I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.) - Brian
On 13-08-21 11:19 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
I have 4 RF ports, 2 hf, 2 vhf, all ip capable, but there's no-one in my area to route to over the air...and forget trying tcipip @ 300 baud hf, lol, that wud be painful...but I cud turn the beam and route to ka0mos over vhf... prolly not very helpful, but yes, I use/would use ip over RF, I have b4, and I will again!
Same issue here... I have a few station In Indiana whow ould like to link via RF but we are just to distant.. Trying to motivate other..
73 N9LYA
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
I have 4 RF ports, 2 hf, 2 vhf, all ip capable, but there's no-one in my area to route to over the air...and forget trying tcipip @ 300 baud hf, lol, that wud be painful...but I cud turn the beam and route to ka0mos over vhf... prolly not very helpful, but yes, I use/would use ip over RF, I have b4, and I will again!
My plan is to rebuild the RF network....in times of emergency, which is what my network is for you can't depend on the carrier based services to be available.
B
________________________________ From: Brian Kantor Brian@UCSD.Edu To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:19:04 AM Subject: [44net] Radio-based networking
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.) - Brian _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
On 13-08-21 11:49 AM, Bob Scanferla wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ My plan is to rebuild the RF network....in times of emergency, which is what my network is for you can't depend on the carrier based services to be available.
I agree completely...but the infrastructure here is sadly outdated, but at least we do have a few working nodes, but not many users...my station is solar/wind-powered - I would not fare very well thru an EMP however, so have a diesel 7kw generator that would make it thru an EMP...I always try to keep an old tube-type radio in my herd... I would love to see some kind of RF mesh tho., in case I survived, I'd need something to ping, hi hi!! Cheers, John
Brian,
In Santa Clara County, CA, we have BBSs W1XSC, W2XSC, W3XSC, W4XSC, W5XSC and W6XSC. They share a common 440 frequency for forwarding. W[1-4]XSC are the primary BBSs and are usually the only ones on the 440 frequency. Each has 2m and 220 access frequencies. Some of the sites also have 802.11 point-to-point links between them. (We do not use converted amateur frequency/power 802.11 stuff because it doesn't really buy us anything and, in fact, restricts us due to part 97 restrictions on 3rd party traffic.) W5XSC is a training and "fill-in" BBS that moves about to events and can be deployed in a remote location if necessary. It would use the 440 frequency to communicate with the other BBSs. W6XSC is really just a hot stand-by to quickly replace W[1-4]XSC, if needed.
Currently, W2XSC serves as the primary gateway. It has AXIP links to a variety of other systems in California. We are currently waiting on another local BBS sysop to fix his 220 radio. When that happens (this month or next), two of our local BBS network links will convert from AXIP to AX.25 on 220 radio.
We're hoping that the UDR56K guys will see the importance of adding forward error correction. If they do that, we'll probably switch to that for the backbone. With FEC, we figure we could probably get 32-36 kbps of real error-free performance. Without FEC, it's just not going to work any better than what we have now.
A few folks are investigating ham mesh applications for local user access (instead of 1200 baud AX.25). I don't know how far this will go or how dependable it would be in an emergency due to the need for some many hams to keep their part of the mesh operating. But we'll see.
More internet stuff: W2XSC also serves as a one-way out e-mail gateway from all of the BBSs. Email is deemed important by various organizations so they can get health and welfare word out to families and/or communicate with vendors. Due to the problem with 3rd party traffic, we are working on establishing direct Internet access for each BBS. This will allow all of the BBSs to perform 2-way email gateway functions. When Internet is available at all sites, we will also convert each to be their own AMPRnet gateways. But for BBS network stuff, I presume other systems will still prefer to forwarding through W2XSC or maybe one other site. Maintaining too many forwarding definitions is just a pain. Even with Internet at each site, we intend to continue to have the BBSs communicate with each other over radio.
More about the network: "XSC" is the Cal-Fire designation for the Santa Clara County operational area. The network is open for anyone to use. But it is primarily oriented toward ARES/RACES support. Therefore each of the systems is in hardened locations, with UPS and generator, etc. and we guard uptime and security as much as any commercial carrier would. Users are assigned a primary and a backup BBS to help even out the load in the event of a disaster that takes down any particular BBS. Hams stationed at cities and agencies use the tactical call feature of JNOS that one of our guys wrote and Maiko incorporated into the code. The typical user connects with Outpost as an access application. We also have PacFORMS which is an application that presents standard county forms in an HTML format to the user but sends only the data (not all the html formatting) in the packet message. We have regular check-ins twice a week and all-radio-based packet activities are a standard part of all of our drills. In fact, most message traffic is now transmitted with packet and only emergency or other "must talk to a human" traffic goes on the traditional voice "message net".
