Re: [44net] Distributed BGP Announce

O.K. Then I think we're on the same page. I certainly think other parts of the country and world can benefit from additional Internet gateways. Heck, even those of us in California can benefit from an additional gateway when the current amprgw has a problem. But a direct tunnel to each remote end-point within AMPRnet, even if it's in another country, is still the most efficient for intra-amprnet communications. I don't understand the "assisted network" use case. Can you explain and/or provide an example use case for that scenario? Thanks, Michael N6MEF -----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Marc, LX1DUC Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:01 PM To: 44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Distributed BGP Announce OTOH some networks cannot connect using the IPIP fullmesh and need to connect using some other tunnel protocol (PPTP, OpenVPN, etc). You could say that those networks are "assisted" networks and they require a "proxy gateway" to connect them to the existing IPIP fullmesh. These "proxy gateways", if BGP enabled, could announce the local "assisted" networks via BGP and route traffic from the internet directly to the IPIP endpoint or the assisted network and vice versa route traffic from the 44net to the Internet directly via the local upstream provider. That way the proxy gateway wouldn't have to route the non-44net traffic via UCSD. (Btw not every proxy gateway must have to be a BGP gateway.)