44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3 participants
3195 discussions

Add network to gateway
by Marc, LX1DUC 28 Nov '14

28 Nov '14

Good afternoon, in the original layout it was possible to add any network to a gateway. Now you can only add networks assigned to the account holding the gateway, at the same time it seems impossible to add a gateway more than once or to share a gateway between several network holders. While I agree that users should be unable to add foreign networks to their gateway, it also creates an issue where several OMs decided to share 1 single gateway for various reasons. Can someone please advise how to share a gateway between several resource holders under the current portal design and logic? vy 73 -- Marc, LX1DUC -- www.laru.lu - Luxembourg Amateur Radio Union www.emcomm.services - Emergency Communication www.ham-dmr.lu - DMR Infos for HAMs

8 11

Re: [44net] Add network to gateway
by Rob Janssen 28 Nov '14

28 Nov '14

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Add network to gateway > From: > Chris <chris(a)g1fef.co.uk> > Date: > 11/28/2014 08:13 PM > > To: > AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > Guys, > > The intention was not to cut anyone off, but there were a lot of folk adding 44 networks to gateways that had not been allocated to them, or indeed allocated at all. Of course that is because your view on "allocated" is different from others' I think any address that has an entry in the .ampr.org DNS is "allocated". That it does not have an entry in your list of allocated subnets is a different matter. > The whole point of the Portal is to document who has been allocated (and is using) what IPs. So the gateway code has been updated to only allow allocated networks to be added to gateways. I would have considered it better when the work on managing allocations (addresses and DNS entries) had been finished first. But of course it is a hobby project so you can set your own priorities. Rob

1 0

Portal API
by Chris 26 Nov '14

26 Nov '14

I have implemented an API for accessing the Portal data programatically, if you login and select “API” from the menu there is some info there about it. So far I have only implemented one function: the ability to retrieve the encap routes. I would appreciated comments / feedback / suggestions as well as any bug reports. Thanks, Chris

6 20

Re: [44net] Bogus route entries
by Rob Janssen 25 Nov '14

25 Nov '14

> Re: [44net] Bogus route entries > From: > "Marius Petrescu" <marius(a)yo2loj.ro> > Date: > 11/25/2014 07:26 PM > > To: > "'AMPRNet working group'" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > Hello, > > With the last apr-ripd version (1.13), this entry (or any other having the > gateway inside its own subnet) gets ignored and can be direct routed (since > it is BGP-ed). > Unlike the entry 44.140.0.0/24 via some public IP which does not work. > I would prefer to see it as it is via 44.140.0.1... > > Marius, YO2LOJ Ok I must tell I have not yet installed the latest version, I am using 1.12 with the -x option and I noted this one (as it appears near the top of the list) is coming and going all the time. I captured a trace and this entry was not among the RIP entries sent at that time. So the problem is somewhere upstream, not in ampr-ripd. Next tuesday we will move our gateway to the datacenter of our ISP and we will start doing BGP routing of 44.137 (permission from ARDC is already obtained), so then I will update ampr-ripd and see what I can do to have entries like this working OK. But this time my main question is why is this route changing all the time even when it is not updated in the portal? (unlike the French one and now a Spanish one where users apparently are experimenting and do not understand the system so they insert and delete their entry all the time until it works) Rob

1 0

Bogus route entries
by Rob Janssen 25 Nov '14

25 Nov '14

Can somebody explain why the entry "44.140.0.0/16 via 44.140.0.1" keeps appearing and disappearing? Of course it was already discussed before that this entry has limited usefulness, but ok when someone wants to have it, let them (I won't be able to use it). However, it appearing and not appearing in the routing table in a blinkenlight fashion, while the portal says: Last modified 2014-04-12 17:46:33 Something is going wrong somewhere, but where? Rob

2 1

Re: [44net] Attn LX gateway
by Rob Janssen 25 Nov '14

25 Nov '14

> Subject: > Re: [44net] Attn LX gateway > From: > "Marc, LX1DUC" <lx1duc(a)laru.lu> > Date: > 11/14/2014 12:25 AM > > To: > 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 12/11/2014 21:46, Rob Janssen wrote: > > As Rob seems to have had issues finding the correct contact email > address for the IP address mentioned, I thought this might be helpful > to share with the group: > > For IP addresses allocated by RIPE there is the Abuse (Contact) Finder: > https://apps.db.ripe.net/search/abuse-finder.html > > Not each and every network has updated to the latest RIPE policies, > but it's always worth a shot:-) > > 73 de Marc It is also helpful when some contact or identifying information is present in the gateway listing on portal.ampr.org. In this case it only points to a clubstation with an info address, but via that I was able to get the message forwarded to you. It would have been helpful when your callsign and/or e-mail had been present in the portal listing. 73, Rob

13 24

Which radio is good for connect with a PC ?
by Ernest.Tse＠Pacswitch 19 Nov '14

19 Nov '14

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: <http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/44net/attachments/20141120/41bcfb6…>

1 0

Which radio is good for connect with a PC ?
by Ernest.Tse＠Pacswitch 19 Nov '14

19 Nov '14

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: <http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/44net/attachments/20141119/c3f67e2…>

4 3

Re: [44net] amprgw ok?
by Rob Janssen 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

> Subject: > Re: [44net] amprgw ok? > From: > "Marius Petrescu" <marius(a)yo2loj.ro> > Date: > 11/18/2014 06:05 PM > > To: > "'AMPRNet working group'" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > > > Brian, Chris, thank you for your efforts. > > I took a look at the latest sent encap info and I want to bring in > discussion the way how some gateways are announced. > >> >route addprivate 44.24.240/20 encap 44.24.221.1 > Now this one is ok. The gateway (44.24.221.1) is BGP announced, but not in > the encap file. Everything ok and working. Ok, with the exception that my systems cannot route to there, because the gateway is within network-44. Discussed before. Hopefully will change after we are on BGP ourselves, on a connection that does not do source address filtering. But we won't be using a gateway within network-44 unless absolutely required, I still think it is something to be avoided because quite a lot of gateways will not be able to route there, and the reason of "reliability" that was given for this setup in fact results in permanent failure. > > Now to the other two IMHO are wrong: > >> >route addprivate 44.151.94.28/32 encap 44.151.94.28 > So this host expects to get encapsulated traffic to a gateway which is the > host itself. This leeds to a routing loop and is not possible with a regular > setup. > This encap entry is in fact plain and simple useless: It states 'you can > reach me via me' which gives not much information. This one appears and disappears. Sometimes it is in my list, sometimes not. It could be that he does not understand how to setup his system, and is not able to read English very well. Maybe a French or otherwise Francophone person can try to contact him and ask what is going on. > >> >route addprivate 44.140/16 encap 44.140.0.1 > The same applies to the above, just that the whole subnet is routed to a > gateway which is part of that subnet itself. > This one also appears and disappears. When I looked in the portal gateway list, the last two gateways were not appearing there. Could it be that they are old gateways that have already been deleted by their owners but are irregularly being re-announced due to the damaged database? Rob

2 1

portal issue?
by Brian 18 Nov '14

18 Nov '14

It appears some subnets have been purged from the portal. Can we restore from a backup? -- If Microsoft intended Windows to be for ham usage, they would have incorporated our protocols into their kernel. 73 de Brian Rogers - N1URO email: <n1uro(a)n1uro.ampr.org> Web: http://www.n1uro.net/ Ampr1: http://n1uro.ampr.org/ Ampr2: http://nos.n1uro.ampr.org Linux Amateur Radio Services axMail-Fax & URONode AmprNet coordinator for: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net