27 May
2022
27 May
'22
5:04 p.m.
Marius,
I fully agree with that. But as you have seen, when suggestions are made here to change
towards such a network, there always is negative feedback from some people who just
do not want to change, and bring up "advantages" of the current IPIP mesh to
explain
why we should keep it like that.
That is why I tried to provide solutions to enable those people to come on board.
Probably the vast majority of users is well served with a single VPN tunnel to a single
PoP
somewhere in their network neighborhood, routing only their own subnet. They will
never get involved in the "more advanced" topics like running multiple tunnels
to either
more than one PoP and/or to a friend, and using automatic routing protocols.
Having a local PoP to enable connections from end-users and have that PoP on the
IPIP mesh (and on internet BGP), yes, that is what we have been doing here for many
years.
But in many other places, this local solution does not exist and new users are forced to
setup an IPIP mesh node themselves, which as you know is possible but presents a lot
of challenges.
Rob
On 5/27/22 11:43, Marius Petrescu via 44net wrote:
I think the main issue in this endeavor is to attract more users to our network.
Proficient users may use whatever alternatives they like, and they have the necessary
knowledge to do it.
The problem is the networking novice, which may have basic networking skills, but lack
the "advanced" part, and of course the regular or occasional user, which
requires plain network access, without backups, fall backs, roaming, fixed location
independent addresses and other goodies, using SOHO class equipment..
For such users, a regional POP access using standard VPN technologies and optional
standard routing protocols is a perfect opportunity to get a foothold in this domain while
the POPs themselves provide network integration and backbone routing (no matter what the
technology behind - it may well be our current mesh for the beginning, and various
connection techniques to the POP really don't matter as long as they are well
supported). The most important thing is that the access should be as plain and transparent
as possible for a novice, and require the dumbest equipment possible for permanent
access.
Advanced features may come late on a need to use basis, after the initial learning curve.
Let's create momentum by expanding the user base first and worry about advanced user
level stuff later, keeping the wizardry at POP level.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 27/05/2022 11:52, Rob PE1CHL via 44net wrote:
Of course, but the reason I proposed this was
that when suggesting a PoP network where
everyone would connect and send their traffic via probably 2 PoP hops to the destination
was that there was the immediate reaction that "this would be so much less
efficient" and
"I want to send my traffic directly to the guy I am BBS forwarding to" etc.
So in my design that is perfectly possible, you can setup a private tunnel to anyone and
when using BGP that will automatically be taken as a shorter path. Of course it would
even
be possible with static routing.
And indeed, a first level of fallback could be created using some list of PoPs to call
and selecting
an alternative when the first is unreachable. Will depend on the router software what
is
easier to achieve: two permanent connections and autorouting, or two connections with
only one being active at any time.
My point is that the such a network is much more flexible than the IPIP mesh we have
now,
which essentially is using static routing and cannot handle any alternatives.
Rob
On 5/27/22 01:02, John D. Hays via 44net wrote:
_______________________________________________
44net mailing list -- 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 44net-leave(a)mailman.ampr.org Another approach would be auto-failover between
PoPs in client routers.
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 10:59 AM Rob PE1CHL via 44net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org>
wrote:
Yes, that is also part of my design. An entry-level user can connect to a single PoP
and get "their subnet" routed to them, and route all other Net44 space towards
that PoP. Simple, static routing.
A more advanced user can make multiple PoP connections and use BGP to send and
receive individual subnet routes, and let their local router decide to which of the PoPs
to send each packet. That would also cover the case where a PoP is down and all traffic
is routed via the remaining one(s).
These users can also have cross-connections to other users (via radio or direct
tunnels) and the routing remains correct.
--
John D. Hays
Kingston, WA
K7VE / WRJT-215
_______________________________________________
44net mailing list -- 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 44net-leave(a)mailman.ampr.org
_______________________________________________
44net mailing list -- 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 44net-leave(a)mailman.ampr.org