44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3198 discussions

On The Air
by Bill Vodall 29 Jul '13

29 Jul '13

So how are folks actually making use of all this nifty routing technology on the air with Amateur Radio these days? I don't remember the last time I've seen an "ampr.org" email address here on the list. I kinda remember the last time I had one that worked... Bill

15 23

Re: [44net] Distributed BGP Announce
by Bryan Fields 28 Jul '13

28 Jul '13

On 7/25/13 2:59 AM, Marc, LX1DUC wrote: > By defautl GRE provides an Layer3 MTU of 1476 bytes. How will you cope > with packet fragmentation or in case DF=1 with ICMP type=3 code=4 (The > datagram is too big. Packet fragmentation is required but the 'don't > fragment' (DF) flag is on.) filtering. Yes, but this is why we have PMTUD. It works fine so long as ICMP is not blocked. If ICMP is blocked, then some one along the path needs to get some clue. I've only encountered this on private networks (LAN's, and packet cores where IT runs it). Generally it's fixed with me screaming "YOU'RE BREAKING THE INTERNET STUPID!" ;) Also as it only really efficts TCP, I solve it on my GRE tunnels with ip tcp adjust-mss 1436 in cisco set interface $interface ip tcp adjust-mss 1436 in juniper tcp-mss-adjust 1436 under an SDP config in Alcatel-Lucent 73's -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

3 2

Receiving routes with conventional RIP
by Neil Johnson 28 Jul '13

28 Jul '13

Is it possible to get the IPIP routes delivered by conventional routing protocols (RIP, OSPF, etc) rather than running a custom daemon ? Just curious. -Neil -- Neil Johnson -N0SFH http://erudicon.com

6 8

Tunnel issues with rip44d
by Neil Johnson 27 Jul '13

27 Jul '13

I can't seem to get rip44d to hear the routes. I'm sure I'm doing something dumb. Here is my /etc/networking/interfaces configuration: # Tunnel to amprnet auto tun0 iface tun0 inet static address 44.50.128.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 44.50.128.255 pre-up iptunnel add tun0 mode ipip local 128.255.134.47 post-down iptunnel del tun0 If I run tcpdump on the tun0 interface I can see the routes coming down, but when I run rip44d it never hears them. I did I miss. I'm running ubuntu 12.04 LTS. Thanks. -Neil -- Neil Johnson -N0SFH http://erudicon.com

2 3

Why is Linux box necessary?
by YT9TP op. Pedja 27 Jul '13

27 Jul '13

Hi, First time posting on this list. I am new to AMPRNet and actually still struggling to make gateway. I realized that I have to download encap file with route definitions and load them into my gateway router so my networks sees all other networks in 44/8. It is suggested that I have to get up Linux box that will do the gateway job. Thing is, I want to use Mikrotik router that I already have in use, and which handles my network. I do not need another box just to play gateway. I do not understand why standard dynamic routing protocol is not used in first place, so we would not have this issue at all as all routers are capable of dynamic routing?!?! I noticed that there is a script made by Marius, YO2LOJ, that reads encap file and then sets Mikrotik up to it. But, to run that script I again need Linux box. I noticed there are other scripts that do the same for other kind of routers. I guess there are number of fellow hams that would like to use already set router and not additional Linux box. Why then such scripts are not run at portal.ampr.org so we can, besides encap file, download prepared files for popular routers, so we do not need to make conversions for ourselves? If such download is provided, I would be able make Mikrotik itself to download file and run it to set routes. I would not need additional Linux box to do that. That would make whole process simpler, easier to implement and even cheaper (in manner not just money, but efforts, physical space, maintenance...) and that could motivate more people to get involved. If resources on portal.ampr.org are limited, mirror copies of those files could be easily established to prevent problems. YT9TP Pedja

10 13

Re: [44net] Distributed BGP Announce
by Bryan Fields 26 Jul '13

26 Jul '13

On 7/25/13 1:40 PM, Marc, LX1DUC wrote: > However I'm not sure I'm able to provide an IS-IS capable router for > the trial... A Juniper O-series might work ;) I think the 2811s from cisco are cheap enough now (under 400 on ebay). The issue with cisco is you need some one to get the code for you now that they've locked down the CCO site. I'd love to use ALU gear, but it's just to expensive on the used market. But this is all just discussion on how we wan to do it at this point. We'll need some detailed proposals and come to a conciseness on it. -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

