On 14/03/19 06:33, Rob Janssen wrote:
- May I encounter routing issues with some clients ?
- Is it recommended to deploy ampr-ripd in parallel with BGP ?
You won't encounter problems with traffic to other systems on internet and also not with other AMPRnet systems routed via BGP, but some of the traditional AMPRnet networks that are only routed via IPIP will be unreachable when you do not run IPIP tunnels in parallel to your BGP announcement, or at best they will be routed via San Diego, USA which of course affects delay and packet loss values.
That shouldn't be an issue for Internet facing services (Echolink, DMR, etc), since they're unlikely to be accessed from tunneled systems, but if one is going to host services for other 44net users, then you will definitely want tunnels.
I cannot judge if this will affect your system. However, when your router system is capable of running ampr-ripd or another solution for IPIP tunnels (e.g. the scripts for RouterOS or the recent solution for Juniper) I think it is always a good idea to install one of them.
And then you'll have issues in at least parts of the German networks. I myself now have an issue, because some of my machines have a 44net address for various reasons, and these machines will route to my 44.190.8.x BGP subnet via San Diego (30,000 km round trip!). One thing affected is my Echolink proxy - accessing it from the desktop will be veey suboptimal now). I was thinking of putting in ampr-ripd, but there were protests from the Germans. At this time, I'll probably just setup a site to site VPN, so I can at least have optimal routing between my 2 sites.