44net

44net@mailman.ampr.org

3196 discussions

Re: [44net] Message for Chris, G1FEF about 44.135.92.8/29
by Bob Tenty 24 Feb '20

24 Feb '20

I replied to you from my gmail address Bob On 2020-02-24 17:27, G1FEF via 44Net wrote: Bob, nothing received from you. I have sent you an email, please reply to if or let me know here if you don't receive it. Regards, Chris

1 0

Re: [44net] Message for Chris, G1FEF about 44.135.92.8/29
by Bob Tenty 24 Feb '20

24 Feb '20

Chris, I wrote you an email from my address as listed in the portal. Hopefully you received it this time. Bob On 2020-02-24 07:24, G1FEF via 44Net wrote: Hi Bob, On 24 Feb 2020, at 12:14, Bob Tenty via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: Chris, Sorry to write you in this way but I tried to reach you since the end of October of last year with emails without any reply. Also an email from the portal itself received no reply Please email me here: chris(a)g1fef.co.uk that should reach me. Thanks, Chris

2 1

Message for Chris, G1FEF about 44.135.92.8/29
by Bob Tenty 24 Feb '20

24 Feb '20

Chris, Sorry to write you in this way but I tried to reach you since the end of October of last year with emails without any reply. Also an email from the portal itself received no reply I need the follow change. I route and have an entry for the subnet 44.135.92.0/24 Ron, VE3CGR wants to route the 44.135.92.8/29 part himself. He is registered in the portal. Can you add 44.135.92.8/29 to this entry? Please leave the rest of my 44.135.92.0/24 subnet intact. Many thanks, Bob (Boudewijn) VE3TOK -- There is nothing permanent except change Heraclitus

2 1

Seeking BGP Guru
by William Lewis 24 Feb '20

24 Feb '20

Good evening. I am looking for someone who would be an expert in BGP and using Comcast for the transport. Please contact me off list. I have some questions I'm looking to get answered. Thank you, William Lewis / KG6BAJ wlewis(a)myhostingsource.com * ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * This message is for the designated recipient only and MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of this E-mail is prohibited. Wm Lewis

