16 Jul
2013
16 Jul
'13
10:54 p.m.
On 7/16/13 11:00 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
A solution would be to have the border router at each
of the
directly-connected subnets also have a full set of tunnel routes and
interfaces installed, as it could then participate in the tunnel mesh
and should then be in the encap file. I don't see commercial internet
providers doing that.
So this means that in order for the the directly-connected subnets to
also participate in the tunnel mesh, there has to be a tunnel-enabled
router downstream of the connection to the commercial Internet. Thus the
only advantage of being directly-connected is simply an independent (quite
possibly higher-bandwidth) connection to the commercial Internet backbone.
It doesn't improve internal connectivity in the AMPRNet at all. We still
need the tunnels for that.
Admittedly, I've been a bit tardy in getting my BGP
session up with my
provider (summer is always busy for me), but perhaps there is a better way to
do this.
What I envision would be to have a few regional AMPR BGP routers/peering
points. AMPR would need and ASN of course (I'd be willing to put up the money
for this from ARIN), some hardware and a few friendly providers across the
globe. I have one friendly provider, and I'm sure we could find a few more.
Hardware is up to us, I'd prefer an actual router (ALU/Cisco/JNPR), but there
is no reason openbgpd on a *nix box wouldn't work.
So you would have each peering point announcing 44/8 but behind the peering
routers would be a set of (GRE) tunnels between all the routers. The 44net
BGP routers would run I-BGP across these tunnels (or ISIS/OSPF, but I feel
IBGP would make more sense to manage redistribution of routes as it's got more
"policy knobs" than OSPF and to a lessor extent ISIS.) The 44net non bgp
users would then have IP-IP tunnels to their closest 44net peering router.
For optimized routing (as it makes no sense to me for .AU users to tunnel
through UCSD) we could have routing between the 44net routers announce more
specific routes for directly connected subnets. We'd have to manage this, as
I'm sure we don't want to add another 1000 routes to the global table (and
then have filtering), but I don't see it being that many routes when a /16 is
for a whole continent, which has 1 or 2 peering routers in this design. This
also avoids black holes caused by 44net directly connected peers being
filtered by sites that filter at less than a /24 block (don't laugh, I've seen
large companies filter at a /19)
Admittedly this is a very "back of a napkin" design, but it's a start.
Thoughts?
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
727-214-2508 - Fax
http://bryanfields.net
16 Jul
16 Jul
11:05 p.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
I really see both of these uses of 44 net as different projects in the
same band. Think 440mhz some people do ssb, others FM, while others
do SSTV some folks do packet some people do Fast Scan TV. There is
not really a need for a 100meg bursting to 1gig connection to
interface with a 1200 baud system. Your not going to be able to do
much with the content. SIP cant run over 1200baud, you would kill
your local lan if you tried to download a 100meg file from an FTP
server. I actually think you would want to prevent access to some of
what we are going to do.
Now as far as providing an additional de-centralized access to the
internet for the tunnels, yes we have said we are happy to help with
that in any way and it is really needed. Don't take this the wrong
way Brian, but if the big one(earth quake) hits SoCal the whole 44net
cant talk to each other anymore. As UCSD is very close to one of the
major fault lines in SoCal I would say this is not an if but a when
situation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Andreas_Fault
Lin N4YCI
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Bryan Fields <Bryan(a)bryanfields.net> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On 7/16/13 11:00 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
--
Lin Holcomb
Office: +1 404 806 5412
Mobile: +1 404 933 1595
Fax: +1 404 348 4250
A solution would be to have the border router at
each of the
directly-connected subnets also have a full set of tunnel routes and
interfaces installed, as it could then participate in the tunnel mesh
and should then be in the encap file. I don't see commercial internet
providers doing that.
So this means that in order for the the directly-connected subnets to
also participate in the tunnel mesh, there has to be a tunnel-enabled
router downstream of the connection to the commercial Internet. Thus the
only advantage of being directly-connected is simply an independent (quite
possibly higher-bandwidth) connection to the commercial Internet backbone.
It doesn't improve internal connectivity in the AMPRNet at all. We still
need the tunnels for that.
