27 Jul
2014
27 Jul
'14
7:53 p.m.
Are we anywhere close to being able to support an RF-based mesh network?
Or is it just simplest to have backhaul to a single tunnel device?
I'm thinking the RF network side would be using OSLR or some other
routing protocol, providing it with the information it needs, but for
the tunnel announcing a single IP makes the most sense. Otherwise, the
large network would show up with multiple diverse routes, but may in
reality be partitioned.
--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR
Disinformation Architect
27 Jul
27 Jul
8:55 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Kris Kirby <kris(a)catonic.us> wrote:
Are we anywhere close to being able to support an
RF-based mesh network?
Or is it just simplest to have backhaul to a single tunnel device?
HamWAN (http://hamwan.org) is an OSPF mesh based network using 44net
with multiple Internet backhauls. Unfortunately the IPIP tunnel design
requires a single tunnel endpoint so within AMPR we have a single
point of failure, but at least the rest of the Internet benefits from
our multiple backhauls.
You are probably familiar with the HSMM-MESH system. That system uses
10.0.0.0/8 auto-configured addresses based on the MAC address of your
WRT54G router. 10.0.0.0/8 is obviously different than 44.0.0.0/8, but
I'm sure you know how to change the IP address your devices. Just keep
in mind the existing users have built a system based on private
address space, so you won't easily be able to peer with them. You'll
need to decide on an authoritative source for IP address allocations
first. In my opinion, they made a big mistake not utilizing 44net for
their address space.
Tom KD7LXL
7 Sep
7 Sep
7:30 p.m.
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Tom Hayward wrote:
HamWAN (http://hamwan.org) is an OSPF mesh based
network using 44net
with multiple Internet backhauls. Unfortunately the IPIP tunnel design
requires a single tunnel endpoint so within AMPR we have a single
point of failure, but at least the rest of the Internet benefits from
our multiple backhauls.
Even OSLR has difficulty with this sort of situation, unless one wants
to build/hack a router to use as a hub point for terminating the IPIP
link to mirrorshades and then duplicate/flood all the traffic in the
direction of each known router. That fails the single-point-of-failure
test, however. RF-wise, it does make a little sense, if you have a
high-enough antenna and coverage to match. But again, single point of
failure, which is not in keeping with the failure-tolerant design of the
internet.
In my opinion, they made a big mistake not utilizing
44net for
their address space.
Agreed, but some countries don't have the IP space that some states do.
Indeed, many mountaintops don't have 902-928 MHz, 2.4GHz, or 5.8GHz
available for use.
--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR
Disinformation Architect
8:25 p.m.
Hi folks.
Again another approach. Let's see how it performs in Washington state.
But after studying the homepage for 10min, I think they use 44. IP space
But for a meshed HF net, why not use BGP. In my area, it works pretty well.
Have a look here
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fww…
http://www.de.ampr.org
Here you see the details of the net
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A…
http://hamnetdb.net/
a map of the network
http://hamnetdb.net/lsp_map.cgi#zoom=6&lat=50.4&lon=10.6&layers…
Greetings
DD2MIC
Am 07.09.2014 um 20:30 schrieb Kris Kirby:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Tom Hayward wrote:
--
Beste Grüße von
Micha
HamWAN (http://hamwan.org) is an OSPF mesh based
network using 44net
with multiple Internet backhauls. Unfortunately the IPIP tunnel design
requires a single tunnel endpoint so within AMPR we have a single
point of failure, but at least the rest of the Internet benefits from
our multiple backhauls.
Even OSLR has difficulty with this sort of situation, unless one wants
to build/hack a router to use as a hub point for terminating the IPIP
link to mirrorshades and then duplicate/flood all the traffic in the
direction of each known router. That fails the single-point-of-failure
test, however. RF-wise, it does make a little sense, if you have a
high-enough antenna and coverage to match. But again, single point of
failure, which is not in keeping with the failure-tolerant design of the
internet.
In my opinion, they made a big mistake not
utilizing 44net for
their address space.
Agreed, but some countries don't have the IP space that some states do.
Indeed, many mountaintops don't have 902-928 MHz, 2.4GHz, or 5.8GHz
available for use.
--
Kris Kirby, KE4AHR
Disinformation Architect
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
3525
days inactive
3567
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Kris Kirby -
Micha Przybilla -
Tom Hayward