On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 19:54, Brian Kantor <
Brian@ucsd.edu> wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 15:19:31 -0800, David Josephson WA6NMF <
wa6nmf@josephson.com> wrote:
I am puzzled that we want to assign 44-net addresses one by one as shown
in amprhosts rather than as subnets. Perhaps there is a historical
reason for that. The routing table could get to be very large (we can
hope!)
Subnetting is reasonable to do but we still have to assign addresses in
those subnets one at a time in order to get DNS entries for them and to
enable them in the Internet ingress filter.
The division of the AMPRNet space into the existing blocks of addresses
was primarily for administrative convenience, not as a mandated subnetting
scheme.
Subnets should probably track routers/gateways; that is, each
router/gateway should have a small subnet associated with it. That would
help to keep the routing table at a reasonable size. Since routers often
serve a specific geographical area, having regional subnets could be a
fairly
good way to assign addresses.
The hard question is what size region and what size subnet?
The implication is that there will be a router for each region, which is
what we've been doing in many places anyway. Perhaps major cities is a
reasonable way to divide an area into subnets. But there are also flat
networks which need only one router even though they span multiple cities.
Ideas?
- Brian
Dynamic DNS to update amprgw's filter.
We only need the filter for ingress to Net44, we could use "Established"
and "Related" IPTABLES for egress.
DHCP for mobile users (those moving between access points).
We already have "region" subnets, e.g. 44.x.0.0/17 blocks already allocated
to coordinators. That means the inter region routing tables can be
relatively small. Within the region subnetting and even sub-subnet can
performed based on local need.
I wrote this in late January and you see more comments in the thread
starting at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STARnetDigital/message/209
One of the uses I foresee for STARnet Digital is for it to support "VPNs"
for D-STAR Digital Data. Currently, the D-STAR frame addresses one and
only one destination. The UR is either set to the gateway for NATing out
to the Internet, or it is set to the call of a remote system.
If the UR were to be set to STARnet Digital group, then each frame could be
relayed back out to each terminal in the VPN/Group. This still needs to be
tested and probably refined.
I think the Net-44 address space could be the unifying point for IP based
amateur communications. The NxN
text tables being distributed now to IPIP tunnel pockets of activity
doesn't scale well and uses a format designed around a specific
application. I have been thinking, instead we should build a network
around regional routers that each support one 44.x.x.x/16 address
space (44.0-255.x.x)
-- these could exist in a VPN (maybe LT2P) creating tunnels either to each
other or through 1 or more continental/country routers.
In turn, these 256 POP routers, would support up to 256+ local
networks (44.x.x.x/24),
which in turn could distribute out to progressively smaller and smaller
CIDR address spaces.
When AMPRNET was created, the available hardware was either severely
limited or financially unreachable for a hobby pursuit. Now a US$40 router
(
http://routerboard.com/RB750 IPV4, IPV6, VPN, Tunnels, MPLS) can be
pressed into service to provide these services (
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:License#License_Levels) for any local
jump off point to RF (even to a mesh or PTP high speed microwave link). The
core routers can be had in the US$350 range (
http://routerboard.com/RB1200).
There are a number of hams that own or have access to high bandwidth
enabled data centers to house core and regional routers.
Additionally, with a little creativity we could build a special DHCP that
would examine the D-STAR, AX.25, or ??? frames to assign a Dynamic DNS
address to each station (assuming
amateur-relay.net as the domain, could be
ampr.org):