14 Mar
2015
14 Mar
'15
2:10 p.m.
Subject:
[44net] TUNNEL vs DIRECT connection of subnets
From:
Brian Kantor <Brian(a)UCSD.Edu>
Date:
03/14/2015 02:30 AM
To:
44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
At the current moment I can see no way for an AMPRNet subnet to be both
TUNNEL and DIRECT (BGP-announced) connected, unless a special provision
has been made to operate a gateway from a non-44/8 address into the
BGP-connected subnet.
Sure, but I think that is not unreasonable. We do it on our gateway and there is
no problem with it. The provider has issued a small non-44 subnet to the gateway
machine and it routes the net-44 traffic to that address. (i.e. our provider announces
44.137.0.0/16 on BGP and accepts the traffic on their core router and they forward it to
us, we
forward our traffic for internet to them on another address in that subnet on which their
router listens).
We are also on the IPIP mesh with our /16 and the tunnel endpoint is that same non-44
address (213.222.29.194). This means that other IPIP gateways forward traffic via a
tunnel.
This works just fine. It also means the others do not have to setup exceptions for our
subnet in their IPIP tunnel systems. Getting the /30 network required for this should
be no problem even today.
Rob