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@hamradio.ucsd.edu wrote:
Message: 2 Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 14:41:22 -0700 From: K7VE - John k7ve@k7ve.org To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] Some newbie guidance. Message-ID: CAN77r3xdL9DQv3XFH331PQ+YdBa2MaTu6PBnWq1ehCrvYcdYuA@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
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
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(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
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
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
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@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@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
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@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@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@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@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-
Brian Kantor -
Eric Fort -
Marius Petrescu -
Max Lock -
Ralph -
Rob Janssen