Hi,
Le 12/03/2019 à 20:09, Rob Janssen a écrit :
When you have a BGP routed subnet yourself, and you
run ampr-ripd in
parallel to improve connectivity to IPIP-only subnets, you force the
traffic to other BGP routed subnets via amprgw where they would much
more efficiently be routed directly.
I'm planning to start deployment of our 44.190.11.0/24 BGP-routed
subnet. In the first phase, this subnet will host only Internet-related
stuff (XLX, DMR, Echolink, public WEB server). I don't plan to install
ampr-ripd in parallel (at least for now, in order to make things simpler
and more step-by-step).
Those machines will only need to talk with other machines on public
Internet (ie, other XLX servers). I don't want to use dual-adressing for
XLX (ie, one AMPRNet IP and one "standard" IP with NAT). I'd like to
use only one 44.190 AMPRNet IP for XLX/DMR.
Nobody here is using ampr-ripd. Local clients and sites are connected to
our DC through our TKNet VPNs (basically, Hub-and-Spoke OpenVPN tunnels
running on tiny OpenWRT boxes, with dynamic endpoint IP support, which
have the big advantage of being totally Plug and Play). Our old VPN
setup uses private addressing (10.0.0.0), but we planned to migrate to
AMPRNet adressing, on a separate subnet, different from the 44.190 (ie,
44.168)
In such a setup :
- May I encounter routing issues with some clients ?
- Is it recommended to deploy ampr-ripd in parallel with BGP ?
Thank you in advance for your answers and comments,
73 de TK1BI