25 Jul
2013
25 Jul
'13
10:45 a.m.
On 7/25/13 9:27 AM, Brian Rogers wrote:
That's why I completed the work started by Hessu
and Marius in regards
to axMail-Fax... however there's already a system out there called
Winlink 2000 that uses HF, FM, and Internet to handle email. When I
query those who run it I get almost always these 3 identical comments:
1) It's windows, there's no learning curve of nos or linux involved.
2) I can use the resources I have already without any _additional
expenses_.
3) I don't have time to learn amprnet.
... then there was the issue raised about 3-party relaying, so now we
have governmental restrictions shying us away from certain applications.
How we route is all well and good, but if you're not:
- providing useful services, some of which may be unique
- have a user base to use this network
- cost effectiveness (especially to the seniors who may be on fixed
incomes)
I have no interest in limiting myself to what some old ignorant hams can
understand. This is one of the reasons I got out of radio for a number of
years, as it was not new or challenging due to these guys. I want to sit down
an study if I don't understand it, not gripe about it (and my angina) on FM.
We really have two discussions here. One is global BGP peering and a 44-net
back bone, the other is the end user connecting over tunnels or dedicated
links to the backbone.
The backbone should be based on standard routing protocols and be vendor
agnostic (ie ALU/CSCO/JNPR), as I could see having a router and peering link
donated, but if we need to rack a linux box, we'll have an issue.
The individual backbone POP's can interconnect with the end users over any
method they want. (I'd say we need to support IPIP or GRE tunnels as standard
at any POP)
For an end user wanting a /29 or /31 they would pick a "local" AMPR POP, and
link in with them.
Thoughts?
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
727-214-2508 - Fax
http://bryanfields.net