I'm unable to attend the 2016 TAPR DCC next month in St Petersburg Florida. If anyone on this mailing list is going to be there, could you please let us know the substance of any discussions relevant to the AMPRNet.
Thank you. - Brian
On 8/15/16 1:57 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
I'm unable to attend the 2016 TAPR DCC next month in St Petersburg Florida. If anyone on this mailing list is going to be there, could you please let us know the substance of any discussions relevant to the AMPRNet.
I'm there. I'll be submitting a paper on IPv6 and a bit of a numbering plan for amateur radio networks. BTW ampr.org lacks an AAAA record ;)
Why not get some of the other board members to come out to DCC?
73's
On 15/08/2016 4:12 PM, Bryan Fields wrote:
I'm there. I'll be submitting a paper on IPv6 and a bit of a numbering plan for amateur radio networks. BTW ampr.org lacks an AAAA record ;)
I'll be interested to hear what's happening with IPv6.
Bryan raises a good point -- there are other 44net board members besides Brian, and I bet folks would love to meet them. I'll be in Europe on vacation, but I'm sure there will be plenty of folks to inform the list as to the happenings. On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 at 01:21 Tony Langdon vk3jed@vkradio.com wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On 15/08/2016 4:12 PM, Bryan Fields wrote:
I'm there. I'll be submitting a paper on IPv6 and a bit of a numbering
plan
for amateur radio networks. BTW ampr.org lacks an AAAA record ;)
I'll be interested to hear what's happening with IPv6.
-- 73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL http://vkradio.com
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
On 8/15/16 2:21 AM, Tony Langdon wrote:
I'll be interested to hear what's happening with IPv6.
I'd like to see AMPRNET get an allocation and function as a RIR to ham radio handing out /32's or /48's.
We have a /48 from our upstream now for Tampa Bay HamWAN, but it's not deployed due to be being lazy/working/sick :(
73's
Lazy always gets in the way :)
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 at 01:42 Bryan Fields Bryan@bryanfields.net wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On 8/15/16 2:21 AM, Tony Langdon wrote:
I'll be interested to hear what's happening with IPv6.
I'd like to see AMPRNET get an allocation and function as a RIR to ham radio handing out /32's or /48's.
We have a /48 from our upstream now for Tampa Bay HamWAN, but it's not deployed due to be being lazy/working/sick :(
73's
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
On 15/08/2016 4:42 PM, Bryan Fields wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On 8/15/16 2:21 AM, Tony Langdon wrote:
I'll be interested to hear what's happening with IPv6.
I'd like to see AMPRNET get an allocation and function as a RIR to ham radio handing out /32's or /48's.
Would be nice. I already have full IPv6 capability here, so I'm not a stranger to the protocol. I'd also like to see software developers start utilising IPv6. Very little ham radio software is IPv6 capable. It's frustrating when one has deployed IPv6 and has to keep battling with the evils of NAT. :/ I've been considering allocating a /64 or two from my /56 to ham radio use, just to experiment.
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Bryan Fields wrote:
I'd like to see AMPRNET get an allocation and function as a RIR to ham radio handing out /32's or /48's.
I used to think that way too. However, I submit that it's far easier for the average ham to deal with a prefix trust list than to either 1) negotiate a foreign prefix announcement with their upstream network provider, or, 2) setup and maintain a tunnel. The latter carries forward the additional latency and sub-optimal routing we already have with the current system of IPv4 gateways.
The prefix trust list could be maintained in a route registry.
Antonio Querubin e-mail: tony@lavanauts.org xmpp: antonioquerubin@gmail.com
I agree that we need to move away from relying on using a block of network addresses to identify valid ham radio hosts.
A prefix trust list would provide much more flexibility for network design. To keep individual hams' radio-vs-non radio hosts distinct, the trusts should be something like a /64 where the actual radio gear will be deployed within a given ham's own IPv6 range. It then makes it practical to 'wall off' the radio gear within the ham's home network to prevent unintended access of the ham radio network by non-ham devices.
We can reduce the need for regional network management - any station (club/repeater/individual) that wants to join can do so equally, as there would be no subnets to manage, only over-the-air routes (which would still need to be managed regionally) - although I'd be happy to see at least some of these built dynamically, too (the trust list could be used here to authorise route changes as well). Tunnels should no longer be necessary - if using the Internet for routing, the IPv6 addresses become perfectly routable via the ISPs. The trust lists would be used to filter incoming traffic to prevent non-ham use of these routes.
We get a flexible, resilient, more manageable (meaning less management required) network. The main management tasks would be maintaining the trust list and over-the-air routes.
IPv6 has some real advantages for over-the-air use, including header compression that could actually reduce overhead on the radio links.