Admittedly, I've been a bit tardy in getting my BGP
session up with my
provider (summer is always busy for me), but perhaps there is a better way to
do this.
What I envision would be to have a few regional AMPR BGP routers/peering
points. AMPR would need and ASN of course (I'd be willing to put up the money
for this from ARIN), some hardware and a few friendly providers across the
globe. I have one friendly provider, and I'm sure we could find a few more.
Hardware is up to us, I'd prefer an actual router (ALU/Cisco/JNPR), but there
is no reason openbgpd on a *nix box wouldn't work.
So you would have each peering point announcing 44/8 but behind the peering
routers would be a set of (GRE) tunnels between all the routers. The 44net
BGP routers would run I-BGP across these tunnels (or ISIS/OSPF, but I feel
IBGP would make more sense to manage redistribution of routes as it's got more
"policy knobs" than OSPF and to a lessor extent ISIS.) The 44net non bgp
users would then have IP-IP tunnels to their closest 44net peering router.
For optimized routing (as it makes no sense to me for .AU users to tunnel
through UCSD) we could have routing between the 44net routers announce more
specific routes for directly connected subnets. We'd have to manage this, as
I'm sure we don't want to add another 1000 routes to the global table (and
then have filtering), but I don't see it being that many routes when a /16 is
for a whole continent, which has 1 or 2 peering routers in this design. This
also avoids black holes caused by 44net directly connected peers being
filtered by sites that filter at less than a /24 block (don't laugh, I've seen
large companies filter at a /19)
Admittedly this is a very "back of a napkin" design, but it's a start.
Thoughts?
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
727-214-2508 - Fax
http://bryanfields.net
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html 
11:35 p.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:05:26PM -0400, Lin Holcomb wrote:
way Brian, but if the big one(earth quake) hits SoCal
the whole 44net
cant talk to each other anymore. As UCSD is very close to one of the
major fault lines in SoCal I would say this is not an if but a when
situation.
Yes, sometime in the next 10,000 years the San Andreas and its contributory
faults are expected to knock us off the map. Doubt I'll be around. The
rising sea level is likely to get here long before that.
But with the tunnels, "the whole 44net cant talk to each other anymore" is
simply not true - that's the advantage of a mesh: its survivability.
I'm for more peering points but there are difficulties. As far as I know,
everyone else who is doing multiple peering points has independent connectivity
between those points - a fibre network they own, dedicated ATM circuits, etc.
I don't see us having that ever.
- Brian
17 Jul
17 Jul
2:29 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Brian Kantor
<Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote:
everyone else who is doing multiple peering points has independent
connectivity
between those points
In our case, we already have that with the tunnels, so I can totally see
this working.
As mentioned before, we would need a new AS number from ARIN. We would
also need to designate a small chunk of the 44 space for anycasting on the
internet. Every BGP gateway router would send announcements for 44/8 using
the new ASN. Each router will also listen on the same anycast IP for
tunnel traffic (such as 44.255.255.1). When IPIP packets are received on
that address, it will route them using the tunnel matrix. The subnet
routers (the ones not using BGP) would need a static route that sends the
anycast IP range out through their internet connection instead of through
the tunnel.
The advantage of this configuration would not only be redundancy, but
anycasting also allows the traffic to automatically route to it's closest
gateway. This is what many CDNs and DNS providers do.
2:53 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
That is a no brainier to get the AS number. I will chip in for sure.
In fact I really think any group that is doing BGP should be requried
to flip the bill for part of the re-issue thru donations for direct
funding.
Brian are you still waiting on CA or the IRS to get you the 501c3
status. It would really help to raise funds. (maybe we should change
the application to be ampr teaparty to speed things up) just kidding,
but would probably work. (sorry for DX stations that is a US joke as
the IRS just got in a lot of hot water for dragging their feet on any
application that contained the words tea or party for a tax exempt
status) By being a 501c3 US citizens donations are pretax dollars and
in some cases like my wife's employer. (The little beverage company
based in Atlanta GA think red and white logo.) They match 2 for 1 aka
we write a check for $100 they mail a check for $200 to ampr.
