44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3194 discussions

rip updates?
by JJ 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

howdy gang....wondering how to get rip updates coming to my gateway? Just registered it 3 days ago on the gateway robot and waited...router is set to pass port 520 to jnos both ways, but not seeing anything being sent? monitored the router, linux, and jnos for anything on port 520udp/tcp...nothing (yet?) perhaps I need to wait longer...not dead in the water anyhow, kind help from a few admins (you know who you are, hi!) allowed me to at least ftp the recent encap file..... I'm all set up to grab ripv2 .. Cheers, John

1 1

Re: [44net] jnos and ubuntu 12.04
by Russ WL7LP 22 Jul '12

22 Jul '12

ok I got the tun0 working in Ubuntu 12.04 gui version and also the tun0 is working in jnos as well. only problem I am having is getting out to the rest of the world and I believe it's just a router problem not having the new addresses for the new machine. haven't tested the radio's part yet to see if there slow. but at least the tun0 is up 73 Russ WL7LP ________________________________ From: Ted Gervais <ve1drg(a)gmail.com> To: Russ WL7LP <wl7lp(a)yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:10 AM Subject: Re: [44net] jnos and ubuntu 12.04 Yes Russ. The server version works great especially where it doesn't need as much memory/resources etc.. That is why I went to that version. I have a very old computer here with limited memory so the server version fit the bill. On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Russ WL7LP <wl7lp(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Hi Ted. > > >Thanks Ted. that's good to know it works fine with the server version. I am running the GUI version. >though I may switch to the server version if can't get it working with the gui version. > > >73 Russ WL7LP > > >________________________________ > From: Ted Gervais <ve1drg(a)gmail.com> >To: Russ WL7LP <wl7lp(a)yahoo.com>; AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> >Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 9:32 AM >Subject: Re: [44net] jnos and ubuntu 12.04 > > > >Hi Russ. > >I run the latest Jnos on Ubunty 12.04LTS (server edition). >It works fine. No problems that I know of, in particular the tun0 feature. >That works without a problem. > > > >On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Russ WL7LP <wl7lp(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) >>_______________________________________________ >> >>I been trying to get jnos and ubuntu 12.04 LTS to work for a week now and no joy at it. >>tun0 will not loaded from jnos at all. only way I found it does is to start jnos as sudo >> >> >>sudo ./jnos that loads the tun0 sometimes but then another stuff don't work and crashes >>shortly after. some say to get both to work you need to load the tun0 before jnos. >>never tried it yet but have a coupe of files createtun0.c that you compile into a binary and run it >> >>that will load the tun0 with what name you give it. going to try that. a friend of mine did it and seem >>to be working good for him. but if there is a solution to jnos and ubuntu 12.04 I should would love >>to hear about it. >> >> >>73 Russ WL7LP >> >> >>________________________________ >> From: Daniel Curry <daniel(a)danielcurry.net> >>To: 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu >>Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 7:51 AM >>Subject: [44net] jnos and ubuntu 12.04 >> >>(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) >>_______________________________________________ >> I am hearing from local hams that jnos and ubuntu 12.04 LTS are not >>compatible? >>Reasons: >> >>1) unable to telnet tun0 port to the jnos application from the linux host >>2) Something about module for tun not getting loaded >>3) Response time from the radio side is slow on connections. >> >> Can someone shed some light if there is a compatibility issue and what >>are the hoops that must be configured, if any? >> >> >>-- >>Daniel Curry >>PGP: AD5A 96DC 7556 A020 B8E7 0E4D 5D5E 9BA5 C83E 8C92 >> >>San Francisco/Silicon Valley AmprNet Co-coordinator [44.4.0.0/16] >> >> >> >>_________________________________________ >>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 >> > > >-- > >Ted Gervais (ve1drg) >1464 Luxury Ave >Windsor, Ont >N8P 0A9 >(519)956-9776 > > > -- Ted Gervais (ve1drg) 1464 Luxury Ave Windsor, Ont N8P 0A9 (519)956-9776

