Marius, that is exactly what he said…
If all you are doing is tunneling, then tunnel away… using private addresses.
I think you may have thought he misunderstood private addresses.
What he is proposing (and I also mentioned) is not tying up all the addresses and limiting accessibility to some box Brian has stashed in a corner at UCSD.(figure of speech)
If something happens to it, or him, then the system is dead. Correct me if I am wrong, but UCSD is the ONLY routing point. I doubt UCSD even knows that it is being used as the gateway for this entire 44 net.
There are hundreds of thousands of IP addresses being tied up for a project that just as well could be done on internal addresses.
It is time to bring it into the 21st century and allow actual high speed access, multiple routing points, and stop acting like it is still the 80’s or earlier. I didn’t just come onto the scene. I help operate a full duplex 2 meter packet repeater and not only live nearby, but am friends with Dale Heatherington WA4DSY. I’ve been looking at this for a long time and seeing how it is almost impossible for an average Ham to even USE this resource we have.
Either that or give back about 90% of the addresses like several other responsible entities have done. Use it or lose it!
Ralph
N4NEQ
From: 44net-bounces+ralphlists=bsrg.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+ralphlists=bsrg.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Marius Petrescu
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 3:14 PM
To: 'AMPRNet working group'
Subject: Re: [44net] 44net is not just for tunneling
44.x.x.x IS routable. The fact that some parts of it are not is a specific "feature" of 44 usage, implementation and geographic distribution.
You can reach 44 hosts from the public internet (via ucsd.edu - but this is nothing special, every subnet has somewhere one or more specific routing points).
10.x.x.x (together with 192.168.x.x, 172.16-31.xx.xx and 169.254.0.0) is not routable. Every provider taropits/drops private and link-local IPs, since their uniqueness can not be ensured. And this means that 10.x.x.x addresses will NEVER be reachable except if tunneling is used.
From: 44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro@hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Lin Holcomb
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 19:13
To: AMPRNet working group
Subject: [44net] 44net is not just for tunneling
I am still in the holding pattern while ya'll work out things, but I share Ralphs frustration. I see tunneling as a project that uses 44net not the whole 44net project. It seems to me that this has been confused by many and sent the 44net down one road. We need some highways and not 2 lane dirt roads, sorry but 1200baud or even 9600 baud is a two land dirt road compaired to 10-300 meg connections I can offer I spoke to several groups at Dayton and there are many others who would love to have use of the IP addresses Dstar, highspeed packet ect. (not tunneling all thru UCSD)
The inability to have routeabil addresses from the net back to the 44net( or the lack of desire do to the slow speeds) raises this question how is it that the current tunneling network would be different if the 44.x.x.x was replaced with a 10.x.x.x and the route point at UCSD was a 44.x.x.x ? Really what advantage does a non-routabile 44 have over a 10 with the way you are currently using the network?
From perspective I see no difference....If I cant see a difference why would ICANN? Folks this is 1/255 off all of the ipv4 addresses in the world we are talking about. This is like 220 in the 80s use it or loose it.
Lin