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@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
/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.
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.
/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.
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.
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@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net