Just a thought does ARIN not cut a break on the price if your a
non-profit? Do they charge UCSD for the AS number?
Lin
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Javier Henderson <javier(a)cisco.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Jul 16, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Cory (NQ1E) <cory(a)nq1e.hm> wrote:
--
Lin Holcomb
Office: +1 404 806 5412
Mobile: +1 404 933 1595
Fax: +1 404 348 4250
As mentioned before, we would need a new AS
number from ARIN.
How would the AS number be funded?
There’s an initial $550 fee, plus $100/year
73,
-jav k4jh
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html 
2:57 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
On Jul 16, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Lin Holcomb <LHolcomb(a)clearqualitygroup.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
That is a no brainier to get the AS number. I will chip in for sure.
I was thinking long term. Interest on these projects comes and goes, so while it might be
easy to raise the $550 for the initial issuance, who knows what will happen with the
recurring fees.
We do need an AS number for this project to complete it as described, though.
73,
-jav k4jh
18 Jul
18 Jul
3:19 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My $DAYJOB company is a LIR with RIPE. An ASN registered with RIPE via
a LIR is 50 EUR (~66 USD) per year. I could help with requesting the
ASN from RIPE and I can also take care of the costs, if necessary I
think it could be possible that a few national or regional HAM clubs
provide some funds to cover the yearly costs.
73 de Marc, LX1DUC
On 16/07/2013 21:57, Javier Henderson wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Jul 16, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Lin Holcomb
<LHolcomb(a)clearqualitygroup.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________ That is a no
brainier to get the AS number. I will chip in for sure.
I was thinking long term. Interest on these projects comes and
goes, so while it might be easy to raise the $550 for the initial
issuance, who knows what will happen with the recurring fees.
We do need an AS number for this project to complete it as
described, though.
73, -jav k4jh
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=b8m0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
3:30 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
Well......
Maybe your specific 'RIPE' provider is a good guy, but as for 'RIPE' as a
company, I've been so inundated with hacker attempts from IP addresses
that all belong to 'RIPE' that I finally blocked all IP Addresses from
them.
I can say for me personally, 'RIPE' is a company I want nothing to do with
and I will continue to block them.
Just one mans opinion, and may not reflect the group.
Bill / KG6BAJ
-----------------------------
My $DAYJOB company is a LIR with RIPE. An ASN
registered with RIPE via
a LIR is 50 EUR (~66 USD) per year. I could help with requesting the
ASN from RIPE and I can also take care of the costs, if necessary I
think it could be possible that a few national or regional HAM clubs
provide some funds to cover the yearly costs.
3:44 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
Ummm, RIPE has nothing to do with the traffic. It just assigns Addresses
and AS's to customers.
If you are blocking all address space assigned by RIPE, you are blocking a
good portion of the Internet.
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Wm Lewis <kg6baj(a)n1oes.org> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
Well......
Maybe your specific 'RIPE' provider is a good guy, but as for 'RIPE' as
a
company, I've been so inundated with hacker attempts from IP addresses
that all belong to 'RIPE' that I finally blocked all IP Addresses from
them.
I can say for me personally, 'RIPE' is a company I want nothing to do with
and I will continue to block them.
Just one mans opinion, and may not reflect the group.
Bill / KG6BAJ
-----------------------------
--
Neil Johnson -N0SFH
http://erudicon.com
My $DAYJOB company is a LIR with RIPE. An ASN
registered with RIPE via
a LIR is 50 EUR (~66 USD) per year. I could help with requesting the
ASN from RIPE and I can also take care of the costs, if necessary I
think it could be possible that a few national or regional HAM clubs
provide some funds to cover the yearly costs.
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
4:48 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'm not sure you do understand the concept of IP space allocation and
assignement from IANA via RIRs via LIRs to EndUsers or you might have
seen some other company (and not the RIR) called RIPE.
73 de Marc, LX1DUC
On 17/07/2013 22:30, Wm Lewis wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________ Well......
Maybe your specific 'RIPE' provider is a good guy, but as for
'RIPE' as a company, I've been so inundated with hacker attempts
from IP addresses that all belong to 'RIPE' that I finally blocked
all IP Addresses from them.
