How does everyone handle servers that they have accessible via net 44?
(As well as their local network)
I typically use the 192.168.1.X private IP range on my home network.
A couple IPs on that network are servers (askerisk, samba etc). I
don't really want to change my internal network configuration. So I
was thinking some sort of one-to-one translation of IP addresses.
I have tried everything I have read thus far with no luck.
Lets say:
server: 192.168.1.20 that I'd like translated to 44.92.21.35
Good day all,
I am wondering if my setup is fully operational, can you guy's
take 2 minute of your time and try to ping the following adddresses from
your ampr.org network and reporte them back to me:
44.135.49.1, 44.135.49.2 and 44.135.49.4
thank you!
73 de Jean,
--
Sysop de: VE2PKT (BBS), VE2PKT-3 (URONode),VE2PKT-4, VE2RAJ (XRouter)
: VE2RCN-1, VE2RDL-1, VE2RGC-1, VE2RVA-1, (The-Net)
: VE2PKT-9 (DXCluster), VE2PKT-10 (Winlink Gateway)
RF:
147.435 Mhz (1200 Bps)
Internet:
Telnet xrouter-ve2pkt.dyndns.org port 23 (Network Node)
Telnet fbb-ve2pkt.dyndns.org port 6300 (FBB BBS)
Telnet ve2pkt.dyndns.org port 9000 (DXCluster)
E-Mail:
packet: ve2pkt(a)ve2pkt.#qbc.qc.can.noam
ampr net: ve2pkt(a)ve2pkt.ampr.org
Inet: ve2pkt(a)amsat.org or ve2pkt(a)gmail.com
According to records on the portal, the following 120 (of 275 total)
entries in the gateways list are unclaimed - that is, no one has come
forward to take ownership of the entry. They therefore appear to be
inactive.
I propose we mark these as no longer in service. That will have the
effect of no longer including them in the encap list. Eventually
we'll delete them from the database if they're not reactivated.
If a gateway that is still valid is listed below, contact me or Chris
to get it assigned to the proper registered owner.
- Brian
8.22.205.37
12.195.50.128
24.55.199.25
24.84.205.232
24.89.203.65
24.137.76.29
24.212.252.100
24.212.252.109
24.212.252.110
24.224.157.206
50.79.209.150
62.49.17.234
64.22.214.233
64.119.33.202
64.119.42.138
64.255.99.17
65.41.209.137
65.48.61.133
65.70.212.35
66.11.68.11
66.112.51.126
66.114.139.158
67.108.91.190
68.61.222.68
68.188.234.106
68.209.144.3
69.69.168.201
69.137.244.193
69.145.172.163
69.178.117.150
69.254.106.173
70.137.68.217
71.36.92.66
71.107.40.238
71.107.40.238
71.201.92.148
74.85.194.5
75.21.234.175
76.14.161.185
76.64.80.228
76.247.140.206
76.253.114.92
77.249.108.97
79.116.75.255
79.116.81.105
80.59.234.233
80.229.68.173
81.235.253.122
84.92.153.154
89.228.59.72
90.206.95.108
91.84.215.75
94.72.251.181
94.101.48.134
94.172.232.113
96.20.43.106
96.35.76.41
97.84.11.198
98.193.215.29
98.208.81.22
99.88.77.66
99.116.194.13
108.185.66.208
113.212.169.28
118.22.1.194
118.82.200.153
122.108.78.111
130.208.168.63
131.155.192.172
141.85.43.57
142.103.194.1
146.48.126.26
146.48.126.28
148.223.34.6
150.188.8.195
152.66.0.109
155.207.19.57
158.42.128.200
161.53.16.179
168.96.128.17
173.14.57.181
173.177.124.119
173.208.214.53
184.175.46.166
186.125.37.47
189.42.190.50
190.31.163.55
190.139.56.180
192.147.172.252
193.22.2.254
194.27.119.2
195.22.112.28
195.113.115.135
195.150.236.251
198.108.247.220
200.17.207.2
200.46.129.3
201.252.37.40
202.63.57.97
203.5.58.162
203.24.120.198
203.24.120.199
203.24.120.200
203.26.188.134
203.59.134.49
206.251.38.99
207.111.203.194
207.179.123.166
208.74.106.137
208.94.114.29
208.115.126.75
208.127.104.172
212.159.74.68
212.159.90.90
213.73.1.100
216.86.85.144
216.144.222.182
217.42.40.69
220.157.89.84
220.233.86.207
Its working now. But it took much longer than 5 mins to get the
inital transmission.