1 0

Using a cisco to do the tunnelling
by renzorossi＠libero.it 10 Jul '12

10 Jul '12

Ciao Sam in CisarNet (http://www.cisar.it/radiowiki/index.php?title=Italian_Cisar_Radio_Amateur_W…) we are already using with success a Cisco router to "Gateway" our wifi national network to amprnet 44.0/8, with a lot of tunnel interfaces configured by means of a visual basic script and batch commands running by a normal windows xp computer. This script is easily adaptable for your needings. Sorry for my delay in the answer, but I have some trouble in receiving correctly 44net mailing list. Please discard my message if this is not useful anymore, or feel free to contact me to share our scripts. Ciao from Italy. IW0SAB Renzo. [44net] Using a cisco to do the tunnelling Rob Janssen pe1chl at amsat.org Thu Jun 7 13:32:21 PDT 2012 Previous message: [44net] Using a cisco to do the tunnelling Next message: [44net] dd-wrt setup for amprnet Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] VK4FQ/VK4TTT Sam wrote: > Hey Guys > > We have a surplus of cisco routers with dsl wics due to an upgrade. > We have put DSL into a few of our repeater locations and want to put packet (before the 12/13 storm season) > I am looking for a config that will do the ip tunnel encap for 44 net. > > If you have done it please email me vk4fq at smellyblackdog.com.au with destructions please I have studied the matter in the past and I think it will be a bit difficult. Cisco support only a single source and destination address for an IPIP tunnel interface. In other systems (NOS, Linux) the idea usually is that you setup a single tunnel interface and have a routing table that tells the system where to send packets for a certain subnet. But in a Cisco I think you would need to configure a separate tunnel interface for each gateway station. The problem is that the station list is not static, so you need to write some script that generates IOS config commands to insert, delete and modify tunnel interfaces to track the changes in the encap.txt. There are multipoint tunnels in IOS, like DMVPN, but those protocols are not in use in the amateur IP net. (unfortunate, because it could automate the entire encap.txt hassle and solve all problems for people with dynamic addresses) Correct me if I am wrong... We have an unused 887 at work that I would probable be able to get donated for home use, but I have hesitated to take the plunge. Rob

1 0

Current Encap File
by VK4FQ/VK4TTT Sam 26 Jun '12

26 Jun '12

Guys Can someone please send me a current encap file please. If there is somneone lurking - please add me to the daily email list so I dont have to keep on asking Is there any desiginated address pool for ipv6 Sam

2 1

Subnetmask /15
by Jann Traschewski 21 Jun '12

21 Jun '12

Hi Brian, since the line for routed prefixes of a single gateway at Jim Fullers mailing robot is limited, I combined the prefix of austria (44.143/16) and switzerland (44.142/16) to 44.142/15. Even the german HAMNET has 44.224/15. Marius, YO2LOJ, just told me that he doesn't receive these prefixes from "amprgw" by RIP. I guess the amprgw-code doesn't allow prefixes wider than /16. Can you check the code and allow even /15 subnet masks? I have no idea how to overcome this line limit :( Currently DB0FHN is the central gateway "translating" from IPIP-networks to the HAMNET and vice versa: db0fhn:~# grep 141.75.245.225 /opt/encap/encap.txt route addprivate 44.130/16 encap 141.75.245.225 route addprivate 44.142/15 encap 141.75.245.225 route addprivate 44.151/16 encap 141.75.245.225 route addprivate 44.161/16 encap 141.75.245.225 route addprivate 44.224/15 encap 141.75.245.225 route addprivate 44.134.189/24 encap 141.75.245.225 route addprivate 44.134.190/23 encap 141.75.245.225 I know that there is even some other software (with filters limiting to /16) out there, but I hope most of them will accept /15. Thank you, 73, Jann DG8NGN DL-IP-coordination Btw: I'll attend the HAM RADIO exhibition in Friedrichshafen if anyone wants to have an eyeball QSO. -- Jann Traschewski, Georgenschwaigstr. 10, D-80807 Munich, Germany Tel.: +49-911-696971, Mobile: +49-170-1045937, E-Mail: jann(a)gmx.de Ham: DG8NGN / DB0VOX, http://www.qsl.net/dg8ngn