For further information, see: http://www.scc-ares-races.org/packet.html or contact me off list.
Michael N6MEF
________________________________ From: Brian Kantor Brian@UCSD.Edu To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:19:04 AM Subject: [44net] Radio-based networking
I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
we used to have a big wireless network you can see here http://www.qsl.net/4z4zq/wlan.html
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Scanferla" va3rjs@yahoo.ca To: "AMPRNet working group" 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 4:49 PM Subject: Re: [44net] Radio-based networking
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ My plan is to rebuild the RF network....in times of emergency, which is what my network is for you can't depend on the carrier based services to be available.
B
________________________________ From: Brian Kantor Brian@UCSD.Edu To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:19:04 AM Subject: [44net] Radio-based networking
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.) - Brian _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
Check out http://hamwan.org
------------------------------ 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
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Ronen Pinchuk drorap@netvision.net.ilwrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ we used to have a big wireless network you can see here http://www.qsl.net/4z4zq/wlan.html
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Scanferla" va3rjs@yahoo.ca To: "AMPRNet working group" 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 4:49 PM Subject: Re: [44net] Radio-based networking
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ My plan is to rebuild the RF network....in times of emergency, which is what my network is for you can't depend on the carrier based services to be available.
B
From: Brian Kantor Brian@UCSD.Edu To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:19:04 AM Subject: [44net] Radio-based networking
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.)
- Brian
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
I'm still working on my setup, but I'm trying to use net44 together with the Broadband-Hamnet router firmware. My setup is going to consist of 4 routers, two acting as hamnet nodes, and two acting as hamnet access points. In addition to that, I have a linux VM running in a datacenter to act as my gateway between net44 and my mesh.
The two nodes (I've received one and the other should be arriving in a few days) will be connected via high gain directional antennas, and they will both have one of the access points connected to them running a high gain omni antenna to allow end-user access. Both the nodes have enough memory to run Asterisk, ngircd, and OpenVPN (with I need to swap out for a more FCC friendly [unencrypted] solution).
The concept is that, I can set one (or both) of these nodes up in an EmComm or special event situation. As long as one of my nodes (or any node in range) has internet access, my nodes will get their net44 IP addresses via my gateway server, making that nodes' services available to the internet.
i.e. I can connect my IRC client to 'localnode:6667' when I'm within my mesh range, and my buddies can connect to '44.4.36.1:6667' to reach me via the internet. If the internet does die, the services will still be available locally on the mesh, just not to internet users.
So far it's actually working like a charm. I'm able to connect my laptop (via the node) and my iPhone (via Internet) to the node's IRC server.
But like I said, I need to choose a solution other then OpenVPN for routing between my gateway to my nodes to comply with FCC rules, if a node connects to the internet via the mesh instead of the WAN port anyway.
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.) - Brian _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 10:21 -0700, Blaine Forbort spake:
But like I said, I need to choose a solution other then OpenVPN for routing between my gateway to my nodes to comply with FCC rules, if a node connects to the internet via the mesh instead of the WAN port anyway.
You may want to read into dgip. You load the server side, and the clients each request their routing when they become active... similar to dhcp.
I have it available at ftp://n1uro.ampr.org/packet/dgipip_0.1a.orig.tar.gz
Actually, I think I just found a solution that I like. All I need to do is add 'cipther none' to both my server and the client routers' OpenVPN configuration. That way I still have excellent NAT transversal capabilities, compression, and signing to prevent Man in the Middle attacks, while not actually encrypting the traffic.
I also like this solution because it's very well support by many hardware venders, and OpenVPN does a great job of handling my routing table.
My only issue is that I was also using this server to encrypt my web browsing...but I'm sure I'll find a solution to that problem.
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Brian Rogers n1uro@n1uro.ampr.org wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 10:21 -0700, Blaine Forbort spake:
But like I said, I need to choose a solution other then OpenVPN for
routing
between my gateway to my nodes to comply with FCC rules, if a node
connects
to the internet via the mesh instead of the WAN port anyway.
You may want to read into dgip. You load the server side, and the clients each request their routing when they become active... similar to dhcp.
