Date   
Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Dean Gibson AE7Q <yahu.stuff@...>
 


On 2015-02-25 12:48, Don Poaps va7dgp@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] wrote:
Paul

Don't hold your Breathe. ...

I gave up ...

Don Va7dgp

That's an understatement.  The whole 44 thing is (functionally) a joke.  Promises for minor changes are still not made after a year.

I know this is a hobby, but if you are going to try to interest new amateurs (especially those with a network background), don't ever tell them about the 44.net.  I finally dropped my membership in the 44.net mailing list.  Not that it had much effect;  nothing's going on there.

-- Dean

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

basil@...
 


---In UniversalDigitalRadio@..., <ve7dhm@...> wrote :

> Who else, if anyone, plans to use 44 address scheme in the Pacific North West around the Puget Sound?


I live in the San Juan Islands on Lopez Is. & have just started playing with an IP network with a another HAM on Orcas Island, Peter K2SPR. Peter recently acquired a subnet. Where are you located?


/Basil N7NIX

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

"John D. Hays" <john@...>
 

Don and Paul,

The current system for requesting address space is through http://portal.ampr.org 

According to https://portal.ampr.org/networks.php Canada is administered by 


44.135.0.0 / 16 CANADA Luc Pernot [VE3JGL]

As for the use of Net-44, you should join the mailing list at http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net

I am the administrator for Puget Sound on the US side (Western Washington).  There are several networks allocated, the largest being a microwave based system at http://hamwan.org 

There will certainly be UDRx(s) in the address space, including on San Juan and Lopez Islands. You will see from the pre-order map for UDRx that Puget Sound is slated for many units. http://nwdigitalradio.com/udrmap (zoom in).

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Don Poaps va7dgp@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

Paul


Don't hold your Breathe. Bob Ve7wnk. Don't quite remember his call was my contact. He is administrator on 44 group. He didn't even know he was administer..

I gave up and went to use Linbpq and using their nodes to pass mail and Winlink.

Don 
Va7dgp

 

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, ve7dhm@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

Who else, if anyone, plans to use 44 address scheme in the Pacific North West around the Puget Sound?

I have a allocation request in but it seems to take awhile...still waiting.


Has any testing been done using JNOS with the 56K speed configuration option?


Gateway security - is this a concern for discussion.  Assign static IPs to users, DHCP server, map IPs to

MACs considering a TCP/IP environment?


Paul VE7DHM



--
Don Poaps
New Westminster, BC
VA7DGP
 

--


John D. Hays
K7VE

PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 
  

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
 

I live in the San Juan Islands on Lopez Is. & have just started playing with
an IP network with a another HAM on Orcas Island, Peter K2SPR. Peter
recently acquired a subnet.
Do you have a gateway or are you playing standalone? Any coverage to
the South?

Bill

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Don Poaps <va7dgp@...>
 

John

I'm on the mailing list. In the portal it showed as the one for BC as he got the 44net for BCwarn.

I'm just cooling my jets until there's documention on how to setup with Linbpq

Don va7dgp


On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, 'John D. Hays' john@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

Don and Paul,

The current system for requesting address space is through http://portal.ampr.org 

According to https://portal.ampr.org/networks.php Canada is administered by 


44.135.0.0 / 16 CANADA Luc Pernot [VE3JGL]

As for the use of Net-44, you should join the mailing list at http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net

I am the administrator for Puget Sound on the US side (Western Washington).  There are several networks allocated, the largest being a microwave based system at http://hamwan.org 

There will certainly be UDRx(s) in the address space, including on San Juan and Lopez Islands. You will see from the pre-order map for UDRx that Puget Sound is slated for many units. http://nwdigitalradio.com/udrmap (zoom in).

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Don Poaps va7dgp@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

Paul


Don't hold your Breathe. Bob Ve7wnk. Don't quite remember his call was my contact. He is administrator on 44 group. He didn't even know he was administer..

I gave up and went to use Linbpq and using their nodes to pass mail and Winlink.

Don 
Va7dgp

 

On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, ve7dhm@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

Who else, if anyone, plans to use 44 address scheme in the Pacific North West around the Puget Sound?

I have a allocation request in but it seems to take awhile...still waiting.


Has any testing been done using JNOS with the 56K speed configuration option?


Gateway security - is this a concern for discussion.  Assign static IPs to users, DHCP server, map IPs to

MACs considering a TCP/IP environment?


Paul VE7DHM



--
Don Poaps
New Westminster, BC
VA7DGP
 

--


John D. Hays
K7VE

PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 
  



--
Don Poaps
New Westminster, BC
VA7DGP
 

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Tom Hayward <esarfl@...>
 

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Dean Gibson AE7Q yahu.stuff@...
[UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
That's an understatement. The whole 44 thing is (functionally) a joke. Promises for minor changes are still not made after a year.

I know this is a hobby, but if you are going to try to interest new amateurs (especially those with a network background), don't ever tell them about the 44.net. I finally dropped my membership in the 44.net mailing list. Not that it had much effect; nothing's going on there.
44net has a reasonable size user base with low average networking
experience and an apparent reluctance to change. That said, AMPR has
allowed users of the 44net IP space to do their own thing as long as
they also support the entrenched RIP and IPIP tunnel scheme. For
example, HamWAN is announcing their address space via BGP, just like
the rest of the Internet. We made arrangement with some other BGP
users to prefer the BGP routes over the IPIP tunnels, so at least our
little piece of 44net has link-state-aware routing and multi-homing.
If you don't like how something is done, just make your own
arrangements.

