W.r.t. the issue of /64 or smaller addresses, my plan is as follows:
- we have a /16 network within AMPRnet (44.137.0.0/16)
- it is very easy to get a /48 network in IPv6 (every home customer at my ISP gets one of them, I have one as well. it would be easy to get a /48 assigned to our gateway where 44.137.0.0/16 is BGP routed now
- I want to make a 1:1 mapping of every assigned address in our IPv4 subnet to a /16 network within that /48 space. E.g. when we get 1234:5678:abcd::/48 from our ISP, I would map 44.137.0.1 to 1234:5678:abcd:0001::/64, up to 44.137.255.255 mapped to 1234:5678:abcd:ffff::/64
- This means every single address allocated in IPv4 gets a /64 subnet in IPv6, any /28 in IPv4 (common subnet size for hams) gets a /60 subnet, etc.
This way, standard practices for using IPv6 addresss can be used, and the proposal of Daniel EA4GPZ can be followed to encode the callsign and service in the lower 64 address bits as desired (for convenience only).
We would "just" have to add IPv6 addresses to all routers in our network, but it can be done in an almost automated way because the IPv6 addresses and subnets can be calculated from the IPv4 addresses already configured using a simple tool.
Of course it still requires quite some work, and causes double maintenance on things like firewalls and routing filters, so I have not done it yet. But it sure would be possible.
Rob
A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/private/44net/attachments/20190720/73ef6221/attachment.bin
El 19/7/19 a las 14:11, Rob Janssen escribió:
This way, standard practices for using IPv6 addresss can be used, and the proposal of Daniel EA4GPZ can be followed to encode the callsign and service in the lower 64 address bits as desired (for convenience only).
Hi all,
Thanks Rob for mentioning my proposal (actually the scheme for encoding callsigns into the lower 64 bits was not mine, but Robert N6DRC's).
In the past I have tried to get more Amateurs involved in IPv6 (Either following my proposal or whatever other idea. The more activity, the best.). Success has been very little to none.
I have an article based on my proposal that was scheduled to be published on the TAPR DCC proceedings this year. Since the IPv6 discussion is appearing again, I have decided to publish the preprint of this article (because it is much more carefully written than the original proposal text, which was written in a rush).
Both the TAPR DCC preprint and the original proposal can be found here:
https://destevez.net/ipv6-for-amateur-radio/
73,
Dani EA4GPZ.
Hello,
Thanks Rob for mentioning my proposal (actually the scheme for encoding callsigns into the lower 64 bits was not mine, but Robert N6DRC's).
ea4gpz's proposal for encoding callsigns in EUI-48 may be used for being part of an IPv6 address. But if you like to use it at MAC layer, you get problems: it does not honor the reserved flags.
When we started with HAMNET here, we were unsure if the law insists in seeing the callsign in each transmission (like the way AX.25 was specified). For this reason, in the year 2009 we designed a callsign in mac encoding for the ethernet: http://db0fhn.efi.fh-nuernberg.de/doku.php?id=projects:wlan:proposal/ see also "Tools" at bottom: call2mac
Fortunately, the german Bundesnetzagentur did not insist in a mac layer encoding of callsigns. But maybe this work could solve problems in other parts of the world.
vy 73, - Thomas dl9sau
Daniel,
You did a nice job in your paper.
You mention the IPv6 DNS whitelist, which was an idea discussed here about May 2017. I know John Hays, K7VE tried to add support so one could use LoTW P12 Certificates (ARRL Logbook of The World) as a key for dynamic DNS authentication. He runs this DNS: https://ar-dns.net/
But it adding records is manual process presently rather than something that could be automated by this self authentication concept that OH7LZB brought to everyones attention back at the 2013 DCC.
Here is a link to that DCC talk for anyone interested:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7anDmQQfyu8
With code examples: https://github.com/hessu/ham-cert-web-demo
If there is someone out there that could code such a self-service DNS or help John add it to his, then I'd say that would be a good start to creating a IPv6 Ham network.
Steve, KB9MWR
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 5:07 AM Daniel Estévez daniel@destevez.net wrote:
El 19/7/19 a las 14:11, Rob Janssen escribió:
This way, standard practices for using IPv6 addresss can be used, and the proposal of Daniel EA4GPZ can be followed to encode the callsign and service in the lower 64 address bits as desired (for convenience only).
Hi all,
Thanks Rob for mentioning my proposal (actually the scheme for encoding callsigns into the lower 64 bits was not mine, but Robert N6DRC's).
In the past I have tried to get more Amateurs involved in IPv6 (Either following my proposal or whatever other idea. The more activity, the best.). Success has been very little to none.
I have an article based on my proposal that was scheduled to be published on the TAPR DCC proceedings this year. Since the IPv6 discussion is appearing again, I have decided to publish the preprint of this article (because it is much more carefully written than the original proposal text, which was written in a rush).
Both the TAPR DCC preprint and the original proposal can be found here:
https://destevez.net/ipv6-for-amateur-radio/
73,
Dani EA4GPZ.
44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
On 20/07/19 20:05, Daniel Estévez wrote:
I have an article based on my proposal that was scheduled to be published on the TAPR DCC proceedings this year. Since the IPv6 discussion is appearing again, I have decided to publish the preprint of this article (because it is much more carefully written than the original proposal text, which was written in a rush).
Both the TAPR DCC preprint and the original proposal can be found here:
Looks interesting, I could easily implement this using part of my /56.
Hi Daniel,
Le 20/07/2019 à 12:05, Daniel Estévez a écrit :
Both the TAPR DCC preprint and the original proposal can be found here:
Thank you for this great paper about IPv6 proposal. I fully agree with the idea, and I do not see any major drawback. Maybe, the callsign encoding needs to be investigated carefully.
Unfortunalely, we are not QRV IPv6 here, I have no plans to deploy IPv6 in my job in the next few years, and I have so much projects on the go... Then, I can't become an IPv6 tester, at least for now ;-)
73 de TK1BI
On 19/07/19 22:11, Rob Janssen wrote:
W.r.t. the issue of /64 or smaller addresses, my plan is as follows:
we have a /16 network within AMPRnet (44.137.0.0/16)
it is very easy to get a /48 network in IPv6 (every home customer at my ISP gets one of them, I have one as well. it would be easy to get a /48 assigned to our gateway where 44.137.0.0/16 is BGP routed now
I want to make a 1:1 mapping of every assigned address in our IPv4 subnet to a /16 network within that /48 space. E.g. when we get 1234:5678:abcd::/48 from our ISP, I would map 44.137.0.1 to 1234:5678:abcd:0001::/64, up to 44.137.255.255 mapped to 1234:5678:abcd:ffff::/64
I'm a bit lost at what you're suggesting, and the practical way it would be implemented. At first glance, this looks like a recipe for suboptimal routing to the outside world.
I have 2 AMPRnet IPv4 allocations - one BGP connected, one IPIP connected. Both sites have IPv6 available. Here, where the IPIP mesh terminates has a /56. I currently have a /64 on the VPS, but as there's only one host, it wouldn't be difficult to carve that into AMPRnet and non AMPRnet parts, because IPs are assigned by hand and are all on the same interface.
-
Daniel Estévez -
Rob Janssen -
Steve L -
Thomas Osterried -
Tony Langdon -
Toussaint OTTAVI