22 Jul
2019
22 Jul
'19
11:49 a.m.
Perhaps this could be a project to spend the $50M on? Deploy a network of
VPN servers with regional access point thus allowing interested parties to
connect to the 44net backbone?
Mark
NI2O/G7LTT
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 12:08 PM Rob Janssen via 44Net <
44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
Because we are trying to draft a new solution that would not work only for
you, but also for others. You do not seem to be interested in that.
Come on, it costs like $5-$10 per month per location to host such a
service.
And that is only when it is paid for. Last time I asked here for
volunteers
to host an echolink proxy farm, there were like 10 volunteers that would
do (and did) it for free. It is likely that they would add such a VPN
server feature to their already existing hosted system, if we would kindly
ask it to them.
/I don't suggest that you would use only our VPN
server, you could />
/connect it in addition to some other to have additional
redundancy />
/and maybe a more efficient path to western europe. /
Why would I want or need to go across the Atlantic when it's not
necessary since IPIP is working fine for me. /You (or
ARDC, using their money) should eastablish one or more VPN />
/servers on the
eastcoast and/or Canada, then you connect there and />
/those servers connect back to UCSD or maybe even advertise some of />
/the locally assigned subnets on internet BGP. /
I don't see where this would be a reasonable allocation of funds by
ARDC. If ARDC were to allocate funding I would rather
see it go into research
of new techologies. We as hams are not leaders anymore, we're lemmings.
That would be a complete waste of money! As is clearly shown by this
entire
discussion, there is nothing that hams hate more than to change something
that they think is working well for them, even without considering how it
works for others.
Again, it is much like the discussion about CW. Large groups of hams
still believe that CW is the most efficient mode and can be received when
all other modes fail. Utter bullshit, of course, but it was like that
50 years ago so it still must be true today.
>/Then it will improve your connectivity to
internet, and connectivity
/> >/to other AMPRnet systems is the same or
similar. /
How will that improve my connectivity to the
internet? I can and do get
around blocks by my ISP just fine - once I know what they are and I take
full advantage of the 200Mbs link I have for a residential circuit.
The connectivity to internet from your 44net systems, of course!
That would now go via UCSD and when you could get a local VPN server which
also announces the state's network allocation on BGP, it would be faster
than the trip via UCSD in many cases.
I could get another circuit with 4G backup and
shell out almost
$2,000/yr additional as a business circuit but why? For people on this
list to try and tell me what to do with my circuit that I spend my money
on? I think not thank you. That's when a ham community turns into a ham
dictatorship.
It is always amazing to see people on this list toggle between "but there
are single points of failure in this solution, I do not like that!" and
"don't tell me to do things the way you like" after explaining them how to
work around those single points of failure. Apparently they bring that up
only to put a spanner in the works of any discussion about change, not
because they really care about it.
Also I think your solution is way too expensive. My home internet
connection
(with fixed IPv4, native IPv6 /48, 100 Mbps, unlimited data, no silly
filtering)
costs me less than $600/year and it includes 4G backup up to 1GB/month.
Rob
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net