> On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, David Ranch wrote:
> >/(6) A RTTY, data or multiplexed emission using a specified digital code /> >/listed in ?97.309(a) of this part may be transmitted. The symbol rate
must not /> >/exceed 56 kilobauds. A RTTY, data or multiplexed emission using an
unspecified /> >/digital code under the limitations listed in ?97.309(b) of this part
also may /> >/be transmitted. The authorized bandwidth is 100 kHz. /
> 56 kilobauds is because the Telebit Trailblazer existed; it used OFDM
> and 6 "baud" carriers.
The Trailblazer was fast, but it wasn't *that* fast!
It actually was like 19200 baud async, internally some 18kbps sync.
This was fast compared to the usual V.22bis (2400 bps) modems of the day, but of
course later telephone modems appeared that could to 56k.
We ran a Unix system with UUCP at work in those days but we could not use modems that fast
because the machine wasn't able to handle full 19200 baud async I/O as it could not
handle the interrupt load... those were the days.
(It was an NCR system with a separate processor for serial I/O, but IBM PC and clones
in those days also struggled at 19200, that is why the 16550 chip with hardware FIFO
was created...)
A couple of years later I bought a ZyXEL U-1496+ modem that also did 19200 over phone
lines, and was popular at some local ISPs. Like the Trailblazer it also used a 68000
processor and it cost well over $500 in local currency.
I agree that those modems are not going to work over radio. Even on telephone lines
they perform lengthy "training" sequences to measure the phase response of the line,
and then assume it remains the same over the duration of the call.
Rob
Telebit was doing the modulation in signal processing software in a
dedicated big-grasshopper-sized Motorola 68000 chip inside the modem.
These days we could do the same modulation in software in just about any
chip. But as Brian said, the signal impairments in multi kilometer
twisted pair telephone circuits with occasional loading coils, chopped
into 56k digital bitstreams and reconstituted at the other end before
transiting a different long twisted pair, are very different than the
impairments typically experienced when passing a signal thru typical
radio circuitry and kilometers of radio "ether" and interference.
There's free software for messing with OFDM over narrowband radio
(e.g. not WiFi); here are a few starting points:
https://github.com/rwth-ti/gr-ofdmhttps://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4984&context=theseshttps://github.com/kit-cel/gr-lte
John
My guess it depend how many updates their information.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:51 AM R P via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: R P <ronenp(a)hotmail.com>
> To: "44net(a)mailman.ampr.org" <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 07:49:41 +0000
> Subject: Portal encap file by email option
> Hi there
> I have noticed that there is option to get the encap file by email
> does anyone know how often the file change a day ? (if i chose to get it "when file change" ) ?
> Thanks forware
> Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
> http://www.ronen.org
> Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSite<http://www.ronen.org/>
> ronen.org (Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSite) is hosted by domainavenue.com
> www.ronen.org
>
>
>
> [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-anima…]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Virus-free. www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: R P via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> To: "44net(a)mailman.ampr.org" <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> Cc: R P <ronenp(a)hotmail.com>
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 07:49:41 +0000
> Subject: [44net] Portal encap file by email option
> _________________________________________
> 44Net mailing list
> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
--
Sysop de: VE2PKT (BBS), VE2PKT-13 (URONode)
: VE2RCN-1, VE2RGM-1, VE2RGC-1, VE2RVA-1, (The-Net)
: VE2PKT-9 (DXCluster), VE2PKT-10 (Winlink Gateway)
RF:
147.435 Mhz (1200 Bps),
Internet:
Telnet://nodes-ve2pkt.dyndns.org port 23 (Network Node)
Telnet://fbb-ve2pkt.dyndns.org port 6300 (FBB BBS)
Telnet://ve2pkt.dyndns.org port 9000 (DXCluster)
E-Mail:
packet: ve2pkt(a)ve2pkt.#qbc.qc.can.noam
ampr net: ve2pkt(a)ve2pkt.ampr.org
Inet: ve2pkt(a)gmail.com
Because some of the gateways have dynamic IP addresses, the file
can change often, sometimes as often as once an hour.
- Brian
On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 07:49:41AM +0000, R P via 44Net wrote:
> From: R P <ronenp(a)hotmail.com>
> Subject: Portal encap file by email option
>
> Hi there
> I have noticed that there is option to get the encap file by email
> does anyone know how often the file change a day ? (if i chose to get it "when file change" ) ?
> Thanks forware
> Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
> http://www.ronen.org
> Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSite<http://www.ronen.org/>
> ronen.org (Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSite) is hosted by domainavenue.com
> www.ronen.org
Hi,
after a change of my dynamic IP address
happened yesterday afternoon the 44net
gateway remained on my expired IP, so
after a double check after several hours
confirm that failure still remains.
May you check about it? TNX
--
73 and ciao, gustavo i0ojj/ir0aab/ir0eq
To all
I have checked the issue more deeply with two different routers and two different homes that get internet feed
My home use Cable modem that on its DMZ sit a MikroTik Router .
