3 Jun
2012
3 Jun
'12
9:46 a.m.
Hi John,
Thanks for the slides, Is there a video of the presentation available
anywhere I think it'd make some good viewing.
Rebooting the AMPRnet is whats needed, new products like the UDR56k are
a great idea and I'd expect to see some poor mans clones of its
functionality following in time. Thanks to the internet the general
level of data comms knowledge has improved in the last 20 years, and a
resurgence in interest seems to be occurring. Me personally, I've got
internet burnout. :)
As regards to tunnelling, I thought it was policy that to tunnel to /44
you need a static IP I read somewhere. Technically of course it's
possible to tunnel to any accessable IP, I subscribe to a dynamic DNS
service to track my VPN end points for example.
-Cheers Max. G7UOZ.
On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 12:00 -0700, 44net-request(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
wrote:
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 14:41:22 -0700
From: K7VE - John <k7ve(a)k7ve.org>
To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: [44net] Some newbie guidance.
Message-ID:
<CAN77r3xdL9DQv3XFH331PQ+YdBa2MaTu6PBnWq1ehCrvYcdYuA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Slides from a presentation I gave a couple of months ago
http://www.microhams.com/digitalconf2012/K7VE_N7IPB_RebootNET44.pdf
Some of the tunneling protocols don't require a fixed IP -- I tunnel a /24
network from a data center to my home (and also a portable subnet) using
L2TP.
------------------------------
John D. Hays
K7VE
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223
<http://k7ve.org/blog> <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays>
<http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays>
3 Jun
3 Jun
3:36 p.m.
New subject: tunneling
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:46:11AM +0100, Max Lock wrote:
As regards to tunnelling, I thought it was policy
that to tunnel to /44
you need a static IP I read somewhere. Technically of course it's
possible to tunnel to any accessable IP, I subscribe to a dynamic DNS
service to track my VPN end points for example.
-Cheers Max. G7UOZ.
No, it's not a policy, just a practical matter as the tunnel ("encap")
table is only updated at most once a day and many of the stations which
incorporate it manually do so less often than that. There is interest
in accomodating 'dyndns' and similar measures in a future implementation.
- Brian
3:54 p.m.
New subject: tunneling
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:46:11AM +0100, Max Lock wrote:
IP
address for their subnet registrations, What prevents us from doing
using something like dyndns now? What would it take to allow specification
of names rather than addresses. really does this not just simply cause an
extra dns lookup? not the best or most efficient implimentation, but
mighty convenient.
-Eric
AF6EP
As regards to tunnelling, I thought it was
policy that to tunnel to /44
you need a static IP I read somewhere. Technically of course it's
possible to tunnel to any accessable IP, I subscribe to a dynamic DNS
service to track my VPN end points for example.
-Cheers Max. G7UOZ.
No, it's not a policy, just a practical matter as the tunnel ("encap")
table is only updated at most once a day and many of the stations which
incorporate it manually do so less often than that. There is interest
in accomodating 'dyndns' and similar measures in a future implementation.
- Brian
other than allowing gateway owners to specify a domain name rather than an 
4:03 p.m.
New subject: tunneling
Eric Fort wrote:
other than allowing gateway owners to specify a domain name rather than an IP address for
their subnet registrations, What prevents us from doing using something like dyndns now?
What would it take to allow specification of names rather than
addresses. really does this not just simply cause an extra dns lookup? not the best or
most efficient implimentation, but mighty convenient.
-Eric
AF6EP
It wouldn't work in existing software. Remember, not everyone is using NOS.
I think rather than introducing yet another hack, it is better to use existing protocols
that the industry
has developed to solve the roadwarrior vpn problem.
(of course it usually involves the use of one or more central systems that route all the
traffic, which is in
certain ways a step back from the fully meshed architecture)
Rob
4:37 p.m.
New subject: tunneling
I can't stand to keep quiet any longer!!!!
Why not forget the tunnels? Or at least do something in addition?
