23 Feb
2019
23 Feb
'19
5:12 a.m.
From time to time testing various setups I need to
determine if the
remote 44 host is IPIP or BGP so that I can verify everything is
working etc.
I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
Does anyone know of an up to date source?
I used to test new installs against hambook.de.ampr.org
(44.225.164.16) as I know this is not reachable via the normal
internet, but is via 44net. It used to be via an IPIP tunnel. I
don't see it in my routes, so it must be via BGP now, but I don't see
it from the above source.
Thanks
23 Feb
23 Feb
5:27 a.m.
Nevermind I figured it out.
The address wasn't showing up when I'd grep 44.225 because its part of
a much bigger CIDR: 44.224.0.0/15 (which I wasn't taking into account)
root@ampr-pi:/var/lib/ampr-ripd# ip route show table 44 | grep 44.224
44.224.0.0/15 via 141.75.245.225 dev tunl0 proto 44 onlink window 840
So it's via an IPIP tunnel and not BGP, which is why I wasn't seeing
it via the thyme host.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 11:12 PM Steve L <kb9mwr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
From time to time testing various setups I need to determine if the
remote 44 host is IPIP or BGP so that I can verify everything is
working etc.
I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
Does anyone know of an up to date source?
I used to test new installs against hambook.de.ampr.org
(44.225.164.16) as I know this is not reachable via the normal
internet, but is via 44net. It used to be via an IPIP tunnel. I
don't see it in my routes, so it must be via BGP now, but I don't see
it from the above source.
Thanks
8:54 a.m.
On 23/02/19 16:12, Steve L via 44Net wrote:
From time to time testing various setups I need to
determine if the
remote 44 host is IPIP or BGP so that I can verify everything is
working etc.
I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
Looks fairly up to date, from
what I can see.
--
73 de Tony VK3JED/VK3IRL
http://vkradio.com
11:38 a.m.
Regarding this topic, I have a "technical" proposal on it.
Wouldn't it make sense to advertise the BGP subnets in the RIP
broadcasts, too?
In light of the fact that the ampr gw forwards these routes anyway, if
those subnets would appear as 44.x.y.z/n via 169.228.34.84 (the ampr
gw) (and most gateways feature a default route to the ampr gw anyway),
then all current setups would work without any change.
This would also allow to easily find out all BGP routed networks using a
simple filter on the route list.
Announcing them with a routing distance of 16 (infinity) in the RIP
would also make sense since Ampr-ripd and Amprd ignores those routes.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 07:12, Steve L via 44Net wrote:
From time to time testing various setups I need to
determine if the
remote 44 host is IPIP or BGP so that I can verify everything is
working etc.
I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
Does anyone know of an up to date source?
I used to test new installs against hambook.de.ampr.org
(44.225.164.16) as I know this is not reachable via the normal
internet, but is via 44net. It used to be via an IPIP tunnel. I
don't see it in my routes, so it must be via BGP now, but I don't see
it from the above source.
Thanks
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
4:33 p.m.
It works, at least for 44.182.1.1 - I just checked. Egress via ampr
tunnel default route, a reglar trace with amprgw as the first hop.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 14:02, Brian Kantor wrote:
As far as I know it does NOT. I believe they're
blocked at the entrance
firewall to amprgw.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 01:38:19PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
In light of the fact that the ampr gw forwards
these routes anyway [...]
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net 
5 p.m.
Ah, I see I misunderstood what you said. Yes, that would be expected
to work. I was thinking of the inbound path.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 06:33:14PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
It works, at least for 44.182.1.1 - I just checked.
Egress via ampr
tunnel default route, a reglar trace with amprgw as the first hop.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 14:02, Brian Kantor wrote:
As far as I know it does NOT. I believe
they're blocked at the entrance
firewall to amprgw.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 01:38:19PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net In light of the fact that the ampr gw forwards
these routes anyway [...]
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
7:15 p.m.
So, wouldn't it make sense to publish BGP routed networks that do not
have 'tunnel ' set in the portal as RIP routes using amprgw as gateway?
This would solve some issues:
- Users could actually see all reachable destinations in their route list
- Users could easily identify BGP networks by checking 169.228.34.84 as
their gateway
- they could drop the setting of that 'default' route in the ampr
routing table, allowing a (implicit) throw to the main table. This will
make it easier to reach local or directly connected ampr networks (which
now need routes placed in the ampr table). Also, unknown destinations
would be NATed to the system's gateway, without putting any additional
traffic to amprgw.
