Re: [44net] TAPR DCC 2016 - anyone going?

I agree that we need to move away from relying on using a block of network addresses to identify valid ham radio hosts. A prefix trust list would provide much more flexibility for network design. To keep individual hams' radio-vs-non radio hosts distinct, the trusts should be something like a /64 where the actual radio gear will be deployed within a given ham's own IPv6 range. It then makes it practical to 'wall off' the radio gear within the ham's home network to prevent unintended access of the ham radio network by non-ham devices. We can reduce the need for regional network management - any station (club/repeater/individual) that wants to join can do so equally, as there would be no subnets to manage, only over-the-air routes (which would still need to be managed regionally) - although I'd be happy to see at least some of these built dynamically, too (the trust list could be used here to authorise route changes as well). Tunnels should no longer be necessary - if using the Internet for routing, the IPv6 addresses become perfectly routable via the ISPs. The trust lists would be used to filter incoming traffic to prevent non-ham use of these routes. We get a flexible, resilient, more manageable (meaning less management required) network. The main management tasks would be maintaining the trust list and over-the-air routes. IPv6 has some real advantages for over-the-air use, including header compression that could actually reduce overhead on the radio links. - Richard, VE7CVS On 8/15/16 6:37 AM, Antonio Querubin wrote: