Hi Rob,
Le 19/04/2018 à 19:07, Rob Janssen a écrit :
As you know, I don't agree with that. We should not segregate our addresses into different classes and force everyone into some class depending on what they want to do. It is a stopgap measure that will lead to endless changes and work, and it isn't even clear what "internet based amateur radio services" are exactly.
I'm quite a beginner here, but here's my personal opinion. And I don't agree with you, HI :-)
I think original routing methods are not easy to use and have drawbacks : - eBGP is not available to end-users, or even to small teams or repeater operators. It requires network skills, and access to telecom operator data centers. - ripd over IP-IP is nice, but it has severe drawbacks in nowadays'world : not talking about security (plain text password !), AMPRNet hosts behind IP-IP tunnel can not communicate with non-AMPRNet hosts, and this causes problems for digital modes such as D-Star or DMR. If a D-Star repeater in Paris on AMPRNet IP behind IP-IP tunnel wants to communicate with another D-Star repeater in Paris hosted on public Internet (99% of them), their communication will go through AMPR gateway at UCSD, which is not optimal at all ;-)
One of the main purpose of amateur radio is to experiment new things. Then, I think it's globally a good idea to experiment new routing variants, that are more suitable with today and tomorrow usages. Of course, this will raise compatibility issues and routing problems. But that's our job to find solutions :-)
Here, in Corsica, we'll try to adapt our home-made system (OpenVPN tunnels to two central gateways, and OSPF routing through 10.0.0.0/8 private addressing) to AMPR addressing. One of the main advantages is that user connection is very easy (we developed a Plug and Play system called "TKBox" : an OpenWRT router, which opens VPN tunnels to our two data centers, in VPN pass-through mode). It's suitable for a remote location such as our island, because our two data centers will be the only points of connection with the outside world. All the specific routing and firewalling has to be tone only there.
Jann's project about 44.190.0.0/16, even if I didn't understand yet how it works ;-) also seems a good idea for me.
The global idea of local or regional BGP platforms seems good to me, because it does not break existing things, thus allowing more 'direct' communications with public Internet (without having to go through San Diego gateway). Moreover, having such a BGP gateway in every country should facilitate firewalling/control about what is allowed by local rules, and what is not. We addressed that in our TKNet design : things that do require communication with public Internet (Echolink, D-Star, DMR) will be located in a dedicated "DMZ" zone of the firewall, with specific access rules. The "normal" amateur radio equipments (such as a remote HF station) will remain in the "private" part of the network, with no Internet access.
Of course, we all must have an "overall" approach, so that those new experiments must (as far as possible) remain compatible with existing (old) things.
73 de TK1BI