The fact is that, actually the repeater is networked
to the EchoLink
server and this can be obtained ONLY by using the commercial
IP number, i.e. IP address 79.47.199.234.
Look at our repeaters, e.g. PI2NOS
It is registered on the Echolink system using its own address 44.137.72.130
(
pi2nos.ampr.org).
Therefore this problem does not occur here.
the incoming IP results 44.137.41.97; so I understand
that the
internet server act as the real gateway in a similar way as our
ampr.org gateways. It function very OK!
Yes, for "normal traffic" it works OK. But not for Echolink.
This is because Echolink has a directory server that registers your repeater
by IP address, and this address does not match the actual address.
When you get connected by someone from plain internet, it works OK because the route
back is through the same NAT router, where you have defined port forwarding for the
5198 and 5199 ports, and the users sees the same translated address as the Echolink
system
registered.
However, when I connect from my address 44.137.41.97, the repeater or another part of
the system thinks it is being clever and routes the traffic through a IPIP tunnel,
the address does not get translated, and the connection fails.
The quick way to solve it is to give your repeater some RFC1918 address (10.x.x.x,
192.168.x.x)
so its traffic is always forced through the NAT router. Alternatively, you can setup
some
policy routing so the Echolink traffic is always sent to the NAT router, not routed
directly.
Then you can still use AMPRnet on the same computer for other things.
The way we solved it here is by applying for BGP routing of our subnet, so our net-44
traffic
is routed directly on internet and it is no problem to run an Echolink repeater on it.
(the subject of this thread: will routing through UCSD cause problems with VoIP. yes it
will,
but we don't route through UCSD so we don't have that problem)
Rob