15 Aug
2016
15 Aug
'16
5:14 a.m.
It's frustrating when one has deployed IPv6 and
has to keep battling
with the evils of NAT. :/
But we have a large IPv4 space available so why would we battle with NAT???
It should not be a problem to get an IPv4 address from net-44 for any of your
experiments and not have to use NAT.
Not that I am against experimenting with IPv6, but I am not sure which way
that should go:
- somehow get an "own" IPv6 range that we can manage in a similar way as
the net-44 space
- just use the IPv6 space everyone can get from their local provider and
have only DNS support for it in ampr.org and maybe some service for listing
of prefixes in use on ampr hosts to be used in firewall address lists.
Having an own range appears nice, but it means we will again have the problems with
internet tunneling and BGP routing that we are having now.
Rob
15 Aug
15 Aug
7:12 a.m.
New subject: TAPR DCC 2016 - anyone going?
On 15/08/2016 7:14 PM, Rob Janssen wrote:
But we have a large IPv4 space available so why would
we battle with
NAT???
It should not be a problem to get an IPv4 address from net-44 for any
of your
experiments and not have to use NAT.
Net44 suffers from high latency and non
optimal routing, because of its
largely tunneled architecture. While great for general data exchange (I
ise XMPP over AMPRNET with no issues, for example), it's not as good for
time critical applications such as VoIP (IRLP, Echolink, etc).
Not that I am against experimenting with IPv6, but I am not sure which
way
that should go:
- somehow get an "own" IPv6 range that we can manage in a similar way as
the net-44 space
- just use the IPv6 space everyone can get from their local provider and
have only DNS support for it in ampr.org and maybe some service for
listing
of prefixes in use on ampr hosts to be used in firewall address lists.
Having an own range appears nice, but it means we will again have the
problems with
internet tunneling and BGP routing that we are having now.
I think with much larger address space and the availability of /56 or
larger spaces for many connections means many of us already have excess,
the second approach is worth investigating. Come up with DNS management
and a system for automatically configuring AMPRNET6 routers to share
trust information to tie the network together securely. As I said
before, I could easily allocate part of my /56 to this project. I'm
using less than 1% of my address range (1/256th to be exact :) ).
--
73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
3021
days inactive
3021
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Rob Janssen -
Tony Langdon