> my thought is we need
> more people working on finishing the portal first.
What exactly is that going to DO?
Here I am sitting on my hands trying to figure out how to get my (already
allocated MONTHS AGO) /24 connected to the flamin internet. No one seems
focussed on making a wiki entry about THAT. Rather, they'd be happier
tunneling their little private network to someone elses'. It seems that
many other groups have been waiting YEARS for this assistance or
documentation, and MANY other groups who have just given up in disgust.
Would the people who ACTUALLY HAVE a properly connected (live to the
internet) 44 subnet that they openly brag about, kindly document the bloody
thing in the wiki so I can do it as well? This isn't a dick measuring
group, its a networking group. You know what you're doing, so write it up
so mere mortals can achieve a positive result as well.
There needs to be a sample equipment list with DIY workarounds for those
with time but not money, and there needs to be a VERY well written
document-set to hand to my ISP so I don't scare them into just plain
refusing my request, or unduly taxing their tech team.
Thank you.
On 4/20/14, 7:27 PM, Neil Johnson wrote:
> I've summarized Eric's explanation and added an entry to the wiki.
>
> http://wiki.ampr.org/index.php/Announcing_your_allocation_directly
+1.
I think the point is if you have to ask how to connect (announce) your /24 to
the internet you probably shouldn't be doing it on your own, your ISP needs to
do it for you. Perhaps a overview of internet routing process is needed, as I
want the 44/net to be a place to learn, but we need to ensure people
understand what they are doing before messing with the global table.
This is quite simple, but the LoA (letter of authority) and required
information can be daunting to those who've never done it before.
Also, if you're on the digest version, can you change the subject of your
reply? I've been ignoring this thread since I didn't feel like reading it all
at once.
73's
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
727-214-2508 - Fax
http://bryanfields.net
On 4/20/14, 9:24 PM, Neil Johnson wrote:
> and do my part
> for keeping the global BGP routing table from expanding faster
I disagree, I work for a company that sells routers.
:D
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
727-214-2508 - Fax
http://bryanfields.net
Steve,
Part of the request for 44-IP space from Brian for the intent to
advertise it on the Internet is a ISP who is already willing and offered to do
this. If this hasn't already been done the IP space you have may not have
Brian's approval for that type of use. (But rather used for just IP-in-IP tunnel
service) So before you go down that path you may want to check with him first.
Once that is completed and you have a LoA (Letter of Authority) from Brian
stating you have his approval to advertise this space on the Internet you should
be able to do the following. (Some ISP's ask for a LoA, and most should ask).
Also note the other requirements that one agrees too: http://www.ampr.org/tos.txt
1)
Once you've already discussed this with yoru ISP and they are willing to
do this, let the ISP know the IP space and send them the LoA. They will need
this so that they can setup the required configs, notify their upstreams, and
setup routing of that block to your router. This could take a couple of days,
and unless they are HAM friendly (this really helps) or you also purchase a lot
of services form them, I would have to guess they may charge for this service.
2)
Have your ISP advertise the 44 space assigned to you using their
existing BGP ASN and then have them route you your 44 block to your router.
3)
This is probably why no one has written this because each person setup
will be different depending on how you will use the space. But for yours (with
not having any details at all) I will assume you have a router that connects to
your ISP with three interfaces. One interface will connect to your ISP and that
interface will have a external public routable IP, one interface will point to
your internal network with perhaps a 192.168.0.1/24 IP running NAT on that
interface. The 3rd interface will be a DMZ network where the 44-net addresses
will live. Perhaps a switch plugs into this interface and a different switch
plugs into your Internet NAT interface. (don't mix the two within the same
logical network/switch/vlan).
NOTE: This is only one very simplified example.
https://www.osburn.com/ampr_network-140420-1.0.0-example_network.jpg
Tim Osburn
www.osburn.com
W7RSZ
On Mon, 21 Apr 2014, Steve Wright wrote:
> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 09:22:02 +1200
> From: Steve Wright <stevewrightnz(a)gmail.com>
> Reply-To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
> To: 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: [44net] 44Net Digest, Vol 3, Issue 78
>
> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> _______________________________________________
>> my thought is we need
>> more people working on finishing the portal first.
