BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of the country you reside in.

I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is.

I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, and better for a number of reasons.

Just my .02 -Colin/VA6CCB

-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Pedro Converso pconver@gmail.com Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks Antonis,

Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is accepted.

Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users.

73, lu7abf, Pedro

On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Hello Pedro,

The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space on the Internet using BGP.

Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be.

Thanks, Antonis

...

On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations?

Thanks

73, lu7abf, Pedro 44.153 Argentina Coordination _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

I totally agree, but some of us are there, so just want to make sure 44net remains BGP capable. Also, some like Vultr ( think its them? ) and myself do BGP announcements for downstream 44net users that we host services for like VPS. It just happens that my day job is also running a BGP capable network so things worked out!

Most 44net folks wont, or cant do BGP, so need a stable, easy alternative for sure, its important the technical bar is low enough that as many folks as possible can make use of the 44net space. But for those that can, BGP will be the best choice, just not a lot of us.

-C

-----Original Message----- From: Tim Požar pozar@lns.com Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:42 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Colin Bodor colin.bodor@imperium.ca Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

BGP on the public Internet requires that you:

* Have an ASN * Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce * Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to. * Have the gear/software that announce the space * Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting with your deployment * Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a peering location, etc.) * Have the skill set to execute all of the above

This will be a large hurdle for most folks.

Tim

On 7/28/21 11:16 AM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote:

BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of the country you reside in.

I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is.

I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, and better for a number of reasons.

Just my .02 -Colin/VA6CCB

-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Pedro Converso pconver@gmail.com Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks Antonis,

Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is accepted.

Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users.

73, lu7abf, Pedro

On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

...

Hello Pedro,

The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space on the Internet using BGP.

Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be.

Thanks, Antonis

...

On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations?

Thanks

73, lu7abf, Pedro 44.153 Argentina Coordination _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

On 7/28/21 8:42 PM, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote:

BGP on the public Internet requires that you:

• Have an ASN
• Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce
• Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to.
• Have the gear/software that announce the space
• Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting with your deployment
• Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a peering location, etc.)
• Have the skill set to execute all of the above

This will be a large hurdle for most folks.

That is why it was suggested that the TAC would design a backbone network. consisting of routers in datacenters all over the world, interconnected by tunnels, and accepting various kinds of VPN connections from users.   These routers would advertise the network on BGP (either local subnets like /16 or the entire /9+/10) in several places around the world, and thus relieve the individual amateurs from the chores mentioned above. And, at the same time, allow the allocation of smaller subnets to users (sharing a larger allocation between them), facilitate the routing of net-44 space between regions of the world, etc.

Users would have the choice of using a simple standard VPN tunnel to route just their network to/from a nearby backbone PoP, or to make multiple tunnels and run a dynamic routing protocol when they are interested in that.  That would then be BGP on private AS number and peering only with a couple of PoPs from that backbone network, so you can announce smaller subnets and do not require the heavy gear required to do internet BGP. And this network would know which subnets are "intranet", which are "BGP announced" and which have special routing needs.  So the proposal that is now being discussed would not be necessary at all.

Of course users would still have the option to make direct links to other users, or to announce space on internet BGP directly.

But instead, the TAC came up with a renumbering plan to cover a special case and which is not even part of a solution.

Rob

I think there is a misunderstanding about preventing opeople to access the network, it's all abiut HOW they access the network. I referred to "noobs", but what I want to point out is exacly the existance of different user classes, with different capabilities.

First, we have the ones with good netwoking knowledge, for which neither networking approach poses any problems. These are not the issue.

Then we have those with mediocre knowledge, but willing to learn. For such users, the experiment is the interesting part, not necessary the network access itself. These also pose no special problems, and their let's say bigger brothers can help them to get on track.

And finally, there are the ones I called "noobs". These users don't know why they need to access this network, and what to do with it. For them, the internet is a browser on a device, and the network is something you connect to, to get the intrnet working. This last category has basically 3 goals when trying to access the 44net: - they want to access local community resources. For this they need some kind of access (radio, HSN, VPN) provided by the local community, and an easy comprehensible configuration to get to those resources. In this case, they only need a route to the local subnet, the rest of the 44net space will be accessible to them via the regular internet, but in theur use case, that goal is secondary, since only local subnet resources are important. - they want national/regional resource accesss. In this case, again they need a network access by a connectivity provider (usually provided by hams from the first category, or a POP like the ones discussed in the 44NGN group, again provided by some bigger brother). Again as configuration, in the current allocation scheme, the national/regional space may be represented by a single subnet entry, with connectivity provided by the upstream. Again, the rest of the 44net space is accessed via the regular internet. - they want access to all of the 44net address space. This kind of users are probably rare, as the interest of a "noob" usually does not exceed national resource level. In this case, again an upstream provider is needed, and the complete network is represented by 2 static route entries, with a complete access provided by upstream.

What is actually interesting is that the national/regional filtering and subnetting is actually easier done using the current allocation scheme, no matter if it is reachable via tunnel or BGP announced on the public internet, as long as the upstream provider is willing to forward those connections in the name of the user (again we speak about those POPs).