4 3

Active but quiet regions
by Jann Traschewski 19 Jun '12

19 Jun '12

Hi All, following the recent discussions on this list I like to remind that there are really active regions using net44. In preparation of the HAM RADIO in Friedrichshafen (www.hamradio-friedrichshafen.de/ham-en) I created an overview of such a region. Please find the "HAMNET Overview 2012" at http://db0fhn.efi.fh-nuernberg.de/doku.php?id=start&#hamnet --- As one of the IP-coordinators for this region I'm very happy to be able to use 44/8 for the allocations. Two reasons for that: * 44/8 will never clash with our radio amateurs private used RFC1918 addresses within 10/8, 172.16/12 or 192.168/16. They can fully integrate AMPR access into their LAN. * I can easily adjust my firewall rules to distinguish between radio amateurs (44/8) and the rest of the internet. Discussions about CIDR makes me nervous :D --- Currently I'm thinking about different tunnel mechanism for net44 and I don't know the answer :) On one hand we have our stable system to distribute information about IP-ENCAP (protocol #4) tunnels to net44-routes by E-Mail, FTP or RIP. Routing information will be updated through the robot once a day. --> no realtime On the other hand we have manual IP-ENCAP tunnels for our tunnels within the HAMNET (a part of the AMPRNet). We speak BGPv4 over these tunnels and get realtime routing information. --> no automatic tunnels I don't know what would be the best for tunneling. Isn't there a proper mesh protocol? I did have a look at OpenNHRP, but it will not fit our needs regarding a simple, automatic, realtime capable solution. --- I do like the posting from Hessu, OH7LZB, about the different technical solutions to do direct announcements on the Internet. Right questions to be answered... However at this stage I guess most AMPRNet-systems will not be able to directly communicate to net44-destinations with their own net44-ip-address. 73, Jann DG8NGN -- Jann Traschewski, Georgenschwaigstr. 10, D-80807 Munich, Germany Tel.: +49-911-696971, Mobile: +49-170-1045937, E-Mail: jann(a)gmx.de Ham: DG8NGN / DB0VOX, http://www.qsl.net/dg8ngn

1 0

Re: [44net] Use of the network
by Bjorn Pehrson 17 Jun '12

17 Jun '12

Even better to make it one dedicated asn. VK4FQ/VK4TTT Sam <vk4fq(a)smellyblackdog.com.au> skrev: >(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) >_______________________________________________ >Easy >Restrict it to ASN's that belong to Radio Groups / Clubs individuals >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Brian Kantor" <Brian(a)UCSD.Edu> >To: "AMPRNet working group" <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> >Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 11:39 PM >Subject: Re: [44net] Use of the network > > >> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) >> _______________________________________________ >> On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 07:53:10AM -0400, Ralph wrote: >>> If I am a Ham, and have the right to use the space, and it is provided to >>> me >>> over Non-Amateur-Radio means (i.e. Routed to me by my ISP over wireless, >>> fiber, tin cans and a string), then I feel that I can and will use it for >>> what I want. >> >> That is precisely why it is necessary to have contractual restrictions to >> keep the network limited to ham radio related activities. >> >> One proposal was that all endpoints must be ham stations or facilities >> primarily provided by and for hams. >> >> I rather like that; it's fairly non-restrictive and allows for just about >> any >> kind of transport or intermediate routing but should keep the netspace >> from >> being subverted to commercial interests. >> - Brian >> _________________________________________ >> 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

