"John D. Hays" <john@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
BTW, Chris (G1FEF) is actively looking for people willing to help enhance portal.ampr.org
LAMP experience is helpful.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:31 AM, 'Tyrell Jentink, KD7KUJ' tyrell@...
I've always wanted to play with 44net. I mean, I really have no idea what I expect to achieve... I feel like reviving the BBS network of the past would be counterproductive for the Advancement of the Radio Art... Yet, at the same time, relying on the internet isn't good for the resilience of communication in general. It seems that the 44.x allocation had good intentions, and it certainly seems that amateur radio pushed the advancement of internet technologies early on, but we have dropped the ball. We need something creative if we want to become relevant again.
So what are people planning on doing once a 56k mesh network exists? What kind of traffic will it carry?
On Feb 25, 2015 11:03 PM, "myyahoo@...
Something that we need to influence
when the UDRs start shipping in quantity. I have a 44.x net
allocation for the old 56kbps network (I was last on there in
1998) in the Vancouver area but we may need to look at different
routing mechanisms as mesh networking becomes a reality, and
gateways to the network will be more varied and variable. Guess
I'll have to study up on BGP. Good thing I work at a company that
has a 'past' with BGP... Don't have a CCIE - yet...
I'm now in San Jose, CA, so I also need go write the local exams
to get 'local' and confuse things less when we form a network
here. Think I've said this before. :-)
If the political processes are not working, it may be because no
one is interested in supporting and maintaining them. That may be
fixed by offering to step up to the plate - but then again, there
is frequency coordination... not been a lot of hope in that area.
(We will need to push there too. ;-)
If the 44.x net progress has stagnated, new blood may be able to
effect some change (politics notwithstanding). Some of us
associated with this project have been associated with packet
radio since the early days and may be able to effect some gentle
pressure among friends to help things move along. If not, there
are alternatives (e.g., 10.x net and NAT/PAT) that can get us
running without employing the 44.x net, at least initially, if we
need IPv4 address space, and IPv6 is wide open. Getting a piece of
44.x allocated to this effort would be another alternative. We
don't have to clean up the whole 16M address space, if we were to
get a 64K slice we'd serve the continent for a millennium or
BTW - we're really pushing to use IPv6 here (the on-air footprint
could be critical to performance, with IPv6 header compression),
where one subnet is the size of the *entire* IPv4 space, but we'll
likely need some IPv4 space for a while to tide us over for maybe
the next decade until the Internet becomes more IPv6 aware. Some
6-to-4 conversion will be likely to boost performance while
retaining compatibility. We only really need numerous IPv4
addresses for inbound-to-ham-net connections, PAT can help solve
outbound - but we need to control those inbound connections, to
prevent non-ham-legal content from traversing the ham links.
Software for this already exists, in one form or another.
- Richard, VE7CVS (/W6)
John D. Hays
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223