Even when the cable modem set to no DMZ at all i still get amprnet traffic to my home and all is working fine but if i point on the DMZ to a PC that have a web server and from outside world surf to my publiic IP i get the web server respond but if i shut the DMZ the web server is not answering to requests anymore so the DMZ mechanism, is functioning but it turn out that for the ipip tunnel the DMZ dont effect at all
it has been tested with two different modems in two different internet feeds and two AMPRNET networks
my cable modem modem work as a Router and do NAT for the Internet to Private addresses (192.168.1.x) and the MOkroTik router sit on this address and do the IPIP tunnel to UCSD
The other home use modem that is used as a transparent mode and connected to first mikrotik that makes the NAT for the Private network (10.0.0.x) and after this modem there is additional mikrotik that do the IPIP to UCSD and it work without any DMZ or Port redirection
I dont know to explain it but that is the facts and its hard to argue with that currently at my home the DMZ point to a computer that do Echolink bridge to our NatoinWide DMR system and not to the router that do the IPIP and i have a working AMPRNET ....
Regards
Ronen -4Z4ZQ
________________________________
From: 44Net <44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com(a)mailman.ampr.org> on behalf of Michael Cullen via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:09 AM
To: AMPRNet working group
Cc: Michael Cullen
Subject: Re: [44net] UCSD tunnel behing NAT and Firewall setting ?
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
Hi Nate,
I can certainly add this to the TODO list if it is of interest.
Regards,
Chris
> On 13 May 2019, at 22:22, Nate Sales via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
>
>
> From: Nate Sales <nate.wsales(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Portal API
> Date: 13 May 2019 at 22:22:55 BST
> To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
>
>
> Hello,
> Is there any plan to make the API more complete? It would be really cool to
> be able to update gateways and such programatically.
> 73,
> -Nate
>
>
> _________________________________________
> 44Net mailing list
> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
I use IPIP behind a NAT by forwarding all IPIP traffic to a particular host
- it’s a separate protocol so quite easy to do actually.
On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 17:18, Steve L via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
wrote:
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Steve L <kb9mwr(a)gmail.com>
> To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 11:14:45 -0500
> Subject: Re: [44net] UCSD tunnel behing NAT and Firewall setting ?
> IPIP requires Protocol 4 forwarding (or DMZ) at the firewall to the
> gateway.
>
> OpenVPN handshakes are about every 5 seconds, between the client and
> server. The client creates and maintains an active connection to the
> server at all times. This allows the server to track a reverse way
> back to the client.
>
> Since we are decentralized, meaning we don't all reach each other thru
> a central server, we'd have to have maintain handshaking to each other
> ampr gateway. I forget what Brian last said there were in terms of a
> number of IPIP gateways, but that would obviously be a lot of data,
> and thus not practical.
>
> The only other VPN like architecture that I know of that works like
> what we are doing is Tinc, as it supports mesh routing too. But I
> haven't played with it yet.
>
> Your other option is to setup a VPS, bring in a subnet via BPG, and
> then used whatever method you like (OpenVPN, etc) to bring it from the
> VPS to your firewall restricted gateway. A solution that John, K7VE
> has been pointing out (https://groups.io/g/net-44-vpn)
>
> Steve
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:41 AM R P via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> wrote:
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: R P <ronenp(a)hotmail.com>
> > To: "44net(a)mailman.ampr.org" <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> > Cc:
> > Bcc:
> > Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 06:37:54 +0000
> > Subject: UCSD tunnel behing NAT and Firewall setting ?
> > Hi there
> > I know that VPN can be done behind firewall NAT (from the client side)
> > Can the IPIP be made (from the gateway side) behind a Firewall (that
> allow any traffic outbound) and a NAT ?
> > Untill few month ago my gateway sited on the DMZ and it worked
> > But i had changed the DMZ to point another IP and it seems that the
> IPIP still work .. I wonder if it is a router problem or the IPIP can
> pass thru like a VPN can pass
> > Thanks For any Info
> > ronen- 4Z4ZQ
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Steve L via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> Cc: Steve L <kb9mwr(a)gmail.com>
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 11:14:45 -0500
> Subject: Re: [44net] UCSD tunnel behing NAT and Firewall setting ?
> _________________________________________
> 44Net mailing list
> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
>
IPIP requires Protocol 4 forwarding (or DMZ) at the firewall to the gateway.
OpenVPN handshakes are about every 5 seconds, between the client and
server. The client creates and maintains an active connection to the
server at all times. This allows the server to track a reverse way
back to the client.
Since we are decentralized, meaning we don't all reach each other thru
a central server, we'd have to have maintain handshaking to each other
ampr gateway. I forget what Brian last said there were in terms of a
number of IPIP gateways, but that would obviously be a lot of data,
and thus not practical.
The only other VPN like architecture that I know of that works like
what we are doing is Tinc, as it supports mesh routing too. But I
haven't played with it yet.
Your other option is to setup a VPS, bring in a subnet via BPG, and
then used whatever method you like (OpenVPN, etc) to bring it from the
VPS to your firewall restricted gateway. A solution that John, K7VE
has been pointing out (https://groups.io/g/net-44-vpn)
Steve
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 1:41 AM R P via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: R P <ronenp(a)hotmail.com>
> To: "44net(a)mailman.ampr.org" <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 06:37:54 +0000
> Subject: UCSD tunnel behing NAT and Firewall setting ?
> Hi there
> I know that VPN can be done behind firewall NAT (from the client side)
> Can the IPIP be made (from the gateway side) behind a Firewall (that allow any traffic outbound) and a NAT ?
> Untill few month ago my gateway sited on the DMZ and it worked
> But i had changed the DMZ to point another IP and it seems that the IPIP still work .. I wonder if it is a router problem or the IPIP can pass thru like a VPN can pass
> Thanks For any Info
> ronen- 4Z4ZQ
