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
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Kris Kirby kris@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
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
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%2Fwww...
Here you see the details of the net http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%...
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:
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@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-
Kris Kirby -
Micha Przybilla -
Tom Hayward