He did hint at it the other day. But I guess the cat's out of the bag now.
Adam (and others),
Please don't advertise 44.192.0.0/10. To do so would cause some
fairly significant problems. I am preparing a document to explain
what's up with this and hope to have it ready in a week or so.
I ask your patience.
- BrianRon W6RZ
On 7/18/19 19:38, Alistair Mackenzie via 44Net wrote:
> _________________________________________
> 44Net mailing list
> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
Since about noon today (7/18), reverse DNS lookups of 44/8 from the outside
world have returned NXDOMAIN. Forward DNS works fine.
This is occurring from multiple sites, with multiple service providers.
Michael
N6MEF
Hi everyone, I'm trying to migrate the gateway from linux to mikrotik.
Given that on Linux the network traffic 44 takes place regularly, I am
instead experiencing a great difficulty in configuring the rb 951 n2
following the directions of the wiki.ampr. There is someone on the list who
has set up a rb mikrotik as described by the wiki and works regularly. I
state that the ipip interface goes in regular running, the setups checked
several times seem made for as requested. Someone can give me some info
about it. Greetings Francesco IW8PGT
http://sp.ampr.orghttp://search.sp.ampr.org
czw., 18 lip 2019 o 08:23 Frederic Zulian via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
napisał(a):
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Frederic Zulian <fzulian(a)gmail.com>
> To: 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 08:22:41 +0200
> Subject: Hamnet Web Page List
> Hello,
>
> When I'm connected to the Hamnet network how can I know the IP addresses of
> existing web pages.
>
> Is there a list or search engine?
>
> 73
> --
> Frédéric ZULIAN
>
--
Pozdrawiam Andrzej (www).
Hello,
When I'm connected to the Hamnet network how can I know the IP addresses of
existing web pages.
Is there a list or search engine?
73
--
Frédéric ZULIAN
On 7/16/19 11:28 AM, Holger Baust via 44Net wrote:
> Hi.
>
> My company plans to use DC/OS from Mesosphere and DC/OS is using
> 44.128.0.0/20 per default for overlay networking.
> This seems to have no impact since this overlay nets are only used in
> DC/OS clusters and not routed to the Internet, but might lead to
> problems in some cases...
>
> Their documentation with this informations can be found at:
> https://docs.mesosphere.com/1.10/networking/virtual-networks/ip-per-contain…
You're posting using quoted printable, don't do that. I've fixed your link.
> Is this already known?
News to me, and a really poor idea. There's other networks which could be used
for this, without stepping on allocated space. 44.128.0.0/20 isn't used now,
but neither was 1/8 or 5/8. I kinda want to announce 44.128.0.0/20 just to
mess with them, might freak out if there's a route to that :)
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
http://bryanfields.net
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 08:28:49AM -0700, Holger Baust via 44Net wrote:
> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:28:49 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Holger Baust <holger(a)dm6hb.de>
> To: 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
> Subject: Questions regarding usage off 44/8 parts outside of ampr.org
>
> Hi.
>
> My company plans to use DC/OS from Mesosphere and DC/OS is using
> 44.128.0.0/20 per default for overlay networking.
> This seems to have no impact since this overlay nets are only used in
> DC/OS clusters and not routed to the Internet, but might lead to
> problems in some cases...
>
> Their documentation with this informations can be found at:
> https://docs.mesosphere.com/1.10/networking/virtual-networks/ip-per-conta=
> iner/
>
> Is this already known?
>
> 73,
> Holger
While I was unaware of DC/OS specifically using this subnet, I do
know that for many years software from various companies have used
parts of network 44 for "internal-only" networking. In particular,
an obsolete document, which is still available via Google searching
refers to 44.128.0.0/16 in terms which seem to have lead these firms
to believe that it is another RFC1918-style "private network" and
they may use it in that way.
Most of these firms seem to be ignorant of the various RFC1918
networks that are intended for this use. Many of them should be
using the link-local addresses of 169.254.0.0/16, but apparently
don't know about them.
When contacted by me about the misuse of network 44, some are
cooperative and some pull up the obsolete document as justification,
while a small number take up a combative stance and tell me to
contact their lawyers.
Just to make it specific: 44.128.0.0/16 is a subnet currently
reserved for testing in the amprnet. It should not be used outside
Amateur Radio.
- Brian Kantor
Network 44 Manager
On Fri, 2019-07-12 at 14:15 +0000, Ryan O'Connor via 44Net wrote:
>
> Has anyone successfully used AMPRNet with an untangle firewall/router
> device? I’m trying to ditch the Cisco 2850 for something quieter.
>
> Ryan
I don't want to 'jack this thread, but it might be helpful to hear from
others using /any/ of the open source fw/routers available, in particular
anything *BSD-based (I was told a long time ago that "friends don't let
friends run Linux as a firewall).
OSS Platforms that come to mind are pfSense, Untangle, OPNsense, m0n0wall,
smoothwall, etc.
--
Jeff KC9WSJ <jeff(a)kc9wsj.us>