After that it appears to be every 5 min. The same thing I observed
last time I set a gateway up. Oh well, just need to learn patience.
Thanks
How often are the rip routes transmitted? I have read every 5 mins,
but ever time I initially set up a gateway it always seems to take a
*lot* longer than that to see anything come thru.
https://raw.github.com/hessu/rip44d/master/rip44d
I have DMZ on my DD-WRT home router pointed to the pc running the rip
daemon, 192.168.1.106
My gateway entry is: 174.103.204.106
ifconfig tunl0 up 44.92.21.1 netmask 255.0.0.0
tunl0 Link encap:IPIP Tunnel HWaddr
inet addr:44.92.21.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
UP RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:0 Metric:1
RX packets:1 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:152 (152.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
root@test:~# ./rip44d -v
found local address: 192.168.1.106
found local address: 127.0.0.1
found local address: 44.92.21.1
opening UDP socket 520...
entering main loop, waiting for RIPv2 datagrams
Also watching with tcpdump.
Perhaps someone could create a tool to verify protocol 4 packets are
reaching the daemon? I always though that might be handy... go to a
webpage enter your outside address and it sends a protocol 4 packet...
or something?
Greetings;
<$0.02>
As Jay mentioned, we had the email robot before... perhaps it may be
wise to run such again parallel to the portal while the issues Chris
mentioned are worked out? This is standard practices almost anywhere in
which a production environment is being modified/upgraded/replaced.
</$0.02>
--
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.
----- Original Message -----
From: "VK4AA | VK4TTT Sam" <vk4ttt(a)ampr.org.au>
To: "AMPRNet working group" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
Cc: <danny(a)ddmcomputers.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:49 AM
Subject: Re: [44net] unclaimed gateways
> Hi Brian
>
> These are current
> VK7HDM (should be on bgp but Danny is yet to fix it up at his end)
> 203.24.120.198
> 203.24.120.199
> 203.24.120.200
>
> This is for a range waiting for BGP approval (it has slipped by for our
> shared DSTAR|APRS|PAKET Site)
> 203.26.188.134
>
>
> Sam
> VK4AA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Kantor" <Brian(a)ucsd.edu>
> To: <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2013 8:24 AM
> Subject: [44net] unclaimed gateways
>
>
>> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
>> _______________________________________________
>> According to records on the portal, the following 120 (of 275 total)
>> entries in the gateways list are unclaimed - that is, no one has come
>> forward to take ownership of the entry. They therefore appear to be
>> inactive.
>>
>> I propose we mark these as no longer in service. That will have the
>> effect of no longer including them in the encap list. Eventually
>> we'll delete them from the database if they're not reactivated.
>>
>> If a gateway that is still valid is listed below, contact me or Chris
>> to get it assigned to the proper registered owner.