- it would also allow to have all routes in a single routing table while
being able to reach tunneled and BGPd networks using their AMPR address
without policy routing.
Existing set-ups would not affected by such a change in any way.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 19:00, Brian Kantor wrote:
Ah, I see I misunderstood what you said. Yes, that
would be expected
to work. I was thinking of the inbound path.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 06:33:14PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
It works, at least for 44.182.1.1 - I just
checked. Egress via ampr
tunnel default route, a reglar trace with amprgw as the first hop.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 14:02, Brian Kantor wrote:
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net As far as I know it does NOT. I believe
they're blocked at the entrance
firewall to amprgw.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 01:38:19PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net In light of the fact that the ampr gw forwards
these routes anyway [...]
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
8:33 p.m.
It'll take a significant redesign of the rip sender. Maybe in
a couple of months I'll be able to devote some time to it. Don't
hold your breath.
I can't help but wonder what we're missing in this.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 09:15:34PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
So, wouldn't it make sense to publish BGP routed
networks that do not
have 'tunnel ' set in the portal as RIP routes using amprgw as gateway?
This would solve some issues:
- Users could actually see all reachable destinations in their route list
- Users could easily identify BGP networks by checking 169.228.34.84 as
their gateway
- they could drop the setting of that 'default' route in the ampr
routing table, allowing a (implicit) throw to the main table. This will
make it easier to reach local or directly connected ampr networks (which
now need routes placed in the ampr table). Also, unknown destinations
would be NATed to the system's gateway, without putting any additional
traffic to amprgw.
- it would also allow to have all routes in a single routing table while
being able to reach tunneled and BGPd networks using their AMPR address
without policy routing.
Existing set-ups would not affected by such a change in any way.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 19:00, Brian Kantor wrote:
Ah, I see I misunderstood what you said. Yes,
that would be expected
to work. I was thinking of the inbound path.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 06:33:14PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net It works, at least for 44.182.1.1 - I just
checked. Egress via ampr
tunnel default route, a reglar trace with amprgw as the first hop.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 23.02.2019 14:02, Brian Kantor wrote:
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net As far as I know it does NOT. I believe
they're blocked at the entrance
firewall to amprgw.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 01:38:19PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
> In light of the fact that the ampr gw forwards these routes anyway [...]
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
24 Feb
24 Feb
2 p.m.
Marius,
I know I said this would take quite a bit of time/work, but I dreamed
up a clever way to get it done, and I'm ready to turn that on if you
think it really won't hurt any existing installations.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 09:15:34PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
So, wouldn't it make sense to publish BGP routed
networks that do not
have 'tunnel ' set in the portal as RIP routes using amprgw as gateway?
2:28 p.m.
Won’t that break things?
Exit through ampr gateway but entry through the internet? I know some statefull firewalls
that won’t like that very much..
Where ampr router is on one interface and the internet on another
Ruben - ON3RVH
On 24 Feb 2019, at 15:03, Brian Kantor
<Brian(a)bkantor.net> wrote:
Marius,
I know I said this would take quite a bit of time/work, but I dreamed
up a clever way to get it done, and I'm ready to turn that on if you
think it really won't hurt any existing installations.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 09:15:34PM +0200, Marius
Petrescu wrote:
So, wouldn't it make sense to publish BGP routed networks that do not
have 'tunnel ' set in the portal as RIP routes using amprgw as gateway?
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
6:20 p.m.
Ruben,
It won't enter trough the internet unless your tunnel GW address is BGP
announced.
And if the system is BGP announced, it won't need the tunnels.
For those also providing tunnel endpoints on BGPd systems using 44.
endpoints, a simple addition of the on the 169.228.34.84 address to the
-a parameter will restore the previous situation.
On tunnel only systems, the behavior would be the same as the ubiquitous
default route via amprgw on most setups. Just that we have those
individual routes to play with.
Marius, YO2LOJ
On 24.02.2019 16:28, Ruben ON3RVH wrote:
Won’t that break things?
Exit through ampr gateway but entry through the internet? I know some statefull firewalls
that won’t like that very much..