>
> What exactly is that going to DO?
>
> Here I am sitting on my hands trying to figure out how to get my (already
> allocated MONTHS AGO) /24 connected to the flamin internet. No one seems
> focussed on making a wiki entry about THAT. Rather, they'd be happier
> tunneling their little private network to someone elses'. It seems that
> many other groups have been waiting YEARS for this assistance or
> documentation, and MANY other groups who have just given up in disgust.
>
> Would the people who ACTUALLY HAVE a properly connected (live to the
> internet) 44 subnet that they openly brag about, kindly document the bloody
> thing in the wiki so I can do it as well? This isn't a dick measuring
> group, its a networking group. You know what you're doing, so write it up
> so mere mortals can achieve a positive result as well.
>
> There needs to be a sample equipment list with DIY workarounds for those
> with time but not money, and there needs to be a VERY well written
> document-set to hand to my ISP so I don't scare them into just plain
> refusing my request, or unduly taxing their tech team.
>
> Thank you.
>
It appears to work.
You mentioned you weren't intending to provide access to the code, but
how about the code that looks at the source IP / password requirement
part?
I'm one of those guys who still hasn't fully wrapped their head around
PHP yet, so I'd like to see how you did that part.
On that topic, maybe we should have a place/repository on the amprnet
to put ham specific software.
A while back I posted a link to a web based rig control application I
was running. It uses hamlib for backend and php for a front end.
Here is more info:
http://kb9mwr.blogspot.com/2013/04/raspberry-pi-web-based-rig-control.html
As for the ARDC director position discussions, my thought is we need
more people working on finishing the portal first. I am sure Chris
would appreciate that.
> > The IP space is owned by
> >
> > Amateur Radio Digital Communications
> >
> > per the whois.
> >
> > ARIN requires a legal entity to exist in order to receive the IP space.
>
Actually it doesn't sound like it's "owned" by ardc at all. Why do you
state this to be so?
Your mention of your lawyers smacks of stand over tactics.
> 1. Minor: That everyone include his/her callsign as part of the
> message, either in the "From" line (my preference) or in the
signature.
> 2. Major: That messages with a subject line that includes the name of a
> digest, be blocked/rejected. This is not to be cruel or mean, but
> to insure that others (like me) actually read the message. I doubt
> that I'm the only one that refuses to read messages with a subject
> line that is a digest name.
No. No one is interested in your extra rules. Think up something actually
useful and interesting, and contribute that.
Regarding the 44/8 and IANA:
Please don't "shake the hornets' nest," by asking IANA or ARIN. While IANA issued the /8 when it ran "Internet Registry," it is actually referenced in RFCs. It is a technical fixture of the "DARPA Internet" that the 44/8 addresses are AMPRNET. The legal question of: "is an IP address property, and if so, do legacy IP holders have different property rights than those allocated from RIRs" is a DANGEROUS question to venture into having solved before IPv4 "goes the way" of thrift store dialup modems.
Why? Because of all those who still hold legacy allocations:
AMPRNet is the only one that is:
- non-commercial
- nonprofit
- not part of military-industrial complex
- not part of the big-pharmaceutical industry
- not governmental
- not part of big-telecom
- not part of the financial industry
- not part one the major corporations, nations or firms that help rebuild/establish/maintain the infrastructure of the globe during/after World War II
What /8 do you think they'll try to take first when the world's number resources approach 0.01 /8's remaining to allocate???
-KB3VWG
Hello,
I'd like to join the board of ARDC. Having studied the situation a bit,
it looks to me like ARDC is in a bad situation right now. Should Brian
get hit by a bus, the corporation will no longer have any directors or
officers. Its assets would then be disseminated by a court during the
dismantling of the corporation. This means the address space would be
given away to whoever the court decides, which could include ARIN for
re-purposing as commercial space.
