6 Feb
2021
6 Feb
'21
9:47 a.m.
Actually, the idea would be to DELEGATE the user access to some point of
presence which support optimized access to the full mesh/network (by
whatever means, this is not important right now) and allow traditional
VPN access to client that request it and do not have the means to
participate in the grand scheme.
And this does not even need to be centrally coordonated except the
delegation itself (like that system X gets subnet Y, that's it).
POPs could be supporting the current mesh for now, be BGP announce,
whatever is needed to get them fully connected. The idea would be to
provide end user access by means of non-custom protocols (again, no
specifics, each POP should take their own decisions) without the need to
set up an individual gateway, nor the need to get through amprgw.
Of course, everything degenerated in ideas of having everyone to use a
one-fits-all solution, with everyone pushing their own agenda and impose
it upon others...
Sorry to say, but I feel this will be just another failure, like
anything else where some impose their specific solutions on others
without working out a generic paradigm first.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 06.02.2021 16:32, M Langelaar via 44Net wrote:
Rob,
Jason's comment about VPS scalability made me want to ask this (I
forgot) :
That would be possible, but we largely have the
proposed network
already running
for 6.5 years now and it is not necessary to
prove that it works.
So the Dutch network is running it's own VPS service on it's 'own
hardware' ?
So the proposal is to have ARDC run it's own VPS service that would
give amateur
radio ops what they need as far as tunneling requirements and so on ?
In addition we could add openVPN service as well ?
Maiko Langelaar / VE4KLM
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net