>> - Brian
>>
>>
>> 8.22.205.37
>> 12.195.50.128
>> 24.55.199.25
>> 24.84.205.232
>> 24.89.203.65
>> 24.137.76.29
>> 24.212.252.100
>> 24.212.252.109
>> 24.212.252.110
>> 24.224.157.206
>> 50.79.209.150
>> 62.49.17.234
>> 64.22.214.233
>> 64.119.33.202
>> 64.119.42.138
>> 64.255.99.17
>> 65.41.209.137
>> 65.48.61.133
>> 65.70.212.35
>> 66.11.68.11
>> 66.112.51.126
>> 66.114.139.158
>> 67.108.91.190
>> 68.61.222.68
>> 68.188.234.106
>> 68.209.144.3
>> 69.69.168.201
>> 69.137.244.193
>> 69.145.172.163
>> 69.178.117.150
>> 69.254.106.173
>> 70.137.68.217
>> 71.36.92.66
>> 71.107.40.238
>> 71.107.40.238
>> 71.201.92.148
>> 74.85.194.5
>> 75.21.234.175
>> 76.14.161.185
>> 76.64.80.228
>> 76.247.140.206
>> 76.253.114.92
>> 77.249.108.97
>> 79.116.75.255
>> 79.116.81.105
>> 80.59.234.233
>> 80.229.68.173
>> 81.235.253.122
>> 84.92.153.154
>> 89.228.59.72
>> 90.206.95.108
>> 91.84.215.75
>> 94.72.251.181
>> 94.101.48.134
>> 94.172.232.113
>> 96.20.43.106
>> 96.35.76.41
>> 97.84.11.198
>> 98.193.215.29
>> 98.208.81.22
>> 99.88.77.66
>> 99.116.194.13
>> 108.185.66.208
>> 113.212.169.28
>> 118.22.1.194
>> 118.82.200.153
>> 122.108.78.111
>> 130.208.168.63
>> 131.155.192.172
>> 141.85.43.57
>> 142.103.194.1
>> 146.48.126.26
>> 146.48.126.28
>> 148.223.34.6
>> 150.188.8.195
>> 152.66.0.109
>> 155.207.19.57
>> 158.42.128.200
>> 161.53.16.179
>> 168.96.128.17
>> 173.14.57.181
>> 173.177.124.119
>> 173.208.214.53
>> 184.175.46.166
>> 186.125.37.47
>> 189.42.190.50
>> 190.31.163.55
>> 190.139.56.180
>> 192.147.172.252
>> 193.22.2.254
>> 194.27.119.2
>> 195.22.112.28
>> 195.113.115.135
>> 195.150.236.251
>> 198.108.247.220
>> 200.17.207.2
>> 200.46.129.3
>> 201.252.37.40
>> 202.63.57.97
>> 203.5.58.162
>> 203.24.120.198
>> 203.24.120.199
>> 203.24.120.200
>> 203.26.188.134
>> 203.59.134.49
>> 206.251.38.99
>> 207.111.203.194
>> 207.179.123.166
>> 208.74.106.137
>> 208.94.114.29
>> 208.115.126.75
>> 208.127.104.172
>> 212.159.74.68
>> 212.159.90.90
>> 213.73.1.100
>> 216.86.85.144
>> 216.144.222.182
>> 217.42.40.69
>> 220.157.89.84
>> 220.233.86.207
>> _________________________________________
>> 44Net mailing list
>> 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
>> http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
>
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
ON1ARF wrote:
> True. Now, one thing I had in the back of my mind is that OLSR can actually
> run over any interface.
>
> OLSR Is usually done over ad-hoc wifi interface, but you can run it over
> -say- an ethernet link between two nodes ..; or -why not- a VPN tunnel.
>
> So, in the end, even if there is no direct radio-contact with other nodes,
> you could -sort of- "fake" it by connecting nodes over the internet. It
> would probably only require to set up a (say) OpenVPN server in some
> datacenter.
I never thought of this. Very interesting. I may have found a winter
project to try. Perhaps I can find some folks on the ampr net 44 list
to try this with?
> Subject:
> Re: [44net] Raspberry Pi - FM transmitter
> From:
> David Ranch <amprgw(a)trinnet.net>
> Date:
> 12/11/2013 04:49 AM
>
> To:
> AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
>
>
>
> Hello Tom,
>
> One of my elmers tried setting something similar up for WSPR but even with adding the various filters, the harmonics on the higher frequencies were very significant and went well out of the HAM bands!
Well, the article says that the harmonics must be 43dB down to meet FCC regulations, or maybe 40dB
when reading the complicated if-then-else-if sentences in those paragraphs (why not use a table?).
That is quite harsh, for a 10mW transmitter. 1uW is not a lot of power. A homeplug device probably transmits
a lot more than that.
Rob