My ISP (who is also a long time Ham, and is also me) has requested several
times a block of addresses to provide to Hams who are on his Internet
service, which is a wireless based ISP covering 13 cities including the
Atlanta area and fed by 2 Tier 1 providers via fiber. If we do not use the
resource, then we face losing it. We are tying up what- a million
addresses? IP addresses are in short supply. How many do we use? 1,000
even if that many?
What happens if Brian loses his job at UCSD? If everything goes through
there, the whole thing is hosed.
Ralph
N4NEQ
-----Original Message-----
From: 44net-bounces+ralphlists=bsrg.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
[mailto:44net-bounces+ralphlists=bsrg.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of
Brian Kantor
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 10:36 AM
To: AMPRNet working group
Subject: Re: [44net] tunneling
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:46:11AM +0100, Max Lock wrote:
As regards to tunnelling, I thought it was policy
that to tunnel to
/44 you need a static IP I read somewhere. Technically of course it's
possible to tunnel to any accessable IP, I subscribe to a dynamic DNS
service to track my VPN end points for example.
-Cheers Max. G7UOZ.
No, it's not a policy, just a practical matter as the tunnel ("encap")
table
is only updated at most once a day and many of the stations which
incorporate it manually do so less often than that. There is interest in
accomodating 'dyndns' and similar measures in a future implementation.
- Brian
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5042 - Release Date: 06/03/12
4 Jun
4 Jun
1:40 p.m.
New subject: tunneling
Regarding tunneling, maybe we should rather start worrying about correct
tunnel setup.
I checked a little and a lot of setups do not correctly send outgoing
packets via individual ipip tunnels but rather via the default gateway, so
they go via the 44.0.0.1 uscd gateway (which is not the intended behaviour
and packets are usually dropped in a correct setup since replies do not come
in the same interface/route as their outbound counterparts).
Maybe a correct tutorial on setup in linux, jnos, tnos and others is in
place at first?
And a checkup on already set up gateways. BTW: mine is working, I don't need
to check it is not a correct attitude - it probably doesn't, it just seems
from your point ov view.
Afterwards we should worry about dynamic routing and other stuff.
73s de Marius, YO2LOJ
-----Original Message-----
From: 44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
[mailto:44net-bounces+marius=yo2loj.ro@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Ralph
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 18:37
To: 'AMPRNet working group'
Subject: Re: [44net] tunneling
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
I can't stand to keep quiet any longer!!!!
Why not forget the tunnels? Or at least do something in addition?
My ISP (who is also a long time Ham, and is also me) has requested several
times a block of addresses to provide to Hams who are on his Internet
service, which is a wireless based ISP covering 13 cities including the
Atlanta area and fed by 2 Tier 1 providers via fiber. If we do not use the
resource, then we face losing it. We are tying up what- a million
addresses? IP addresses are in short supply. How many do we use? 1,000
even if that many?
What happens if Brian loses his job at UCSD? If everything goes through
there, the whole thing is hosed.
Ralph
N4NEQ
-----Original Message-----
From: 44net-bounces+ralphlists=bsrg.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
[mailto:44net-bounces+ralphlists=bsrg.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of
Brian Kantor
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 10:36 AM
To: AMPRNet working group
Subject: Re: [44net] tunneling
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 09:46:11AM +0100, Max Lock wrote:
As regards to tunnelling, I thought it was policy
that to tunnel to
/44 you need a static IP I read somewhere. Technically of course it's
possible to tunnel to any accessable IP, I subscribe to a dynamic DNS
service to track my VPN end points for example.
-Cheers Max. G7UOZ.
No, it's not a policy, just a practical matter as the tunnel ("encap")
table
is only updated at most once a day and many of the stations which
incorporate it manually do so less often than that. There is interest in
accomodating 'dyndns' and similar measures in a future implementation.
- Brian
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5042 - Release Date: 06/03/12
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
4363
days inactive
4364
days old
5 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Brian Kantor -
Eric Fort -
Marius Petrescu -
Max Lock -
Ralph -
Rob Janssen