I can say for me personally, 'RIPE' is a company I want nothing to
do with and I will continue to block them.
Just one mans opinion, and may not reflect the group.
Bill / KG6BAJ -----------------------------
My $DAYJOB company is a LIR with RIPE. An ASN
registered with
RIPE via a LIR is 50 EUR (~66 USD) per year. I could help with
requesting the ASN from RIPE and I can also take care of the
costs, if necessary I think it could be possible that a few
national or regional HAM clubs provide some funds to cover the
yearly costs.
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=eWhG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
1:34 p.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
Bill, this almost qualifies as the joke of the day...
ARIN, RIPE NCC, AfriNIC, APNIC and LACNIC are the 5 regional Internet
registrars managing IP/AS allocation worldwide.
All european IPs are managed by RIPE NCC.
-----Original Message-----
Well......
Maybe your specific 'RIPE' provider is a good guy, but as for 'RIPE' as a
company, I've been so inundated with hacker attempts from IP addresses that
all belong to 'RIPE' that I finally blocked all IP Addresses from them.
I can say for me personally, 'RIPE' is a company I want nothing to do with
and I will continue to block them.
17 Jul
17 Jul
3:07 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
How would an AS number be funded? In direct answer to that I thought
I saw one of the previous commenter volunteer to put that up
themselves (at least the initial fee) but bthe broader question is
really how AMPRnet as a whole ought be funded on a continuing basis.
Has anyone worked out and determined what the annual operating costs
are estimated to be (peering, transit, colocation, ARIN fees, core
hardware upkeep & maintenance, etc. ). The reality is that it costs
something to keep infrastructure running. How is that paid for?
Maybe those who have address sapace assigned ought to chip in
something like $5-10 for the processing of the assignment & somewhere
between say $0.10-1.00/address assigned per year possibly with some
consideration given toward larger allocations that actually built out
useful projects that served to expand and further AMPRnet goals.
Eric
AF6EP
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Javier Henderson <javier(a)cisco.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Jul 16, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Cory (NQ1E) <cory(a)nq1e.hm> wrote:
As mentioned before, we would need a new AS
number from ARIN.
How would the AS number be funded?
There’s an initial $550 fee, plus $100/year
73,
-jav k4jh
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
3:17 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Javier Henderson wrote:
How would the AS number be funded?
Despite some support, the donation and grant funding models haven't
worked; we're still in debt to the tune of about $2,000, with more
expenses on the way.
In addition to whatever its activities require, it costs around $500
a year to just maintain a non-profit corp in California.
Donations haven't kept up with that, much less to defray the initial
startup costs. We have no money.
- Brian
3:20 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
I think this is an issue we need to open as a new thread. Fund raising.
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Javier Henderson wrote:
--
Lin Holcomb
Office: +1 404 806 5412
Mobile: +1 404 933 1595
Fax: +1 404 348 4250
How would the AS number be funded?
Despite some support, the donation and grant funding models haven't
worked; we're still in debt to the tune of about $2,000, with more
expenses on the way.
In addition to whatever its activities require, it costs around $500
a year to just maintain a non-profit corp in California.
Donations haven't kept up with that, much less to defray the initial
startup costs. We have no money.
- Brian
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
3:47 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
Just curious, is someone having to pay $100 a year to ARIN for a LRSA
agreement?
https://www.arin.net/fees/agreements/legacy.html
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Lin Holcomb <LHolcomb(a)clearqualitygroup.com
wrote:
> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> _______________________________________________
> I think this is an issue we need to open as a new thread. Fund raising.
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu wrote:
> > (Please trim inclusions from
previous messages)
> > _______________________________________________
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 03:37:27PM -0400, Javier Henderson wrote:
> >> How would the AS number be funded?
> >
> > Despite some support, the donation and grant funding models haven't
> > worked; we're still in debt to the tune of about $2,000, with more
> > expenses on the way.
> >
> > In addition to whatever its activities require, it costs around $500
> > a year to just maintain a non-profit corp in California.
> >
> > Donations haven't kept up with that, much less to defray the initial
> > startup costs. We have no money.
