44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

4 participants
3196 discussions

PGP Signature (and text) stripped?
by Chris Maness 15 Dec '20

15 Dec '20

For some reason my whole email content was stripped out. I am guessing some issue with PGP signed mime content. Ouchie -Chris KQ6UP

4 5

ampr-rip2d on Raspberry Pi?
by Chris Maness 15 Dec '20

15 Dec '20

I was able to compile the above daemon on my Pi 4. My Pi is exposed to the wild with a static IP. When I run the daemon with the -dg option (to hang in the foreground) , it does not exit or crash. But I get no notices of traffic or nothing happens in the system's routing tables. Is a password needed? I do see a flag for that, but the website for the daemon has it showing output even without a password. Any help would be greatly appreciated. -73 de Chris KQ6UP SK..

1 0

ampr-rip2d on Raspberry Pi?
by chris＠chrismaness.com 15 Dec '20

15 Dec '20

1 0

Re: [44net] 44NET Route Objects IRR
by James Colderwood 14 Dec '20

14 Dec '20

Hi Pierre, Thank you for the heads up. I was aware of altdb but it hadn't crossed my mind. Hopefully one of these solutions will work :-). On 2020-12-13 17:32, Pierre Emeriaud wrote: > Le dim. 13 déc. 2020 à 12:04, G1FEF via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> > a écrit : >> >> > On 13 Dec 2020, at 09:54, James Colderwood via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: >> > >> > Hi All, >> > >> > May I wish you all happy holidays! >> > >> > Quick question, I'm working on establising my 3rd upstream but hit a snag. The suppliers validation automation prohibits announcing AMPR addresses as the system can't qualify validity. >> >> Are you talking about automatically checking entries in an IRR, or >> RPKI? > > For service providers requesting an IRR route object to automate > filter creation I've been using altdb. While it has not a lot of value > in terms of authorization (anyone can create objects about any > resource - a proper LOA has more value here) it is usually enough for > provisioning tools to create appropriate filters / prefix-lists: > > $ whois -h whois.altdb.net 44.151.210.0 > route: 44.151.210.0/24 > descr: F4INU > origin: AS206155 > mnt-by: MAINT-AS206155 > > $ bgpq3 -4 -l F4INU as206155 > no ip prefix-list F4INU > ip prefix-list F4INU permit 44.151.210.0/24 > > > 73 de F4INU > -- > pierre -- Kind Regards James B Colderwood M0ZAH

3 2

44NET Route Objects IRR
by James Colderwood 13 Dec '20

13 Dec '20

Hi All, May I wish you all happy holidays! Quick question, I'm working on establising my 3rd upstream but hit a snag. The suppliers validation automation prohibits announcing AMPR addresses as the system can't qualify validity. This isn't a deal breaker for me as they can announce my PA/PI IPv6 space. My question is, what are the future plans as many operators are going this route? -- Kind Regards James B Colderwood M0ZAH

4 5

WWconvers Chat Clients
by n2nov＠n2nov.ampr.org 13 Dec '20

13 Dec '20

I am looking to put together a list of what can be used as a client interface for the WWconvers servers like Hub_NA, Hub_EU, etc. So far I have: WinConvers (circa 2000) [WINDOWS] http://www.nyc-arecs.org/WinConvers.zip xConvers-0.8.3-26 (updated 2020) [LINUX Fedora/RedHat] https://fedora.pkgs.org/rawhide/fedora-aarch64/xconvers-0.8.3-26.fc33.aarch… COLRCONV-0.99.3-4 [LINUX Debian/Ubuntu/Raspbian] https://packages.debian.org/jessie/colrconv HexChat 2.14.3 [WINDOWS] http://hexchat.github.io Pidgin 2.13.0 [WINDOWS] http://pidgin.im/ WebConvers [ANY O/S AND ANY BROWSER] http://www.n2nov.net/webconvers/frame.php?jsflag=yes KiwiIRC Web Client [ANY O/S AND ANY BROWSER] https://kiwiirc.com/ Mozilla Thunderbird email software built-in chat tab -- 73 de N2NOV