7 6

ARDC response re BGP portal management
by John Gilmore 23 Feb '20

23 Feb '20

Quan Zhou via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: > Hi all, > Sorry to bother you with a rant, but I'm feeling an urge to ask that what's happening on the AMPR/ARDC. Thank you for your rant. > ## Background > A few weeks ago I have received a harsh email from Chris G1FEF accusing me for announcing a prefix was assigned to me. In that case, the claimed reason is that the prefix wasn't listed on the AMPR portal. > I tried to clear things up by sending him the LOA from WB6CYT, which he claims that is NOT legitimate, also denied possibility there could a bug in the portal caused this. I have also complied with his demands on even more information including all conversations between me and Brian regarding that the assignment. Eventually he continued to ask for even more personal information without justification, threatening that not complying may cause "close of account". > ## Questions > 1. Has all previous assignment by WB6CYT been overruled? Or am I singled out? Previous assignments by Brian (WB6CYT) have not generally been overruled. Brian took very seriously his duty to both make space available to real amateur radio operations and to deny space to opportunists trying to poach the space for commercial, personal, spam/malware or other purposes. Many people requested assignments, and most of them received assignments. Those assignments are and were recorded in the ARDC portal, which was initially programmed by Chris (G1FEF), and operated and evolved by both Brian and Chris. The data in it was supplied by Brian, by net44 users who register to receive allocations, and by the volunteer regional coordinators who make allocations. Any collection of detailed allocations too complicated to fit in one person's memory or on the back of an envelope needs a definitive register that provides the collective memory of all the past decisions. The portal was and remains that definitive register. If your allocation is not in that register, then we'd need to figure out why it isn't. The ARDC Board has access to some of Brian's stored email, as well as backup dumps of the Portal databases, so we can do some searching among those if needed. So far, your rant did not mention the particular IP address allocations involved, so we have had little information to start from. Most allocations are made via country-based and region-based volunteer coordinators, who all have portal accounts with permission to make sub-allocations in their region; Brian did not have to adjudicate most of these. Apparently your allocation is from the China subnet, and apparently Brian was still handling those allocations. My guess is that he did not have a volunteer coordinator for China who both had sufficient experience and that Brian trusted to do the job well. > 2. What are the current rules on allocation now? A snapshot of the latest version of ToS is at: https://web.archive.org/web/20190731094938/https://www.ampr.org/terms-of-se… -- It does not requires personal information beyond ASN addresses. The current rules on allocation have not changed. However, Brian is no longer with us to make decisions based on years of expertise. So anyone who would take over that job will make a number of mistakes as they gain similar expertise. Some of those mistakes will be in allocating addresses to requesters who don't deserve them. Some of the mistakes will be in denying addresses to requesters who do deserve them, or in demanding more scrutiny than is warranted when requests are made. An allocation of 768 IP addresses, such as yours, which has considerable monetary value if used commercially, will naturally get more scrutiny than a typical request for a /29 that only has 8 addresses and can't be routed via BGP. The Chinese agency that licenses amateur radio operators, the State Radio Regulation of China (http://www.srrc.org.cn) does not appear to provide an English-language portal for looking up amateur radio licenses. This currently makes it a more manual process to verify the license status of Chinese hams. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio_licensing_in_China (I hope some 44net users from Asia will improve that Wikipedia page, which is still mostly a stub page.) > 3. What is G1FEF's role in the allocation, which are the rights that ARDC holds has been delegated to this guy along. G1FEF has been informally trying to continue providing service to amateurs while the ARDC board and other volunteers scramble to pick up the work that Brian was doing during his lifetime. ARDC and G1FEF have been negotiating a contract that would specify just what rights and powers ARDC would delegate to G1FEF, and which ARDC would retain for exercise by its board (and eventually by a hired staff, which we have been trying to hire the first person of). The first draft contract was full of legalese that one side or the other didn't like, and it also raised some more complex issues such as international privacy practices, so we are re-drafting, consulting lawyers, and continuing to negotiate. > 4. The holding-the-ID-in-a-photo-of-you practice is pretty common when dealing with financial institutions and websites frequently deals with fraudsters. Since LIR, RIR, and BGP upstream also requires and validates these ID, Why this is necessary to do it again? People who get legacy 44.x.y.z IP addresses from 44net don't have to get addresses from an LIR or RIR, so LIR/RIR practices don't provide any safeguard for 44net addresses. Our previous policy, created and enforced by Brian, was not to demand such identity documents of everyone. But Brian did reserve the right to ask more questions and collect more information when he encountered a situation that he thought was questionable, and to use his own judgment in deciding whether to make an allocation. And he sometimes consulted with the board about how to resolve such situations. > 5. Is Chris Smith, G1FEF capable of handling sensitive personal data? He's handling data as natural person, or an legal entity that ARDC approves? At the moment, as a natural person; he's a volunteer. One of the issues being negotiated in the draft contract, and with lawyers, is to what extent ARDC will collect sensitive personal data, how it would safeguard that data that it does collect, and to what extent ARDC will be subject to privacy controls such as the European GDPR. These issues have been handled informally up to the time that Brian died. The current situation is that when Chris requests identification photos or documents, he examines them and then deletes them after approval. > 6. If there's another change, do anyone with a allocation has to go through the same process again? Since we haven't defined any changes yet, we also haven't decided that issue. > I see that we already have a problem with transparency, now we got bureaucracy? Also it's not my problem that the assignment wasn't added to the portal. It is fortunate that small, informal organizations still have room to operate in today's world, and can provide positive benefits to society. ARDC under Brian's leadership was such an organization; the board helped him around the edges, but he was our leader, and he also did most of the work. Now we have no leader experienced in exactly what Brian did. As organizations grow and become more formal, the world expects a degree of impartiality, predictability, and adherence to rules that reduces the flexibility of the informal processes. Quan, you are simultaneously asking that you be given the benefit of an informal process that provided you with the allocation you claim, and yet also asking that we provide predictable rules and adhere to them, rather than continuing informally. There is clearly a tension between these extremes. The ARDC board (all volunteers) and the technical volunteers such as Chris and the regional coordinators are trying to chart a middle course. Thank you for your help in pointing out some of the implications of the choices we are trying to make. It DOES seem to be your problem that the assignment wasn't added to the portal. If your assignment was in the portal, then your allocation would not be getting the scrutiny it is currently getting. As the wiki says in the "Requesting a block" page: https://wiki.ampr.org/wiki/Requesting_a_block "You must request an amprnet block direct from the Portal. First you must create your account at the Portal. Once you do, you must login..." https://wiki.ampr.org/wiki/Announcing_your_allocation_directly "Apply for your AMPRNet allocation via the Portal. Check the Direct box to indicate that your connection will be using a direct announcement of the subnet (via the BGP protocol). "Upon verification and approval, the AMPRNet administrator will provide authorization to your ISP allowing them to announce your allocation." If only one of your three /24 allocations is in the portal, then how did Brian, the very meticulous AMPRNet administrator end up providing you with a Letter of Authorization for the others? > Best Regards, > Quan Best regards back to you, John Gilmore, W0GNU ARDC board member

5 6

Re: [44net] GL.iNet openWRT Rip44 support?
by lleachii＠aol.com 23 Feb '20

23 Feb '20

Tracy N4LGH, I drafted the OpenWrt Wiki with the help of others on the mailing list. The instructions in the Wiki definitely work - I've been running an AMPRNet node on OpenWrt for approximately seven years. I have ampr-ripd compiled for most of my routers. I'm not sure how I missed your previous requests for assistance; but I'm willing to help setup an official OpenWrt firmware installation. 73, - LynwoodKB3VWG