Where ampr router is on one interface and the internet on another
Ruben - ON3RVH
On 24 Feb 2019, at 15:03, Brian Kantor
<Brian(a)bkantor.net> wrote:
Marius,
I know I said this would take quite a bit of time/work, but I dreamed
up a clever way to get it done, and I'm ready to turn that on if you
think it really won't hurt any existing installations.
- Brian
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 09:15:34PM +0200, Marius
Petrescu wrote:
So, wouldn't it make sense to publish BGP routed networks that do not
have 'tunnel ' set in the portal as RIP routes using amprgw as gateway?
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
23 Feb
23 Feb
4:38 p.m.
Check...
http://yo2tm.ampr.org/nettools.php?host=44.182.1.1&submit=IPv4+Trace&am…
On 23.02.2019 14:02, Brian Kantor wrote:
As far as I know it does NOT. I believe they're
blocked at the entrance
firewall to amprgw.
- Brian
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 01:38:19PM +0200, Marius Petrescu wrote:
In light of the fact that the ampr gw forwards
these routes anyway [...]
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
12:19 p.m.
I believe that 'thyme' list is as current a list as you're going
to find, and unlike the portal database, it doesn't list subnets
that people aren't actively advertising.
Also, there is a significant discrepency. The 'thyme' list is of
actual advertisements; there are 199 of those. The portal database
lists 253 Direct networks, so clearly some allocated BGP networks
aren't being actively advertised to the backbone. Worse, some
people got allocations for a /22 or a /23, but then chose to advertise
pieces of it as multiple /24s, which is confusing!
- Brian
On 23.02.2019 07:12, Steve L via 44Net wrote:
> I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
> http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
>
> Does anyone know of an up to date source?
>
1:11 p.m.
You can always query a specific subnet on the whois server (whois.ampr.org), it will tell
you if the subnet is permitted to be BGP announced or not (amongst other things).
Chris
On 23 Feb 2019, at 12:19, Brian Kantor
<Brian(a)bkantor.net> wrote:
I believe that 'thyme' list is as current a list as you're going
to find, and unlike the portal database, it doesn't list subnets
that people aren't actively advertising.
Also, there is a significant discrepency. The 'thyme' list is of
actual advertisements; there are 199 of those. The portal database
lists 253 Direct networks, so clearly some allocated BGP networks
aren't being actively advertised to the backbone. Worse, some
people got allocations for a /22 or a /23, but then chose to advertise
pieces of it as multiple /24s, which is confusing!
- Brian
On 23.02.2019 07:12, Steve L via 44Net wrote:
> I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
> http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
>
> Does anyone know of an up to date source?
>
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
24 Feb
24 Feb
11:21 p.m.
Would it be possible for the whois server to also display the gateway
address? I'd find that rather handy.
whois -h whois.ampr.org 44.92.21.35
Network: 44.92.21.0/25
Type: user
BGP: NO
Callsign: KB9MWR
Locator: EN54xl
Description:KB9MWR-LAN
Allocated: 2016-03-22 14:57:27
Updated: 2016-03-22 15:24:11
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 7:13 AM G1FEF via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
You can always query a specific subnet on the whois server (whois.ampr.org), it will tell
you if the subnet is permitted to be BGP announced or not (amongst other things).
Chris
On 23 Feb 2019, at 12:19, Brian Kantor
<Brian(a)bkantor.net> wrote:
I believe that 'thyme' list is as current a list as you're going
to find, and unlike the portal database, it doesn't list subnets
that people aren't actively advertising.
Also, there is a significant discrepency. The 'thyme' list is of
actual advertisements; there are 199 of those. The portal database
lists 253 Direct networks, so clearly some allocated BGP networks
aren't being actively advertised to the backbone. Worse, some
people got allocations for a /22 or a /23, but then chose to advertise
pieces of it as multiple /24s, which is confusing!
- Brian
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net On 23.02.2019 07:12, Steve L via 44Net wrote:
> I used to grep this, but apparently this is not current?
> http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-ARIN
>
> Does anyone know of an up to date source?
>
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
1899
days inactive
1900
days old
15 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Brian Kantor -
G1FEF -
Marius Petrescu -
Ruben ON3RVH -
Steve L -
Tony Langdon