29 Jul
2021
29 Jul
'21
12:21 a.m.
Pedro,
Let me answer that for you: YES. It will impact that and with the new design you would get
a different subnet as the one you are using now will conflict with their “intranet”.
Ruben - ON3RVH
On 28 Jul 2021, at 19:15, Pedro Converso via 44Net
<44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
Thanks for answering Antonis, but I don't quite understand.
Argentina has many hundreds of 44.153.x.x hams your can see on
http://amsat.org.ar/amprhost.txt
Many of these users have 44.153 gateways portal registrered, installed
and operational thru ip encap, with tcpip services protocols and aprs
radio and/or over internet using Rasbperries, Linux PCs or routers.
As for now no BGP are in use, that doesn't mean BGP won't be used in the future.
This network has been in succesful operation since the eighties, and
keeps on growing.
Question again is, this proposed change will afect or impair our
operation ?. Please be specific as yes or no.
Thanks,
73, lu7abf, Pedro
44.153 Coordinator
On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net
<44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net On 28 Jul 2021, at 14:02, Tony Langdon via 44Net
<44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
wrote:
On 28/7/21 9:51 pm, Rob PE1CHL via 44Net wrote:
A lot of people out there not only don’t want, but also can't use the
equipment that you use, for whatever reason. A lot of people out there don’t
know what a VLAN is, or what DHCP is, or what a VPN is. They are also not
interested in learning that, just so they can access X’s EchoLink Proxy or
Y’s webSDR..
What we want is to make sure that the network we create is open to as many
people as possible, regardless of knowledge, background, location, financial
status, etc. By definition, this means that the bar must be as low as
possible to join. That’s what we’re trying to do. Decrease this barrier. We
don’t want to enforce static routers, or brands, or routers, we only want to
decrease the barrier, as much as we can.
The current proposal accommodates for all users, both new and inexperienced
all the way to Internet experts. At no point did we say we’re building a
network only for people with static routes. That’s not what we want to do.
We’re not prioritizing and discriminating against anyone based on network
equipment or networking knowledge.
I hope this clears up things,
Antonis
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
In all networks I manage it is the same. I think
it is very unwise to
design a network
based on capabilities of ISP routers, as these vary widely and can change
outside our control.
I agree. I like to have control of the capabilities of any
specialised
routers that I use, and a separate Raspberry Pi is one way to do that.
My network also ensures that only devices which need 44net access get
it. If I ever have a need for a wifi device like a phone or laptop to
get such addresses via DHCP, I'll work something out, to physically or
logically separate the networks enough to allow 44net DHCP. That's not
a problem I currently have.
Having an extra device (Raspberry Pi or similar, MikroTik router or
similar) or at worst some
code running on a PC (VPN client) is the way to go. Routing by ISP
router isn't.
More flexible that way, and works for me. I also have a /28 of
commercial ISP space routed here via VPN, which is used by a select few
hosts. I could never run my network entirely on standard end user
routers.