1 0

BGP portal management after WB6CYT's passing
by Phil Karn 22 Feb '20

22 Feb '20

Hi. As you all know, Brian Kantor WB6CYT passed away suddenly last month. Brian did so much for AMPRNet from the very beginning that he'll be impossible to fully replace. We're trying but it's hard, especially since he was a close personal friend. Chris Smith, G1FEF (chris(a)g1fef.co.uk) has kindly volunteered to take over Brian's portal work and to handle portal and BGP allocation requests. Please direct queries to him. 73, Phil Karn, KA9Q President, ARDC

14 22

Manual BGP validation
by Corey Dean 22 Feb '20

22 Feb '20

I switched over to vultr a few weeks ago. To get my BGP announced there, they needed to do the manual verification. After 1 week of no response by the ampr.org team I have had to start with a new ticket and the manual process again. Is there more than one person than can validate the manual BGP verification process? Corey N3FE

2 1

Re: [44net] A few more questions Re: BGP portal management after WB6CYT's passing
by Rob Janssen 21 Feb '20

21 Feb '20

> I know this process can be invasive but you would be surprised how many bogus requests I've received over the years. I have to assume this is because of the scarcity of IPv4 addresses I agree with that! I also get requests from people who just want to use it for internet hosting unrelated to amateur radio, and without mentioning a valid callsign at all. Of course Quan also does not mention his callsign in his mailinglist message. A lookup on QRZ.COM indicates he likely has a BG3 callsign, but for me it would be suspicious when I receive a communication like that because any radio amateur knows that it is customary to use a callsign rather than only first and last name when communicating between radio amateurs. Just last week I got (as the coordinator for Netherlands) a request from someone likely living in Denmark (a nearby country) with just a fake word in the callsign field. Maybe he got turned away by the Danish coordinator and tried with me, maybe he wasn't even aware of the subnetting by country, I don't know. But we really need to watch out for people trying to masquerade as a radio amateur and trying to obtain IP space for free. Of course it doesn't help that the portal does not convey that information. It is likely that googling for services offering IP space somehow refers those people directly to the portal or to a subpage of the wiki, they read some paragraphs about obtaining IP space and never see what is the target audience for this system. That is mentioned only in some toplevel pages, not in the actual procedures for obtaining addresses. Someone from outside our community may not know what "callsign" means and just enter a netname as they would use in whois. So there is room for improvement there. About the ID and personal info requirement, I certainly have not been asked for an ID photo and it would be a problem to have such things on file indeed. But having some personal contact info (like name, callsign, e-mail and street address) should be fine as it is required to contact the registrant in case of problems. Rob PE1CHL

2 1

Re: [44net] Need TraceRoute from UCSD router
by R P 29 Jan '20

29 Jan '20

Thank U i have finally found the problem it was a wrong IP in the tunnel chain it consisted of few routers in series Thank You all for all your help Now additional question : who deal with entering/Changing records in the ampr.org DNS ? I need to update few records in my Network Thanks Forward Ronen - 4Z4ZQ ________________________________ From: John Gilmore <gnu(a)toad.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 12:35 AM To: R P <ronenp(a)hotmail.com>; gnu(a)toad.com <gnu(a)toad.com> Subject: Re: [44net] Need TraceRoute from UCSD router R P via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: > Steve > May you be kind and make a traceroute from UCSD Router to the Commercial IP of this gateway to see the nodes it passes throug ? I'm not Steve, but here is a traceroute from the UCSD Router to some IP address that was mentioned in the message (you were not specific about what IP address you wanted a trace to, so I just had to guess. Be specific if you are asking people to do some service for you!) John traceroute to 31.44.137.3 (31.44.137.3), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 169.228.34.82 (169.228.34.82) 0.607 ms 0.539 ms 0.606 ms 2 nodem-core-6807-vlan2995-gw.ucsd.edu (132.239.255.49) 0.215 ms 0.245 ms 0.209 ms 3 mx0--nodem-core-30ge.ucsd.edu (132.239.254.162) 0.261 ms 0.227 ms 0.216 ms 4 mx1--mx0-p2p.ucsd.edu (132.239.254.149) 0.566 ms 0.287 ms 0.265 ms 5 riv-agg4--ucsd-2.cenic.net (137.164.23.57) 3.240 ms 3.206 ms 3.152 ms 6 dc-lax-agg6--riv-agg8-100ge-2.cenic.net (137.164.22.46) 5.016 ms dc-lax-agg6--riv-agg8-100ge.cenic.net (137.164.11.2) 5.173 ms 5.120 ms 7 8-1-1-90.ear1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.35.156.65) 4.925 ms 4.916 ms 4.920 ms 8 ae-1-3111.edge4.London1.Level3.net (4.69.141.230) 135.741 ms 135.784 ms 135.748 ms 9 195.122.180.186 (195.122.180.186) 209.543 ms 209.932 ms 209.580 ms 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * *

3 3

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

44net