So what the new allocation scheme will actually break, is the easy "geofencing" by national/regional allocation using a single top subnet, and the seamless migration from one network type to another (radio (isolated)->tunneled->direct(BGP)). It will provide a split in the address space based on the acces mode, which should be transparent to the user.

Keep in mind that resources that are meant to be accessible internet-wide and are BGP announced are fully functional even without 44net client access (services like echolink proxies), so for an user running echolink on a phone, there is no need to use a 44net address. The same goes for BM/IPSC/IRLP servers, DX clusters or whatever. It becomes only important if the access is restricted to 44net addresses (like for example access to radio resources like packet nodes and other similar sensitive regions). And then, most users usually do not want access past their regional resource.

On the other hand, resource access can and should be controlled by the one providing them. So, if hams want to provide services visible on the public internet, of course they can use a BGP announced 44net address space, but there is no specific advantage to these addresses, other than their availability: they behave identically to any other public IP. For low bandwidth applications, the current tunnel system together with the UCSD hosted gateway can offer almost the same services to the public internet, while offering higher speeds betweens 44net islands.

These issues should be weighted in when deciding to reorganizing a well established working network hierarchy. And in my oppinion, if there are access configuration issues in certain large networks affecting "noob" users, simplifying THEIR network access should be done on THEIR border systems and in THEIR networks, without compromising the existing working network.

And also the discussion on the 44NGN list should be taken in account. There are resources available on the set, some at ZERO costs, able to offer POPs, which would solve basically "noob" access by providing easy access to such users.

Marius, YO2LOJ

Hi everybody,

It seems to me that you are making BGP-peering more difficult than necessary. * You do not have to announce your /24 (or larger) to more than one peer/transit provider * you do not have to have a public ASN. your transit provider can give you a private ASN * cheap and robust enough gear/software that covers BGP is widely available, both as consumer products requiring less experience and open source software requiring more experience * The NOC requirements of your transit provider often depends symmetrically on what level of service you require from your transit provider.

But of course you need to be competent and experienced enough, or partner with someone who is.

Cheers

/Bjorn

On 2021-07-28 20:42, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote:

BGP on the public Internet requires that you:

• Have an ASN
• Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce
• Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to.
• Have the gear/software that announce the space
• Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting with

your deployment

• Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a peering

location, etc.)

• Have the skill set to execute all of the above

This will be a large hurdle for most folks.

Tim

On 7/28/21 11:16 AM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote:

...

BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of the country you reside in.

I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is.

I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, and better for a number of reasons.

Just my .02 -Colin/VA6CCB

-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Pedro Converso pconver@gmail.com Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks Antonis,

Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is accepted.

Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users.

73, lu7abf, Pedro

On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

...

Hello Pedro,

The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space on the Internet using BGP.

Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be.

Thanks, Antonis

...

On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations?

Thanks

73, lu7abf, Pedro 44.153 Argentina Coordination _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

Hi Tim,

There are several good reasons to use BGP even in the case that you have only one peer/transit provider.

One of the more important to us is that you can connect at more than one location and combine with an intranet routing protocol, such as  OSPF,  to implement automatic failover.  Our transit provider has a national presence and we have of course radio amateur clubs all over the country. Our ambition is that local networks should be able to provide local services even if part of the network goes down.

Bjorn

On 2021-07-29 00:13, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote:

The list I gave is for folks that want to get their own ASN and address space.  Yes...  You can do what you did below, but then why do BGP?  If you just have one peer and the upstream is announcing your address, you can just skip running your own BGP session and have them announce it for you and route to your network.

You can skip, redundancy, portability, etc.

Tim

On 7/28/21 12:26 PM, Bjorn Pehrson wrote:

...

Hi everybody,

It seems to me that you are making BGP-peering more difficult than necessary.

• You do not have to announce your /24 (or larger) to more than one

peer/transit provider

• you do not have to have a public ASN. your transit provider can

give you a private ASN

• cheap and robust enough gear/software that covers BGP is widely

available, both as consumer products requiring less experience and open source software requiring more experience

• The NOC requirements of your transit provider often depends

symmetrically on what level of service you require from your transit provider.

But of course you need to be competent and experienced enough, or partner with someone who is.

Cheers

/Bjorn

On 2021-07-28 20:42, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote:

...

BGP on the public Internet requires that you:

• Have an ASN
• Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce
• Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to.
• Have the gear/software that announce the space
• Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting

with your deployment

• Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a

peering location, etc.)

• Have the skill set to execute all of the above

This will be a large hurdle for most folks.

Tim

On 7/28/21 11:16 AM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote:

...

BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of the country you reside in.

I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is.

I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, and better for a number of reasons.

Just my .02 -Colin/VA6CCB

-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Pedro Converso pconver@gmail.com Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks Antonis,

Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is accepted.

Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users.

73, lu7abf, Pedro

On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

...

Hello Pedro,

The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space on the Internet using BGP.

Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be.

Thanks, Antonis

...

On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations?

