I couldnt find the initial proposal but i ask why to separate the two network ? why to make any restriction to any network ? every one will put any rules he want on the firewall he probably have in his network and live with that what is the big need to separate the networks ? i really dont understand Ronen-4Z4ZQ http://www.ronen.org
________________________________ From: 44Net 44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com@mailman.ampr.org on behalf of Tony Langdon via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 8:47 PM To: 44net@mailman.ampr.org 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Tony Langdon vk3jed@vkradio.com Subject: Re: [44net] Future of AMPRNet Should NOT BE AMPRNet
On 29/7/21 6:07 am, Jason McCormick via 44Net wrote:
ADRC/AMPRNet should be working with and encouraging the amateur radio community to make progress on tools and technologies that render IPv4, and notably the 44.0.0.0/8(ish) allocation, obsolete. Some areas that cry out for an active community leader include:
- Make useful, educational information available accessible to the amateur operator that helps them understand what IPv6 is, how to use it with their ISP where available, how it's 90% the same as IPv4, benefits of IPv6, etc. I don't think this all needs to be net new material. Perhaps a curation effort with some original content that fills in the gaps important to radio users.
This is related to a suggestion I made earlier - that ARDC could have a role in education, and IPv6 would certainly fit here. I've had native IPv6 myself for over 10 years, and I was able to ensure all of my VPSs have global native IPv6 within a couple of years after that.
- Work with hams and the major projects to enable IPv6 natively for common application such as digital voice (D-STAR, YSF, DMR, etc.), Pi-STAR, Allstar Link, IRLP, APRS, etc. This would include providing some funding, maybe in a Google "Summer of Code"-style project, and some expertise. Our area WAN network currently using 44Net space has been dual-stack IPv6 for years. However while our core non-radio systems could all be 100% IPv6, basically nothing about any of the amateur radio stuff we operate even knows what IPv6 is let alone has a prayer of working on it. There's a lot of great stuff out there that was written by someone who wanted to scratch an itch. All that software is great and serves the need, but it requires help and resources to move forward.
M17 at least supports IPv6 from the outset. My M17 reflector listens on both IPv4 and IPv6, and when I connect using DroidStar, the connection is always IPv6, from what I recall. Reflector based networks like M17 are relatively easy, because if the reflectors run dual stack, the clients can connect using what they have. IPv6 is definitely preferred. Networks with heavy point to point traffic (IRLP, Echolink, AllStar) are much harder, because there's more possibility for IPV4 only and IPV6 only (may have IPv4, but not public) systems to be unable to communicate with each other.
- ARDC/AMPRNet should consider the merits of either outright becoming an LIR[2] and issuing global IPv6 space OR, at minimum, create a formalized "non-collisions registry" of the IPv6 ULA fc00::/7 space[3]. As part of the latter option, it should also define a set of rules for Global/ULA interoperability for "ham purposes" when operators may want their own global IPv6 space to interact with some common/shared ULA space.
There have been proposals for hams to be able to dedicate part of their ISP provided IPv6 space to hame service and have that listed somewhere with ARDC in a registry. For me, that would work, as I have a static /56 (could easily dedicate a couple of /64s to ham use), and they don't filter anything (unless I ask them to - but I've turned the filtering off). But some people may need IPv6 space from elsewhere, to work around ISP restrictions like filtering and dynamic prefixes.
None of the above is exhaustive, nor any sort of immediately workable plan. But all of this discussion on the re-re-allocation of the 44Net space has had me thinking today about what goals of this community should be and it struck me that we're all talking about a technology from the 1970s that most of the world is actively trying to replace or, at least, deprioritize.
I think 44Net will still be important, but encouraging adoption of IPv6 does make sense for looking to the future, as something to do alongside.
-- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net