29 Mar
2014
29 Mar
'14
12:23 a.m.
Mesh is allowing more than just small islands to move data at higher
speeds. I believe that nos has become more of an internet based protocol
than anything else. The whole idea was to have internet protocols over rf
back in the day, if I'm not mistaken. U cab run servers (Linux boxes) on a
mesh network and have a very stable system, especially since WiFi devices
can be bought pretty cheap these days. I thing there should be more
experimentation with 44 and mesh than putting amprnet on the internet. Our
job is to make rf networks. We should use these ip addresses in a manner
to keep them or someone is gonna say, give em back, since ip4 type
addresses have been depleted. As a whole, no one here is trying anything
above 9k6 which kinda sucks.
Just my opinion and observation.
Harold
K7ILO
On Mar 28, 2014 10:09 PM, "Don Fanning" <don(a)00100100.net> wrote:
> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> _______________________________________________
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Eric Fort <eric.fort(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> > _______________________________________________
> > It would seem to me that while due to the fact we are tunneling most
> > everything we may have a logical full mesh but far from a physical full
> > mesh. What does a tunneled logical full mesh really accomplish for us
> > other than making things all the more complicated?
>
>
> Right now it allows small/medium sized islands of amateur packet radio
> networks to interconnect with others around the planet at speeds faster and
> more reliable than HF or VHF.
>
>
> > Wouldn't traditional
> > peering and routing done "the normal way" be much easier?
>
>
> Not really because most networks are point to point (ie: you connect to
> your work VPN - not you connect to your work VPN which interconnects with
> every other VPN in the world). This essentially is a hack to backbone a
> semi-private network on top of the public internet.
>
>
> > I can see a
> > valid place for nailing up vpn links and various tunnels, i.e. last mile
> > access and tying islands together though something other than IPIP with
> > links negotiated on a peering basis as needed, but what does a full
> logical
> > mesh of tunnels give us? It seems that since it's built of tunnels and
> > thus virtual rather than physical we just unnecessarily complicate the
> mess
> > wherein the tunneled traffic and the tunnels themselves end up taking
> > multiple and somewhat changing hops to get from one end to another.
>
>
> Yup, nothing's perfect.
>
>
> > IP was
> > designed such that I could hand a packet off and basically go, "ok, now
> > it's your problem to deliver it (on a best effort basis)", thus I
> shouldn't
> > need to know every conceivable route to every conceivable endpoint. What
> > prevents us from using it that way?
> >
>
> Because the internet isn't built that way. You still need a source and
> destination address. You still need routers able to figure out how to get
> your packet from point A to point Z via points B,C,Q and V. And your
> packets need to know how to return back to you through said points. The way
> the current network works is that it sends a routing table to all
> participants of all these little islands of "44net" and how they could be
> reached over the public internet. And mind you, for it to work correctly,
> the traffic has to be effectively routable back to you without being
> dropped into a blackhole or routing loops occurring. One can just
> substitute 44/8 for 10/8 and the same problems are there.
>
> The simplest way of routing a non-routable network is through encapsulation
> for which IPIP was chosen as it's part of the TCP/IP network protocol.
> This allows everyone to be part of the network while not having control or
> bandwidth being focused at any one single location.
>
> A significantly harder solution would be to use BGP which is what is used
> on the larger internet. But there are many, many reasons why you don't
> want just anyone manipulating BGP routes. One wrong command and you could
> send China's internet traffic to Togo. Or create routing loops which would
> cause large interruptions not only for yourself but for a multitude of
> other people on the internet.
>
> Most residential ISP's will not let you insert 44/8 addresses onto their
> networks. Even commercial hosting and colocation providers really want to
> see justification and the proper I's and T's dotted and crossed before they
> will host a 44/8 subnet for you as it's still not a trivial change. Then
> there is the problem of encapsulated and non-encapsulated. The few 44/8
> subnets that have broken off the UCSD router are able to route across the
> internet just like anyone else but cannot reach other 44net islands that
> run the encapsulated tunnels without going back to the encap munge because
> those other islands either don't know how or are unable to reach them due
> to upstream providers blackholing 44/8 traffic as nonroutable.
>
> One might suggest that we can just create a 44net VPN that we all connect
> into via PPTP or other means but who pays the hosting bill for that?
> Bandwidth and hosting still costs money at the end of the day as Netflix
> found out. And we don't have the advantage of doing commercial
"peering"
> as our networks cannot be used for commercial purposes.
>
> That's all I got...
>