Thanks

73, lu7abf, Pedro 44.153 Argentina Coordination _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

In my case my service provider did all the BGP work on his end, using his ASN.  I just did the legwork of applying for a /24 and obtaining and forwarding the LOA, as well as organising geolocation updates, DNS, and doing my own renumbering.

While I didn't learn anything about BGP itself, I did get a feel for some of the related administrative processes.

If the network starts using BGP internally, I'd be open to learning about it.

On 29/7/21 5:29 am, PH5X via 44Net wrote:

I've never done anything more than home networking and I have managed to set this up remotely on a VM for €5/month. My network is connected directly to two internet exchanges and exchanging routing information with hundreds of other autonomous systems.

An ASN can be had for free from some sponsoring LIRs. The address space is available from 44Net. Plenty of people are willing to peer with you, even some larger ISPs, NSPs and organizations are happy to peer with small networks. Some even provide free transit. A € 5 VPS and free & open source software is all you need. You could even get started with a tunnel to a virtual internet exchange and a transit provider from a local machine. Some experience with home networking and Linux command line is all I had. These peering requirements are not always so strict or are not mentioned at all. Some large networks may have those requirements for direct peering, plenty of others that don't. Some technical skills are expected, but we already have that as amateur radio operators, or are willing to learn.

It's not such a large hurdle to overcome as it might seem. 44net can be a great opportunity to learn about BGP and the workings of the global internet with publicly routable address space. People should be encouraged to learn.

Regards, PH5X

On 28-07-2021 20:42, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote:

...

BGP on the public Internet requires that you:

• Have an ASN
• Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce
• Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to.
• Have the gear/software that announce the space
• Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting

with your deployment

• Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a peering

location, etc.)

• Have the skill set to execute all of the above

This will be a large hurdle for most folks.

Tim

On 7/28/21 11:16 AM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote:

...

BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of the country you reside in.

I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is.

I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, andbetter for a number of reasons.

Just my .02 -Colin/VA6CCB

-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Pedro Converso pconver@gmail.com Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks Antonis,

Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is accepted.

Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users.

...

...

73, lu7abf, Pedro

On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

...

Hello Pedro,

The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space on the Internet using BGP.

Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be.

Thanks, Antonis

...

On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations?

Thanks

73, lu7abf, Pedro 44.153 Argentina Coordination _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

Oh... I didn't even mention updating a Routing Registry someplace. :-)

Tim

On 7/28/21 11:42 AM, Tim Požar via 44Net wrote:

BGP on the public Internet requires that you:

• Have an ASN
• Have address space that is a /24 or larger that you can announce
• Typically, have two peers or more you can announce to.
• Have the gear/software that announce the space
• Have some previous experience so you are not just experimenting with

your deployment

• Meet your peer's requirements (eg 24 hour NOC, show up at a peering

location, etc.)

• Have the skill set to execute all of the above

This will be a large hurdle for most folks.

Tim

On 7/28/21 11:16 AM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote:

...

BGP is what is used at a high level for the internet, it can be ultra-reliable but of course only as reliable as the number of peers and the admin who runs that ASN 😉 and in some cases, the politics of the country you reside in.

I have no comment on the proposal, other than that if I need to renumber any of my BGP prefixes, sooner is probably better than later, and VPN makes more sense (I think that’s whats being proposed?) than the current method (but BGP is best) IMHO. Amazon AWS for example can do BGP through a VPN, those of us who can do BGP will prefer it as its easiest for our network design, and if you "just want to connect" IPSEC is supported by almost everything and would be easy to configure and setup, specially with a portal to create credentials and provide some config examples. Then just default route through it. Or even OpenSSL... The renumbering is what it is.

I am also willing to provide some no charge VPS's up here in Canada if that is of any use for VPN end points or whatever purpose. We are actively seeking volunteer opportunities that "mesh" with our IT offerings (data center, BGP, VPS etc) and happy to donate some resources to a good cause. I also focus on keeping local traffic local (IE internet exchange points) so if the opportunity is there to help route local 44net traffic within Canada that’s great, and better for a number of reasons.

Just my .02 -Colin/VA6CCB

-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Pedro Converso via 44Net Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 12:06 To: 44Net general discussion 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Pedro Converso pconver@gmail.com Subject: Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks Antonis,

Looks things could be then allright for us in case this proposal is accepted.

Althoug BGP doesn't look reliable as on https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-bgp/ I try to not favore BGP usage for ampr users.

73, lu7abf, Pedro

On 7/28/21, Antonios Chariton (daknob) via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

...

Hello Pedro,

The 44.153/16 allocation will only be affected if you do not want to join a network like HAMNET but instead you want to use this IP space on the Internet using BGP.

Depending on your current use case and what you plan to do, we can provide more information about any steps you may have to take, and if you do, we’ll be happy to work with you to determine what these may be.

Thanks, Antonis

...

On 28 Jul 2021, at 15:59, Pedro Converso via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:

Will proposed change affect 44.153.x.x allocations?

Thanks

73, lu7abf, Pedro 44.153 Argentina Coordination _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net

---

44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net