1 0

Re: [44net] 44Net Digest, Vol 1, Issue 49
by Max Lock 17 Jun '12

17 Jun '12

Hi Eric, I've done a lot of work making openwrt based hotspot networks in the past. ddwrt is useful, but there's a couple of issues that come to mind. Firstly with ddwrt using openvpn you'd have to make changes to mirrorshades to support openvpn and do you really need the overhead of encryption? Secondly with ddwrt the ability to tune to the ham band is only possible by using a paid for version that has 'superchannel' functionality. It should be fairly simple to create an openwrt image that sets up an unencrypted tunnel to mirrorshades, however I've never toyed with setting odd frequencies on them. Also given that you wouldn't have unused packages installed you could use the space to install something amateur radio related. Finally how would you stop non-ham access? -Max G7UOZ. On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 12:00 -0700, 44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu wrote: > Has anyone used ddwrt, especially the vpn version to setup a tunnel to ucsd > > then run rip to get routing announcements? just sounds like a neat low > > cost way to get a gateway running. This would be trivial if one could run > > openvpn to mirrorshades. > > > > Eric > > AF6EP

25 54

Quick Test Request
by John Ronan 10 Jun '12

10 Jun '12

Hi, I've got two machines running here on the, 44.155.6.225 and 44.155.6.226. I'd appreciate if someone on the 44-net could just check they can reach 44.155.2.226 for me please (it could be slow, machine is going an apt-get update at the moment). Also, would anyone be in a position to tell me what the best wireless mesh protocol to use is at the moment. These are two Icom ID-1 D-star radios. I've two more that two local hams are going to put running for me on high points and I'd like to run something 'mesh' on the nodes to allow me to get back to the gateway (225) from anywhere within range of any three? Regards John EI7IG

5 13

Re: [44net] 44Net Digest, Vol 1, Issue 51
by kb9mwr＠gmail.com 10 Jun '12

10 Jun '12

I am also interested in implementing some sort of openVPN tunnel with RIP listener on a OpenWRT platform. It's been ages since we had any wormhole connectivity here in Wisconsin (Wigate/KB9BYQ days). And back then it really wasn't implemented correctly in my opinion. As many know, a few of us here in Green Bay, Wisconsin have been experimenting with non-traditional alternatives to AX.25. More recently the 420 MHz 802.11 options. What I really am waiting for is someone to design some amplifiers for these things. We have been using 900 MHz 802.11 with a 5 MHz channel width for some point to multipoint links. In our mobile tests on 900 MHz, the throughput suffers with the multipath from being in motion, etc. So be aware of that, 56 k will quickly be come 10k or worse. At 5 watts on 900 MHz, we manage to pull off 5 mile non-line of site omni-to-omni links with strong signals. A configuration conducive to a Mesh Network. On 900 MHz noise is a problem though, which also results in reduced throughput. So I'd like to be doing 5 watts on 420 MHz. The RFM12BP looks like a way to pull of 19 to 24 kbps on 70cm cheap. Amplifiers for this should be much easier. Steve, KB9MWR > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:00:30 -0800 > From: Eric Fort <eric.fort(a)gmail.com> > To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > Subject: Re: [44net] (no subject) > > Why would I or anyone else for that matter use anything that slow over > wireless when multi megabit radios that will link reasonably long distances > can be had for $50-100ea. These radios connect via ethernet with no > special software. No I don't have any 56k radios on order, I don't see > them as worth the cost to salvage from the trash bin next door. > > Eric > AF6EP > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 12:26:04 -0700 > From: David Josephson WA6NMF <wa6nmf(a)josephson.com> > To: eric.fort(a)gmail.com, AMPRNet working group > <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu> > Subject: Re: [44net] (no subject) > > On 6/8/2012 12:00 PM, Eric Fort wrote: >> Why would I or anyone else for that matter use anything that slow over >> wireless when multi megabit radios that will link reasonably long >> distances can be had for $50-100ea. These radios connect via ethernet >> with no special software. No I don't have any 56k radios on order, I >> don't see them as worth the cost to salvage from the trash bin next door. > > Two reasons: long point-to-point hops and mobile. > > I can see a real utility for a 56k backbone with 100+ mile hops which > can easily be done on 420 with fewer complications (except in PAVE PAWS > areas) than on the higher bands. Likewise, mobile service with omni > antennas is practical over 20+ miles on 420. > > David WA6NMF

3 2

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net