3 6

Newbie issue
by lleachii＠aol.com 26 Jul '13

26 Jul '13

Marc, LX1DUC, Per Brian in a Jan 22 note: 44.0.0.1 responds to pings received from the Internet. It does not respond to pings coming into it over an encap connection to it, for some reason that I've not been able to figure out. I believe it to be a difficulty in getting it to recognize decapped pings. If you are receiving the rip44 announcements, you have properly configured your tunnel to receive IP-in-IP encapsulation from 44.0.0.1. Feel free to use: http://44.60.44.10/tools or http://kb3vwg-010.ampr.org/tools I see your encap as: 44.161.202.0 via 46.29.183.253 dev tunl0 onlink window 840 44.161.203.0 via 46.29.183.253 dev tunl0 onlink window 840 44.161.229.0 via 46.29.183.253 dev tunl0 onlink window 840 Also, I am unable to ping 44.161.229.126. What script/configuration did you use to enable your tunnel; did you specify a local or remote IP (un-needed)? Feel free to look at my script at http://44.60.44.13/startampr 73, Lynwood KB3VWG

15 65

TAPR/ARRL DCC 2013
by Brian Kantor 26 Jul '13

26 Jul '13

Any of you folks planning on attending the TAPR/ARRL Digital Communications Conference in Seattle this September? <http://www.tapr.org/dcc/> I hope to be there. - Brian

4 3

Services That Can Run on 1K2/9K6 RF
by n2nov＠n2nov.ampr.org 25 Jul '13

25 Jul '13

I have been following the conversation on what can we use the modern version of the 44net for other than a futile attempt to compete with cable modems, 4G/LTE or fiber-optic links. The purpose of the 44net/JNOS project that we are putting together for NYC-ARECS is for providing email/telnet services for a served client in case their connection goes down or does not exist in an ad-hoc location. I am wondering if we can expand on the usual email and telnet sessions at 1k2 or even 9k6 to include things like routing our own VoIP/Echolink-type connections? The Echolink manual states that it needs 24K+ data speeds to connect to it's servers and maintain a voice connection. I know that there are other codecs that can work at lower speeds as well as ongoing work with FreeDV operating in 1.5 Khz on 20 meters! Ideas anyone?

1 0

Re: [44net] On The Air
by Bryan Fields 25 Jul '13

25 Jul '13

On 7/25/13 9:27 AM, Brian Rogers wrote: > That's why I completed the work started by Hessu and Marius in regards > to axMail-Fax... however there's already a system out there called > Winlink 2000 that uses HF, FM, and Internet to handle email. When I > query those who run it I get almost always these 3 identical comments: > > 1) It's windows, there's no learning curve of nos or linux involved. > 2) I can use the resources I have already without any _additional > expenses_. > 3) I don't have time to learn amprnet. > > ... then there was the issue raised about 3-party relaying, so now we > have governmental restrictions shying us away from certain applications. > > How we route is all well and good, but if you're not: > - providing useful services, some of which may be unique > - have a user base to use this network > - cost effectiveness (especially to the seniors who may be on fixed > incomes) I have no interest in limiting myself to what some old ignorant hams can understand. This is one of the reasons I got out of radio for a number of years, as it was not new or challenging due to these guys. I want to sit down an study if I don't understand it, not gripe about it (and my angina) on FM. We really have two discussions here. One is global BGP peering and a 44-net back bone, the other is the end user connecting over tunnels or dedicated links to the backbone. The backbone should be based on standard routing protocols and be vendor agnostic (ie ALU/CSCO/JNPR), as I could see having a router and peering link donated, but if we need to rack a linux box, we'll have an issue. The individual backbone POP's can interconnect with the end users over any method they want. (I'd say we need to support IPIP or GRE tunnels as standard at any POP) For an end user wanting a /29 or /31 they would pick a "local" AMPR POP, and link in with them. Thoughts? -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

3 2

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net