9 Jun
2012
9 Jun
'12
9:07 p.m.
As Ralph said, this is not the responsibility of the transporter.
As one of the stations who will be interfacing to Ralph's ISP and putting
it on the air, my plan is to block encrypted traffic to the Internet as
this is not allowed in the US (unless the key is published) or other
system control reasons. Beyond that, it is up to the user to obey the
regulations of ham radio for each country. Just as a repeater owner cannot
control the content of the traffic on a repeater.
In fact, in the U.S. under part 97, I would not even be held responsible
for any traffic that violates the rules, unless it is my own. All that
said, if I see that someone is violating the rules, I would block their
traffic and have a serious talk with them. The portal I would be using is
compliant with US law to trap and record traffic. If I suspect some one of
breaking FCC rules I would kick them off the network.
Lin N4YCI
The other guy who wrote the 900 band plan for the South East US.
Had the first 25mhz split 12.5 khz repeater in the South East on 900
Worked for DataRadio and a whole bunch of other stuff.
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Ralph <ralphlists(a)bsrg.org> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
To all your questions, Jim:
Not my job, man. Responsibility belongs to those who place it on the air on
Ham frequencies. The Internet is license free.
I am just transport, not the Radio Police.
This is the Ralph I am, :-)
Ralph, N4NEQ
APRS Pioneer
The 8th IRLP node in the US
Worked for the 1996 Olympics (first use of APRS in the Olympics)
http://bsrg.org/aprs/pres.html
Co-wrote 900 MHZ bandplan for the Southeastern US
And a bunch more things
http://ralphfowler.com
_____________________________________________
Hi Ralph,
Just a few of questions?
How are you going to control the content of the traffic to meet the
Amateur Radio Rules and Regulations from the various countries on the
Internet traffic to radio via your Internet Service Provider business?
How are you going to preserve the AX.25a packets
currently required
under ITU rules?
How are you going to work with those who are
required to have a tunnel
system?
There are many countries that do not allow various content form or to
the Internet by radio networks. There must be a control or gateway.
This is not a US issue or community, It is a world group.
Also, could you please add at least your call sign to your posts? I am
not sure which Ralph is speaking.
Jim Fuller
N7VR -- http://www.n7vr.org
International TCP/IP Gateways Robot Operator --
http://www.ampr-gateways.org
MTAPRS NET Server Operator -- http://www.mtaprs.net
CWOP-2 -- http://www.wxqa.com
IRLP Node 3398 - http://irlp.fuller.net Original ARECC contributor
-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph [mailto:ralphlists@bsrg.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 6:26 PM
To: 'AMPRNet working group'
Subject: Re: [44net] OpenVPN
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
We don't want a tunnel.
We want them sent through our Tier 1 upstream provider to our ISP,
which I own and provide service to other Hams on.
That is why we contacted you in the first place Brian.
44 Net is not just for tunneling
Use the allocation or lose it, just like 220 (tm)
-----Original Message-----
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2433/5057 - Release Date: 06/08/12
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
--
Lin Holcomb
Office: +1 404 806 5412
Mobile: +1 404 933 1595
Fax: +1 404 348 4250
<http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net>
the mention of using openvpn was mostly intended
as a nudge. While
IPIP seems to be the defacto standard for amprnet tunneling, it's
about the only place I've seen it used much. The tools for
tunnels/vpn links are out there but something such as openvpn is much
more widely supported than ipip....
As a historical note, we used IPIP tunnels because that's all there
was when we got started. This was early; we were using tunnels even
before a protocol ID byte value had been assigned to IPIP. VPNs
hadn't been invented yet.
Indeed, we've discussed using openvpn before and the response was
generally favorable. It would be a great step forward for the
tunneled parts of the network.
- Brian
te: 06/07/12
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net