Re: [44net] OpenVPN

I think here is a misunterstanding. Those providers that would allow these 44 addresses to be hosted in their network will have to set up those addresses. So in their view they assign them to you as a customer, exactly as they would with a regular address. the internet, via your public IP. And exactly, there is NO DIFFERENCE in that case. So if your provider does not host a part of the 44 address space in their network, you will still need tunnels to get access and to reach ampr hosts. Except that those hosted "specially" will allow direct access from anywhere. -----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Joy Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 07:46 To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] OpenVPN (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 02:52:55 +0300, "Marius Petrescu" <marius(a)yo2loj.ro> wrote: If you are using NAT you don't need a 44.x.x.x address. In that case there is no difference between hiding a 44net address and a 10net address behind the NAT. The whole point of this discussion, as I understand it, is how to implement peering between AMPRNET and other autonomous systems on the net. This would allow routing of 44net addresses without need for NAT or tunneling. The difficulty lies in getting ISPs to allow "ordinary users" to maintain 44net IP addresses or networks and advertise routes from within that ISP. _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net