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 8/15/16 6:37 AM, Antonio Querubin wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Bryan Fields wrote:
I'd like to see AMPRNET get an allocation and function as a RIR to ham radio handing out /32's or /48's.
I used to think that way too. However, I submit that it's far easier for the average ham to deal with a prefix trust list than to either 1) negotiate a foreign prefix announcement with their upstream network provider, or, 2) setup and maintain a tunnel. The latter carries forward the additional latency and sub-optimal routing we already have with the current system of IPv4 gateways.
The prefix trust list could be maintained in a route registry.
Antonio Querubin e-mail: tony@lavanauts.org xmpp: antonioquerubin@gmail.com
On 16/08/2016 4:22 AM, Richard Chycoski wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I agree that we need to move away from relying on using a block of network addresses to identify valid ham radio hosts.
A prefix trust list would provide much more flexibility for network design. To keep individual hams' radio-vs-non radio hosts distinct, the trusts should be something like a /64 where the actual radio gear will be deployed within a given ham's own IPv6 range. It then makes it practical to 'wall off' the radio gear within the ham's home network to prevent unintended access of the ham radio network by non-ham devices.
Makes sense to me. I also wonder if down the track, we can use the optimally routed IPv6 network to tunnel IPv4 Net44 addresses. I imagine it should be possible to map the IPv4 routers onto IPv6, for those hosts that have IPv6, and get better routing efficiency (utilising native IPv6 routing to take the most direct path to the remote IPv4 tunnel endpoint). Would this improve the performance of tunneled segments of the IPv4 network?
While IPv6 is the future, I believe IPv4 will still be with us for a long time, and no reason we can't try and improve the performance of the IPv4 network, to the point that it can handle latency and jitter sensitive services such as VoIP. It's going to be a major effort to update a lot of our infrastructure, because of the interconnectedness and distribution (I'm thinking of networks like IRLP, Echolink, D-STAR, etc, which are all IPv4 only) involved. If we could move this infrastructure to an IPv4 network running on top of optimal IPv6 routing, that might help things.
Just thinking out loud here and brainstorming ideas.
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Bryan Fields wrote:
I'm there. I'll be submitting a paper on IPv6 and a bit of a numbering plan for amateur radio networks. BTW ampr.org lacks an AAAA record ;)
+1 though I don't think we need an IPv6 'numbering' plan as we need a network trust plan and enumerate all the 'trusted' networks whether they be IPv6 or net-44. The increasing ease of obtaining IPv6 address space and connectivity, particularly for end-users, changes the paradigm of having to rely on a single netblock for address space. The latter results in inefficient tunnelling and aggregated points of failure at the net-44 'gateways' that simply aren't necessary in an IPv6 world.
Antonio Querubin e-mail: tony@lavanauts.org xmpp: antonioquerubin@gmail.com
On 15/08/2016 5:29 PM, Antonio Querubin wrote:
+1 though I don't think we need an IPv6 'numbering' plan as we need a network trust plan and enumerate all the 'trusted' networks whether they be IPv6 or net-44. The increasing ease of obtaining IPv6 address space and connectivity, particularly for end-users, changes the paradigm of having to rely on a single netblock for address space. The latter results in inefficient tunnelling and aggregated points of failure at the net-44 'gateways' that simply aren't necessary in an IPv6 world.
That's true. I'm certainly happy to allocate some of my /56 to ham radio applications, once the trust model is sorted out. At this point, I'm only using one /64 of my /56.
On 15/08/16 07:12, Bryan Fields wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On 8/15/16 1:57 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
I'm unable to attend the 2016 TAPR DCC next month in St Petersburg Florida. If anyone on this mailing list is going to be there, could you please let us know the substance of any discussions relevant to the AMPRNet.
I'm there. I'll be submitting a paper on IPv6 and a bit of a numbering plan for amateur radio networks. BTW ampr.org lacks an AAAA record ;)
See you there,
John EI7IG
I plan to be there. Have hotel and airline lined up :)
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Bryan Fields Bryan@bryanfields.net wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On 8/15/16 1:57 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
I'm unable to attend the 2016 TAPR DCC next month in St Petersburg Florida. If anyone on this mailing list is going to be there, could you please let us know the substance of any discussions relevant to the AMPRNet.
I'm there. I'll be submitting a paper on IPv6 and a bit of a numbering plan for amateur radio networks. BTW ampr.org lacks an AAAA record ;)
Why not get some of the other board members to come out to DCC?
73's
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-
Antonio Querubin -
Brian Kantor -
Bryan Fields -
John Ronan -
K7VE - John -
Richard Chycoski -
Ryan Elliott Turner -
Tony Langdon