Hi all,
Just joining the list... I applied for a 44net subnet last week and am
beginning the steps to do something cool and interesting with this.
I'm a new ham as of April 2013 (VE5EIS) and work on both VHF/UHF and the HF
bands. I also am involved with a hobby project in Canada called the
Metanetwork, where we link disparate networks together and learn about
networking, route advertising, and so on. The project has gotten me to
learn about all sorts of useful networking things such as using OpenVPN and
deploying IPv6. My routers and my most interesting computers run Linux or
BSD.
I'm hoping to learn more about packet radio and deploy some RF hops on my
subnet. I have some ideas of some useful projects that could be done, e.g.
UUCP over RF for email links between sites that don't have Internet or
telephone connectivity.
At this point I'm working on getting either a tunnel or permission to set up
BGP advertising for my subnet, and then it'll be time to figure out what to
do with this project. I'm hoping to have a lot of fun with it and learn
from you guys - see what you're doing, grab some great ideas, maybe leverage
them with some of my own experience and knowledge.
Thanks,
Jim VE5EIS
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada DO70
The solution is in section 3.3.2 of the user guide : DMZ Host
http://www.draytek.co.uk/support/downloads
Another option is is to put the modem in a Bridge Mode see page 35.
Hi all,
Does anyone know if a Draytek Vigor 2710Vn ADSL router can do IPENCAP
(Protocol 4) so that I can use it in my AMPRnet GATEWAY?
I can't make it work, although my GATEWAY works OK when I use a
TP-Link WR1043ND Broadband Router with DD-WRT Firmware!
--
73 de Demetre - SV1UY
e-mail: demetre.sv1uy(a)gmail.com
Radio e-mail: sv1uy(a)winlink.org
AMPRnet e-mail: sv1uy(a)sv1uy.ampr.org
PACKET mail: SV1UY(a)SV1UY.ATH.GRC.EU
WEB: http://www.qsl.net/sv1uy
I have been reading this common thread on the.broadband hamnet forums.
"Are there any lists with available tunnel connections?"
On the portal, unless noted in the notes area, the only way to really
tell is from looking up the geographic area for the listed subnet.
This is probably something we should re-think. You shouldn't have to
do all that leg work to see what areas have tunnels available.
If we can make that easier to determine, I'd like to think more people
will find what we are doing here on 44net more useful to them.
Back to painful data loss recovery..
Just peeked in th RIP broadcasts today:
44.140.0.0/16 via 44.140.0.1
This entry is invalid, since the gateway is in its own subnet and no other
entry for 44.140.0.1 exists.
Please correct the entry.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:00 AM, <44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> wrote:
>
http://www.scc-ares-races.org/mesh/preso/Basic_WiFi_Net_Planning_v140516.pdf
That's a really good document. This really needs to be in the wiki, or
else no one can find it. It can be dangerous for total newbs to read this,
because it suggests the process is fraught with danger, which of course
it's not. We all agree that it's actually completely trivial to put up an
AP and connect to it from miles away.
rmonline is also a good tool to quickly check links for LOS. There is
also some Android app as well.
http://www.ve2dbe.com/rmonline.html
I don't do link calcs any more - there's just no need to. A pair of
Nanobridges will work real well over a huge distance provided there is
line-of-sight. Really, this stuff is point-and-shoot trivial now.
A really important consideration with an 802.11 ham network, is keeping the
snake-oil protocols separate from the ones that actually work! Viz, don't
run mesh on an AirMax channel. AirMax can push a huge amount of data, even
on a busy channel.
Advice I'd give to a group of total newbies who want to build a network, is
ignore all the tech talk and go buy a 2.4GHz AirMax sector access point,
install on a nice high line-of-sight location, and just play with
connecting to it from all around the place. There's nothing complicated
about it at all. The tricky stuff does come later, but you'll get to that
once you see the network up and alive, and your enthusiasm starts to take
off. Newbs giving up early because it looks too hard is an avoidable
tragedy.
Steve ZL1BHD
44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu wrote:
> Subject:
> Re: [44net] 44Net Digest, Vol 3, Issue 103
> From:
> Pedro Converso <pconver(a)gmail.com>
> Date:
> 05/21/2014 12:17 AM
>
> To:
> AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
>
>
> Hello Rob et all crew aboard this 44 ship,
>
> Thanks for taking time to answer,
>
> If I ping from my jnos> ping pe1chl.ampr.org then ping is answered.
>
> If I ping from any operating system pe1chl.ampr.org or using remote ping
> fromhttps://www.wormly.com/test_remote_ping then ping is not answered.
>
> Therefore any other function as web, telnet, nntp, etc are not answered or
> handled using a PC with any operating system other than a linux with encap.
>
> This is my concern that also happens to others ampr system including yours.
Oh but that is because pe1chl.ampr.org allows only traffic from net-44. It is a NET
system and I don't want to open it to the abusers and portscanners.
Try sys2.pe1chl.ampr.org or www.pe1chl.ampr.org. Those are Linux systems and you
can ping them both from net-44 and from the entire internet.
>
> In fact a ping to any ampr.org does go to amprgw (169.228.66.251) as shown
> by traces, and that happens using any system being or not a linux.
>
> Question is how to resolve this, and reason of seeking help/advice from
> amprnet experts to guide toward finding a solution.
>
> Best 73,
> lu7abf, Pedro Converso
What I deduced from your trace was that incoming the packets were encapped as IP-in-IP
but outgoing they were not. But maybe it is a characteristic of the way you traced, sometimes
those extra encapsulations are not shown in a trace.
I think the best solution today is to handle the net-44 routing in Linux and then when you
want to run jnos put that behind an extra address that you route locally.
Rob
I have 3.4 ghz mini pci cards for 8.50 USD each.
On May 21, 2014 1:09:52 AM EDT, Michael E Fox - N6MEF <n6mef(a)mefox.org> wrote:
>(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
>_______________________________________________
>I haven't seen any commercial equipment available. If you're aware of
>any,
>can you provide links?
>
>M
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: 44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>[mailto:44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of
>Tom
>Hayward
>Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:48 PM
>To: AMPRNet working group
>Subject: Re: [44net] 802.11 link planning
>
>(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
>_______________________________________________
>On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Michael E Fox - N6MEF
><n6mef(a)mefox.org>
>wrote:
>>
>http://www.scc-ares-races.org/mesh/preso/Basic_WiFi_Net_Planning_v140516.pdf
>
>You might add 3.4 GHz and 5.9 GHz to you list of bands. These are
>worth mentioning because they're [US] ham-only and therefore avoid
>many common noise sources.
>
>Tom KD7LXL
>_________________________________________
>44Net mailing list
>44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
>
>_________________________________________
>44Net mailing list
>44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194
http://bryanfields.net