I have it available at ftp://n1uro.ampr.org/packet/dgipip_0.1a.orig.tar.gz -- 73 de Brian Rogers - N1URO email: n1uro@n1uro.ampr.org Web: http://www.n1uro.net/ Ampr1: http://n1uro.ampr.org/ Ampr2: http://nos.n1uro.ampr.org Linux Amateur Radio Services axMail-Fax & URONode AmprNet coordinator for: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
On 21/08/13 15:19, Brian Kantor wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
Hi Brian,
Yes (ish), We turned most of the nodes off last week as we are moving some kit to a new site, EI8JA is moving his shack and the PSU blew on EI3JB's laptop.
We have 4 Icom ID-1's 44.155.6.225/226/227/228. I was most recently, doing some testing of OLSR/batman over them for emcomm use.
The plan is to re-locate one ID-1 to a site about 35km South East of me and put together a little linux box, (most likely some alix boards http://www.pcengines.ch/alix.htm as we have them, linux distribution suggestions welcome) for it. Up to recently the site was an ATV node but no one is using it.
EI8JA would prefer to have something on the tower than nothing, so I purchased a Diamond X5000 antenna for it.
I'm pretty sure I can hit the site from here, so the intention is to see how much coverage we can get from the site, and how much of the county we can service from there. The email is to long already, so I won't bore you with our other plans.
Regards John EI7IG
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.)
- Brian
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
Hi,
Brian Kantor schrieb:
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
here in Europe (OE, DL, HB9, LX, I, F, ...) there are quite a lot Links (mostly 5,6/5,8 GHz). Take a look here
and click on the "Fullscreen Map" Button. If you dig deeper in the Database on the Website above, you can see that we use 44 Address Space for the Network.
Bye Bernd, DM8BS
I too run serveral rf ports and at least one of them is included in the tcpip process. It telnets to another province then from there connects to an rf station there.
I don't allow anything but 44/8 or callsign connects to/from the rf ports.
73, Don - ve3zda
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Bernd Strehhuber 44net@inti.inka.dewrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ Hi,
Brian Kantor schrieb:
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
here in Europe (OE, DL, HB9, LX, I, F, ...) there are quite a lot Links (mostly 5,6/5,8 GHz). Take a look here
and click on the "Fullscreen Map" Button. If you dig deeper in the Database on the Website above, you can see that we use 44 Address Space for the Network.
Bye Bernd, DM8BS _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Brian Kantor Brian@ucsd.edu wrote:
I'm in the process of preparing a new document on the AMPRNet. I'd like to include a section on the radio-based portions of the network.
Is anyone actually using the network over radio at this point? Could you supply some details?
(All the discussions of the landline-based portions of the network are well and good but this network is supposed to be about radio-based networking and that seems to be falling by the wayside.) - Brian
Hi Brian,
I have 4 (really 5) RF ports (2x1200bps and 2x9600bps0 here in Athens.
Network name is ATHNET and at the moment 2 ports run 24/7 the rest are still experimental.
- 1st port is on 144800 KHZ/1200bps runs as an APRS IGATE while the
- 2nd port is on 438025 KHZ/9600bps running as a NODE/BBS access and it includes TCP/IP access to AMPRnet addresses only.
- 3rd port is on 144650 KHZ/1200bps as a NODE/BBS access and it includes TCP/IP access to AMPRnet addresses only, but usually it is OFF until I find a dedicated radio.
- 4th port is on 430650 KHZ/9600bps as a NODE/BBS access and it includes TCP/IP access to AMPRnet addresses only, but usually it is OFF until I solve some antenna problems.
- 5th port??? I have also acquired a ubiquity bullet for 802.11b/g which can be upgraded with new firmware and be made to change frequency making it operable in the Radio Amateur Band segment of 2.4GHZ and this will also allow full AMPRnet connectivity using WiFi technology.
Users are sparse though. You see, Netrom Barons and Packet Kings have driven most Radio Hams away from our PACKET RADIO Networks, in favour of Internet.
I just hope I can convince some people to come back and start using AMPRnet.
Hi hi hi!!!
-
Bernd Strehhuber -
Blaine Forbort -
Bob Scanferla -
Brian Kantor -
Brian Rogers -
Demetre SV1UY -
Don Moore -
JJ -
John Ronan -
K7VE - John -
Kutche, Jerry (Mitchell) USA -
Michael E. Fox - N6MEF -
Ronen Pinchuk