issues lately discussed on both lists evidently show, there is not to much attention paid to REAL PURITY of all, or at lest some linux config files, in particular axports file. It is CRUCIAL, that axports file: - CAN NOT contain ANY EMPTY line at all! If additional space is necessary between lines then usual spaceholder "#" is fine, - CAN NOT contain ^M (CR - in hex 0x0D) code at the end of any line! NOT RESPECTING above two rules may result in unpredictable behavior of many AMPRNet software, not to mention FBB BBS, URONode. Presence of ^M (CR) code can be viewed and corrected, for instance, in Midnight Commander, VI and well known Emacs editors. >From the other hand, simple and friendly editors like nano and joe, apparently are useless... There are few nifty tools that may one use for removing ^M characters, even from bunch of files without editing. Best known is dos2unix available for all linux like distros. Best regards _____ Tom - SP2L (ex sp2lob) __________________________ Send from Sony Xperia Z1 http://aqua-mail.com

2 1

Re: [44net] 44Net Digest, Vol 4, Issue 23
by f5pbg＠free.fr 14 Feb '15

14 Feb '15

Hello, his email is eric.f4lts(a)gmail.com I have already contact him. Best regards, Ludovic - F5PBG. Le 14/02/2015 20:00, 44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu a écrit : > Good evening, > > is Eric F4LTS on this list or does anybody have his contact data? > > Eric has added network 44.151.29.29/32 with Gateway 44.151.29.29, once > the IPIP interface on my router comes up, the route for > 44.151.29.29/32 via 44.151.29.29 comes up, which in turn takes down > the interface which disabled the route, which allows the interface to > come up... a fine loop. > > I had to filter his network 44.151.29.29/32 from the results I fetch > via the API in order to keep my log size down. > > I'm not sure if the portal should allow the gateway for a network to > between inside that same network. I think it makes no sense but please > correct me if I'm wrong. > > 73 de Marc, LX1DUC

1 0

Bad route to 44.140.0.0/16
by Rob Janssen 14 Feb '15

14 Feb '15

What is it that makes this route: 44.140.0.0/16 via 192.16.126.18 dev tunl0 proto ampr-ripd metric 44 onlink appear and disappear all the time? The gateway 192.16.126.18 does not work. In the portal there is a gateway 44.140.0.1 for 44.140.0.0/16, also BAD of course. This has been discussed before. Why hasn't it been deleted? How can it be that there are TWO gateways for the same 44.140.0.0/16 network in the portal? And why is the 192.16.126.18 one appearing and disappearing every few hours? Please whoever is responsible for this, debug this. It has been an issue for many months, it has been discussed before, but nothing has happened. SA0BXI apparently is not reading the list. I thought that was a requirement for being a gateway. As he has never replied to any discussion about his network, why don't we simply delete his entries? Note that 44.140.0.0/16 is BGP announced, so when there is no faulty entry at least it will work for some setups. Right now it is just dead. Rob

1 0

44.151.29.29/32 F4LTS
by Marc, LX1DUC 13 Feb '15

13 Feb '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Good evening, is Eric F4LTS on this list or does anybody have his contact data? Eric has added network 44.151.29.29/32 with Gateway 44.151.29.29, once the IPIP interface on my router comes up, the route for 44.151.29.29/32 via 44.151.29.29 comes up, which in turn takes down the interface which disabled the route, which allows the interface to come up... a fine loop. I had to filter his network 44.151.29.29/32 from the results I fetch via the API in order to keep my log size down. I'm not sure if the portal should allow the gateway for a network to between inside that same network. I think it makes no sense but please correct me if I'm wrong. 73 de Marc, LX1DUC -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJU3obzAAoJELyI73cdFgugm20P+gJyN53Z3Gs+WPMhrK+erP+Y YolVkDxUbUHWEXIcT/pnYwSmv0oDw2DQYzGaES4vHeJgb1sTQrbyPXXi72dHSkLe 7NEjwYz2DH1R3udikQ1yGE24vlQAWWqQYgT4KJ5zOqwmX2INfv+3apgBGvWDUArv sUxPYkywkHLld+N1hGEtlrDjg6wm1FoRoEDdhsbSV1laJ+Nyra+EVn2VuIc5rJKN nDlqa3OYtP2cy0POEmUb3HGbTIszjaWNksrdEof9kNARGCpula/mI2iQpwtJeKqy iw+QtJv72vICHNYgwAdu/bzTvgAgbosfm6WYG/g3IgupPsZBdC64fZ0Z0pn8bB5x koWFGx9g/z/gWjUPuG0UPPzWlozftpiQWlz9qO3/5aSfy0Kn6koFjDl9cA0Q53kS zWI0cuDK4giJQ/fy/vDojzgNnZp511Rm3WScZx9ZI/WbRE696mnLEckADmlZGg0U dAFJDrJNYkujiZDFJWN0ZMjiZO9nEMwgSTLhr7f5xF4l3M7nfhw+dy13lqRPB68q Mhi+NfWz6Ko+jdjLEtBVxOB2UbfUVG+aY5QVa+ctWStigN8d3hyAZ2oiXgtho1m2 m+WK912ObDyzH4waPOyQiMuf3hbnk0064WkJdHvXN5N2ZvW/0ld5FSwe5qF2NEt5 WAP3tvG3Yhsx4YNSuHe6 =XilB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Incomplete table with ampr-ripd
by Rob Janssen 10 Feb '15

10 Feb '15

> Subject: > [44net] Incomplete table with ampr-ripd > From: > Brett Mueller <wa7v(a)wa7v.com> > Date: > 02/10/2015 06:14 AM > > To: > "'AMPRNet working group'" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > Greetings Marius and all, > > Just over a week ago, I finally compiled and installed ampr-ripd 1.13 on my > gateway firewall / router, a Slackware 13.1 with 2.6.33.4-grsec-smp > (home-rolled Grsecurity kernel). Compilation and execution seems to work just > fine, but I get an incomplete AMPRnet routing table (currently only about 30 > routes). > > Ideas what could be preventing me from getting a full routing table? Any place > besides the usual logging locations where I could find some clues? Debugging > arguments, perhaps? > You may have some systematic packet loss along the route to your system. I experienced some problems some time ago (although not as severe as you describe) and I changed EXPTIME from 600 to 7200 in the source. That helps when there is occasional packet loss. Of course when there is systematic loss due to a very small queue at some point, it will not help much. Rob

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net