> > - Brian
> > _________________________________________
> > 44Net mailing list
> > 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
> > http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
> > http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
>
>
>
> --
> Lin Holcomb
>
> Office: +1 404 806 5412
> Mobile: +1 404 933 1595
> Fax: +1 404 348 4250
> _________________________________________
> 44Net mailing list
> 44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
> http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
> http://www.ampr.org/donate.html
>
--
Neil Johnson -N0SFH
http://erudicon.com
3:51 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
There are grandfathered networks -- I own one.
------------------------------
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, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Neil Johnson <neil.johnson(a)erudicon.com>wrote;wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
Just curious, is someone having to pay $100 a year to ARIN for a LRSA
agreement?
https://www.arin.net/fees/agreements/legacy.html
2:59 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
Heikki
Well no it is not necessary as we are using the space alocated to ham
radio for ham radio use these will be APs and clients that are
operating on ham radio frequencies.
As for as use of the 44net I guess one could ask the same of you. If
your project is not routable to the internet why not use 10/8? Answer
on both counts because it is allocated for ham radio use. One
"project" is not necessarily exclusive of the other on the 44 net just
like SSB and FM are both used in 440mhz.
Lin N4YCI
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Cory (NQ1E) <cory(a)nq1e.hm> wrote:
> (Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
> _______________________________________________
>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote:
>> everyone else who is doing multiple peering points has independent
> connectivity
> between those points
>
> In our case, we already have that with the tunnels, so I can totally see
> this working.
>
> As mentioned before, we would need a new AS number from ARIN. We would
> also need to designate a small chunk of the 44 space for anycasting on the
> internet. Every BGP gateway router would send announcements for 44/8 using
> the new ASN. Each router will also listen on the same anycast IP for
> tunnel traffic (such as 44.255.255.1). When IPIP packets are received on
> that address, it will route them using the tunnel matrix. The subnet
> routers (the ones not using BGP) would need a static route that sends the
> anycast IP range out through their internet connection instead of through
> the tunnel.
>
> The advantage of this configuration would not only be redundancy, but
> anycasting also allows the traffic to automatically route to it's closest
> gateway. This is what many CDNs and DNS providers do.
>
5:33 a.m.
New subject: directly connected and tunnel subnets
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Lin Holcomb
<LHolcomb(a)clearqualitygroup.com> wrote:
Well no it is not necessary as we are using the space
alocated to ham
radio for ham radio use these will be APs and clients that are
operating on ham radio frequencies.
Ok, so wouldn't it be great if those clients could access services
within other amprnet sites in addition to the Internet (assuming that
some cool services would exist)? And that your local services could be
accessed from other radio-based networks, not just from the rest of
the Internet? For now, you'll need to have tunnel routing in addition
to the BGP announcement to be able to have that. Without tunnel
routing you only have access to the Internet and other BGP-enabled
sites.
As for as use of the 44net I guess one could ask the
same of you. If
your project is not routable to the internet why not use 10/8? Answer
on both counts because it is allocated for ham radio use.
Cut-n-pasting the answer from my previous email:
I always thought that the cool thing about using 44/8 with BGP
announcements would be that [services in the network would] be
accessible over both the normal Internet routing infrastructure *and*
over radio from various Amprnet gateway sites. And that whenever a
44/8 source address would be seen at my service, I could tell that it
would be originated by an amateur radio operator.
Interoperability with the Internet, thanks to the BGP announcements
and not using 10/8, *and* at the same time, access to the same
services from ham radio networks which are not allowed to access the
Internet over ham radio due to local regulations. That'd be cool. Run
a nice web service having a net-44 address, but when the visitor comes
from within the amprnet with a net-44 address, allow extra features
like being able to key a transmitter.
- Hessu
4176
days inactive
4178
days old
18 comments
12 participants
participants (12)
-
Brian Kantor -
Bryan Fields -
Cory (NQ1E) -
Eric Fort -
Heikki Hannikainen -
Javier Henderson -
K7VE - John -
Lin Holcomb -
Marc, LX1DUC -
Marius Petrescu -
Neil Johnson -
Wm Lewis