Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Hi everybody, It seems to me that you are making BGP-peering more difficult than necessary. * You do not have to announce your /24 (or larger) to more than one peer/transit provider * you do not have to have a public ASN. your transit provider can give you a private ASN * cheap and robust enough gear/software that covers BGP is widely available, both as consumer products requiring less experience and open source software requiring more experience * The NOC requirements of your transit provider often depends symmetrically on what level of service you require from your transit provider. But of course you need to be competent and experienced enough, or partner with someone who is. Cheers /Bjorn On 2021-07-28 20:42, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote: > BGP on the public Internet requires that you: > > * Have an ASN > * Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce > * Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to. > * Have the gear/software that announce the space > * Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting with > your deployment > * Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a peering > location, etc.) > * Have the skill set to execute all of the above > > This will be a large hurdle for most folks. > > Tim > > On 7/28/21 11:16 AM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote: >> BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be >> ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers >> and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of >> the country you reside in. >> >> I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to >> renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than >> later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being >> proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS >> for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will >> prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just >> want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be >> easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create >> credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route >> through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is. >> >> I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada >> if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are >> actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT >> offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some >> resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic >> local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to >> help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, and better >> for a number of reasons. >> >> Just my .02 >> -Colin/VA6CCB >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: 44Net <44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca(a)mailman.ampr.org> >> On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net >> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 >> To: 44Net general discussion <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> >> Cc: Pedro Converso <pconver(a)gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations >> >> Thanks Antonis, >> >> Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is >> accepted. >> >> Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on >> https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I >> try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users. >> >> 73, lu7abf, Pedro >> >> On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net >> <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: >>> Hello Pedro, >>> >>> The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to >>> join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space >>> on the Internet using BGP. >>> >>> Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can >>> provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if >>> you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Antonis >>> >>>> On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net >>>> <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> 73, lu7abf, Pedro >>>> 44.153 Argentina Coordination >>>> _________________________________________ >>>> 44Net mailing list >>>> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org >>>> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net >>> >>> >>> _________________________________________ >>> 44Net mailing list >>> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org >>> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net >>> >> >> _________________________________________ >> 44Net mailing list >> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org >> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net >> >> _________________________________________ >> 44Net mailing list >> 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org >> https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net >> > _________________________________________ > 44Net mailing list > 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org > https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net