5 4

Can't reach raqi.ca
by Jean-Pierre Desilets 07 Dec '20

07 Dec '20

Hi group We are many ham in the 44.135.0.0 (Canada) who can't reach raqi.ca (radio amateur du Quebec ) using ipip to the ucsd gateway . the reverse way won't work ether . Elsewhere is fine . Can you ping or traceroute to raqi.ca from your 44 address ? Let me know . Need help to solve this issue. The traceroute raqi.ca to ve2se.ampr.org : $ traceroute ve2se.ampr.org traceroute to ve2se.ampr.org (44.135.198.1), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 66.159.41.1 (66.159.41.1) 0.195 ms 0.262 ms 0.294 ms 2 mtl.core-a3.cronomagic.com (66.159.42.25) 1.050 ms 1.133 ms 1.157 ms 3 161-81-55-206.static.cogecodata.net (206.55.81.161) 2.051 ms 2.090 ms 2.340 ms 4 199-167-152-144.beanfield.net (199.167.152.144) 2.507 ms 2.519 ms 2.521 ms 5 hu0-0-1-0.pe04.1250RenelevesqueBl01.YUL.beanfield.com (199.167.152.63) 2.636 ms 2.647 ms 2.709 ms 6 hu0-0-1-0.pe05.1250RenelevesqueBl01.YUL.beanfield.com (199.167.152.65) 2.376 ms 2.976 ms 2.836 ms 7 et52-1.lsr01.1250ReneLevesqueBl01.YUL.beanfield.com (199.167.152.67) 2.269 ms 2.347 ms 2.392 ms 8 lo0-1.bdr01.1250ReneLevesqueBl01.YUL.beanfield.com (72.15.48.50) 2.655 ms 2.775 ms 2.777 ms 9 et-1-0-29.edge2.NewYork6.Level3.net (4.30.176.121) 11.466 ms 11.516 ms 11.496 ms 10 * * * 11 CENIC.ear1.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.15.122.46) 77.857 ms 77.901 ms 76.474 ms 12 dc-svl-agg8--svl-agg10-300g.cenic.net (137.164.11.81) 75.180 ms 75.216 ms 75.823 ms 13 dc-lax-agg8--svl-agg8--100ge--2.cenic.net (137.164.11.20) 76.697 ms lax-agg8--svl-agg8-100g-3.cenic.net (137.164.11.66) 76.713 ms dc-lax-agg8--svl-agg8-100ge-1.cenic.net (137.164.11.0) 77.384 ms 14 * * * 15 dc-sdg-agg4--tus-agg8-300g.cenic.net (137.164.11.85) 77.520 ms 77.092 ms 76.981 ms 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * 73's de Jean-Pierre ve2se

8 11

Re: [44net] GRE tunnels
by Rob Janssen 05 Dec '20

05 Dec '20

>GRE works just fine depending on your system. We've never had any problems with GRE except using Mikrotik devices. There is a bug in the GRE implementation on MikroTiks where you will experience a 20-30% packet loss when the system is under any non-trivial use (e.g. multiple audio streams or a file transfer). Several versions of the OS and several different hardware platforms all experienced the same issue. We changed to IPIP and IPIP6 and the issue disappeared with no other reconfiguration. We're using a mix of IPIP, IPIP6, and GRE6 tunnels to a number of sites fed out of our VPS gateway. I cannot confirm that at all. We use GRE tunnels inside our network to connect isolated areas back to our gateway over internet tunnels, and it works very well. The gateway router is a MikroTik CCR1009 and most users use MikroTik RB750Gr3 or comparable routers. No packet loss issues at all. There are of course a couple of things you need to watch for: - the "keepalive" mechanism is a defacto-standard thingy that is not working in standard Linux systems so it has to be kept disabled when the other side is not a MikroTik or maybe Cisco or comparable router - as for any tunnel, the MTU is always lower than 1500 and you cannot send fullsize packets through it without fragmentation. it is best to install a TCP MSS clamping rule to limit the MTU of most traffic - there is a bug in the firewall of more recent RouterOS versions which causes GRE traffic not to be matched by Established/Related firewall rules, and be stamped as Invalid. So when you have the default ruleset of "accept Established/Related, drop Invalid, then accept certain incoming traffic" you need to insert a rule that accepts GRE traffic from your peers BEFORE the "drop Invalid" rule. Of course you can always use IPIP instead. I have chosen GRE in the hope that it is more widely available on other makes of routers, and also it can transport IPv6 in the future. But as GRE usually requires fixed public addresses on each end of the tunnel and also is often a bit troublesome to pass through NAT routers, we also offer the additional option of L2TP/IPsec tunnels, which can be setup from a dynamic address and have no issues with NAT on the client side. (the gateway router itself of course is directly on a fixed address) Rob

4 3

GRE tunnels
by pete M 05 Dec '20

05 Dec '20

Hi everyone, Anyone been playing with GRE tunneling? I am looking at that solution to bring part of my /24 to sites where I have multiple machine that each need a 44 address. GRE have no encryption, it is only an encapsulation of a Layer 2 packet. This lower the actual possible MTU size lowering the throughput slightly. But it is an easy way to connect a site to the VPS. At the same time, we dont need encryption as all the data that are passing into that tunnel is supposed to be ok to route on the internet. and if they contain special thing they should already be encrypted with tls/ssl or other mean of securing the connection. Anyone have experience with this? I would then use openvpn is its normal way for simple client. Then I imagine I will need to bridge both tunnel so that every one could talk to each other at the VPS level. Sounds plausible? Pierre VE2PF

6 16

Re: [44net] OT: Any OpenVPN Guru here?
by lleachii＠aol.com 01 Dec '20

01 Dec '20

Pierre, I'd personally suggest OpenVPN Access Server. There's a straightforward web GUI to setup everything. I think DHCP/Layer 2 requires Windows clients. https://openvpn.net/download-open-vpn/ 73, - Lynwood KB3VWG

3 3

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net