3 Jan
2015
3 Jan
'15
11:08 a.m.
On 1/3/15, Brian <n1uro(a)n1uro.ampr.org> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
Eric;
On Sat, 2015-01-03 at 08:35 -0800, Eric Fort wrote:
for the most part yes. even if just the regional gateways peered and
the smaller nodes then connected to one or more of the regional
gateways by arangement with a given node op we could then escentially
get rid ofdistributing ampr.txt and dynamic routing issues then get
handled and resolved between peers. the routing protocol used
wouldn't even have to be BGP in all cases though that's likely most
appropriate if one considers each node op to basicly be an AS unto
themselves. each peer could decide what protocol was appropriate to
distribute routes it knows to it's other ajacent peers. peerswould
also be free to select the (vpn) tunnel protocol of their choice. By
using standards based methods which are widely deployed as common
practice across all users of the IP protocols we stand to gain
personel and resources that can assist in growing and developing our
part of the amateur radio communications hobby.
Eric
AF6EP
how about eliminating this issue perminantly from
ever happening and
moving to voluntary peering between gateways. Know thy neighbor and
be responsible foryourpeers androutesseems to work really well for
everyone else yet amprnet still relies upon route distribution from a
single source.
Are you suggesting something such as a possible BGPv2 that all gateways
or designated regional gateways could perhaps tunnel broadcast between
themselves? This would be interesting and may help with other route
issues between those using RIPv2 <-> BGP amprnet sites. --
If Microsoft intended Windows to be for ham usage,
they would have incorporated our protocols into their kernel.
73 de Brian Rogers - N1URO
email: <n1uro(a)n1uro.ampr.org>
Web: http://www.n1uro.net/
Ampr1: http://n1uro.ampr.org/
Ampr2: http://nos.n1uro.ampr.org
Linux Amateur Radio Services
axMail-Fax & URONode
AmprNet coordinator for:
Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, and Vermont.
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net