I'm not 100% on this, since there is scant documentation on the heritage
of 44/8 and its present legal ownership status. I believe it's "legacy
space", but ARIN doesn't seem to agree: the netblock suffix does not end
with -Z. As "legacy space" there should be some chain of ownership
documented somewhere, and I'm just not finding it.
Having read the bylaws, I also haven't managed to find how I might go
about becoming elected. The processes for replacement and removal of
directors are defined (majority vote of board members), but I don't see
how elections to vacant positions are supposed to take place. I'd also
like to say that a board electing itself is not the best model of
governance for a non-profit corporation. Non-profits are supposed to
serve some need: in this case the needs of amateurs who wish to make use
of 44/8 space. I'd like to see a governance model where the users elect
the directors who best represent their needs. This is one crucial
governance change that I think absolutely needs to happen.
Aside from governance, there are several technical issues that I'd like
to see brought up to speed with modern standards, and published as part
of official interface specifications for AMPRnet. I don't want to get
too detailed in this email, but a top-level list of technical things I'd
push for as director includes:
1) Support for BGP
2) Support for IPsec(AH)
3) Support for anycasting
4) An improved gateway registration process with IP ownership verification
5) Support for DNS delegation
6) Support for DNSSEC signing
7) Deployment of multiple regional Internet gateways to remove the UCSD
single point of failure
8) Adoption of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol
9) Publication of official multi-platform software which simplifies the
AMPRnet user experience
I've experienced opposition on implementing points 3 and 5 so far, and
I'm reluctant to attempt any more of these agenda items without some
changes to how the organization makes decisions. There are no technical
blockers here, as all of these technologies I mentioned are widely used
on the Internet today. However, it's nearly impossible to achieve
technical leadership when decisions require universal consensus, and/or
the decision making process is undefined. AMPR needs more board members
who can push such technologies forward, and participate in the official
decision making process while relying on their deep technical expertise
to ensure their votes are sound.
In terms of my qualifications for board duty, I founded the HamWAN
organization in Washington which has deployed a regional microwave
network, uses AMPRnet IP space, and has based its standard designs on
the latest & greatest hardware and software has to offer.
Professionally, I'd been running Internet services since 1996. Presently
I work on routing for a major cloud provider. I'd like to bring the
same kind of innovation to AMPRnet as I did with HamWAN. On the
governance standpoint, I drafted the HamWAN bylaws in very intentional
ways. Ways that empower the volunteers who are doing the active work
that contributes to progress. Governance overhead is minimal so
everyone can just mostly focus on the problems at hand.
So, what are the next steps here?
--Bart
1. Minor: That everyone include his/her callsign as part of the
message, either in the "From" line (my preference) or in the signature.
2. Major: That messages with a subject line that includes the name of a
digest, be blocked/rejected. This is not to be cruel or mean, but
to insure that others (like me) actually read the message. I doubt
that I'm the only one that refuses to read messages with a subject
line that is a digest name.
44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu wrote:
> Subject:
> Re: [44net] Running for ARDC director position
> From:
> "." <lleachii(a)aol.com>
> Date:
> 04/18/2014 04:59 PM
>
> To:
> 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>
>
> I keep a little copy/paste history and info athttp://kb3vwg-010.ampr.org but I'm definitely not the AMPR historian, by experience.
I checked there and I read:
There are two negative aspects I can think of:
- Speed: Even an IP frame from one host in Germany to another has to go via ucsd.edu . That way it has to cross the Atlantic two times.
That is not correct. The tunnel mesh does not work like that.
Traffic between 44net hosts flows directly from gateway to gateway in an IPIP tunnel between them. amprgw is not involved
in that at all. Only traffic from outside to inside 44net is via amprgw, and there are now other gateways as
well that serve smaller subnets (e.g. in Belgium and Germany). All gateways have IPIP tunnels to all other gateways,
and the traffic flows according to the shortest route via internet between the gateways.
Rob
