15 Jan
2016
15 Jan
'16
2:24 p.m.
Subject:
Re: [44net] Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
From:
Bill Vodall <wa7nwp(a)gmail.com>
Date:
01/14/2016 10:19 PM
To:
AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
I am firmly against that.
Contrary to the Internet as it is now, we are not a collection of transient users that
only use a couple
of centralized services, but we are all peers that should be able to both use and offer
services and make
connections in all directions.
That is what makes us different from ordinary internet users, and using dynamic or even
translated
addresses kills all that and makes the whole AMPRnet superfluous.
Rob
>When someone applies for an address...
Transient users don't need static or even real IP addresses. We could
re-invent DHCP... 
15 Jan
15 Jan
3:05 p.m.
New subject: Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Rob Janssen <pe1chl(a)amsat.org> wrote:
That is what makes us different from ordinary internet users, and using
dynamic or even translated
addresses kills all that and makes the whole AMPRnet superfluous.
Rob
I beg to differ. I agree with the NAT position, but there are definitely
cases for the use of dynamically allocated addresses.
Here is one: D-STAR data protocol encapsulates Ethernet frames inside of
D-STAR frames, in turn those can contain IP frames. If I am in a mobile,
driving down a highway and using a series of access points, then receiving
a new 44.x.x.x address via DHCP from those access points keeps me connected
for services I am using. If that DHCP also supports Dynamic DNS, then my
hostname doesn't need to change if I am offering services. E.g. I could be
jeep.k7ve.ampr.org and move from 44.24.10.1 to 44.24.100.48 to 44.24.201.12
and continue to use services as well as provide services to others.
--
------------------------------
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>
3:35 p.m.
New subject: Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
I agree - there is a place for temporary addresses for
mobile/portable/temporary connectivity.
Even NAT/PAT could have it's uses - not to provide service like the
current Internet providers who are stingy with addresses, but again for
mobile/portable applications. I wouldn't rule it out - and it really
can't be prevented, anyone can NAT/PAT with existing hardware - but no
one should be forced to go there for 'regular' service in the way that
home Internet connectivity has gone.
Not all devices connected to the 44 net provide services - some are just
consumers that don't need a fixed address (or may be that way when
mobile). The devices that do need a fixed address should get them.
You *can* have your cake and eat it too! :-)
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 1/15/16 1:05 PM, K7VE - John wrote:
_______________________________________________
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Rob Janssen <pe1chl(a)amsat.org> wrote:
That is what makes us different from ordinary
internet users, and using
dynamic or even translated
addresses kills all that and makes the whole AMPRnet superfluous.
Rob
I beg to differ. I agree with the NAT position, but there are definitely
cases for the use of dynamically allocated addresses.
Here is one: D-STAR data protocol encapsulates Ethernet frames inside of
D-STAR frames, in turn those can contain IP frames. If I am in a mobile,
driving down a highway and using a series of access points, then receiving
a new 44.x.x.x address via DHCP from those access points keeps me connected
for services I am using. If that DHCP also supports Dynamic DNS, then my
hostname doesn't need to change if I am offering services. E.g. I could be
jeep.k7ve.ampr.org and move from 44.24.10.1 to 44.24.100.48 to 44.24.201.12
and continue to use services as well as provide services to others.
4:40 p.m.
New subject: Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
Now really...
You actually want a dynamic DNS?
We can not manage the regular DNS entries in the portal yet.
But what is stopping you to send a DNS robot update mail on IP change?
Marius, YO2LOJ
6:36 p.m.
New subject: Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
If you delegate DNS for subnets, the subnets can run Dynamic DNS if they
like. If it's over RF, the encapsulating protocol (AX.25, D-STAR, etc.)
can provide the callsign.
Those who can't provide that service to RF/Mobile users, won't.... Those
who can provide it, will.
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Marius Petrescu <marius(a)yo2loj.ro> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
Now really...
You actually want a dynamic DNS?
We can not manage the regular DNS entries in the portal yet.
But what is stopping you to send a DNS robot update mail on IP change?
Marius, YO2LOJ
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
--
------------------------------
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>
8:25 p.m.
New subject: Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 04:36:55PM -0800, K7VE - John wrote:
If you delegate DNS for subnets, the subnets can run
Dynamic DNS if they
like. If it's over RF, the encapsulating protocol (AX.25, D-STAR, etc.)
can provide the callsign.
Keep in mind that any dynamic assignment scheme should keep a logfile
or other record of who had which IP address when, so that problems can
be tracked down, even if the assignment is no longer in effect.
- Brian
10:13 p.m.
New subject: Verifying the identities of IP coordinators
Individual subnets should be able to choose to be part of dynamic DNS
allocation - or not - this is especially useful for mobile stations.
And yes - logging is key, to track down issues.
Rules could be set up, e.g., only allow patterns like:
ve7cvs-mobile1.ampr.org styles of addresses for dynamic DNS? Perhaps a
different pattern, but the idea being that transient addresses would
have a defined pattern for dynamic DNS?
It needs to be easy to connect, but also easy to debug.
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 1/15/16 2:40 PM, Marius Petrescu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
Now really...
You actually want a dynamic DNS?
We can not manage the regular DNS entries in the portal yet.
But what is stopping you to send a DNS robot update mail on IP change?
Marius, YO2LOJ
16 Jan
16 Jan
2:17 p.m.
New subject: RIP Question
Hi there
Did I understand correct that the RIP system we use is RIP over the Tunneling ?
Or in other words we need at first to have Tunnel to AMPR Router
and only then the RIP data can pass through ?
Any Info Welcome
Thanks Forward
Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
http://www.ronen.org
3234
days inactive
3235
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Brian Kantor -
K7VE - John -
Marius Petrescu -
R P -
Richard Chycoski -
Rob Janssen