Tom KD7LXL

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
 

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Don Poaps va7dgp@...
[UniversalDigitalRadio]
I'm just cooling my jets until there's documention on how to setup with Linbpq
http://www.cantab.net/users/john.wiseman/Documents/IPGateway.html

The big question is still if you want to create a new LAN or join an
existing one.

Bill

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Dean Gibson AE7Q <yahu.stuff@...>
 

On 2015-02-25 14:25, Tom Hayward esarfl@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Dean Gibson AE7Q yahu.stuff@...
[UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
That's an understatement. The whole 44 thing is (functionally) a joke. Promises for minor changes are still not made after a year.

I know this is a hobby, but if you are going to try to interest new amateurs (especially those with a network background), don't ever tell them about the 44.net. I finally dropped my membership in the 44.net mailing list. Not that it had much effect; nothing's going on there.
44net has ... an apparent reluctance to change. ...
If you don't like how something is done, just make your own
arrangements.

Tom KD7LXL
EXACTLY.

-- Dean

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
 

dropped my membership in the 44.net mailing list. Not that it had much effect; nothing's going on there.

So where is it going on and being done better?


Bill, WA7NWP

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

basil@...
 

> I live in the San Juan Islands on Lopez Is. 
> Do you have a gateway or are you playing standalone?

Standalone until I get my fiber connection within a couple of months.

> Any coverage to the South?

It's marginal and likely dependent on tropospheric ducting.
I think there is a lot of interference coming from Whidby Is. challenging any possibilities.
 
/Basil

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

basil@...
 


> Who else, if anyone, plans to use 44 address scheme in the Pacific North West around the Puget Sound?

> Paul VE7DHM


I have good path to your ve7rsk-10 RMS Gateway in Shirley, BC from the west side of Lopez Island, WA.

I sent you a Winlink message, respond if you want to try some things out. Try connecting to n7nix-10 on 144.970.


/Basil n7nix

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

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 three. :-)

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)

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

"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@... [UniversalDigitalRadio]" <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

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 three. :-)

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)

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

"John D. Hays" <john@...>
 

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@... [UniversalDigitalRadio] <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

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@... [UniversalDigitalRadio]" <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

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 three. :-)

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
K7VE

PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 
  

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
 

So what are people planning on doing once a 56k mesh network exists? What
kind of traffic will it carry?
Facebook and much more... With RF multicast to take advantage of our
spectrum resources instead of the old one-to-one model that so
hindered the previous generations of tools.

Bill, WA7NWP

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

"Tyrell Jentink, KD7KUJ" <tyrell@...>
 

Facebook uses HTTPS, which is encrypted, and is definitely designed to "Obscure the meaning of the message," and is definitely against the rules in the US.

On Feb 26, 2015 11:00 AM, "Bill Vodall wa7nwp@... [UniversalDigitalRadio]" <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

> So what are people planning on doing once a 56k mesh network exists? What
> kind of traffic will it carry?

Facebook and much more... With RF multicast to take advantage of our
spectrum resources instead of the old one-to-one model that so
hindered the previous generations of tools.

Bill, WA7NWP

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

Bill Vodall <wa7nwp@...>
 

So what are people planning on doing once a 56k mesh network exists?
What
kind of traffic will it carry?
Facebook and much more... With RF multicast to take advantage of our
spectrum resources instead of the old one-to-one model that so
hindered the previous generations of tools.

Bill, WA7NWP
Facebook uses HTTPS, which is encrypted, and is definitely designed to
"Obscure the meaning of the message," and is definitely against the rules in
the US.
That's an implementation detail. Our better version can be and do
what we want... It's the concept, and beyond, that we need to work
on.

Bill

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

"Tyrell Jentink, KD7KUJ" <tyrell@...>
 

Had you said "We wanna make a facebook-like social network," that would have been one thing... It's probably a "Thing" that would be popular for a few minutes in a few geographic regions before following BBS' 1998 journey into obscurity, but it would be a thing none the less.

But that's a far cry from telling the high schoolers that they can Facebook on Ham Radio; Merely making the statement could be a liability, because what happens when they take you literally?

Not to mention the fact that Facebook uses all kinds of media types that aren't well suited for this bandwidth... And once all restrictions pan out, it won't really be very Facebook like. In fact, it will be fairly BBS like... And as previously mentioned, that lost its allure about two decades ago.

So again... What real traffic will this network carry? And if it's just EmComm stuff... I'm on board, I'll set up a node... But I won't be comparing it to Facebook, and I sure won't be presenting it to the younger generation as any kind of revolutionary wave of the future.

On Feb 26, 2015 11:36 AM, "Bill Vodall wa7nwp@... [UniversalDigitalRadio]" <UniversalDigitalRadio@...> wrote:
 

>> > So what are people planning on doing once a 56k mesh network exists?
>> > What
>> > kind of traffic will it carry?
>>
>> Facebook and much more... With RF multicast to take advantage of our
>> spectrum resources instead of the old one-to-one model that so
>> hindered the previous generations of tools.
>>
>> Bill, WA7NWP

> Facebook uses HTTPS, which is encrypted, and is definitely designed to
> "Obscure the meaning of the message," and is definitely against the rules in
> the US.

That's an implementation detail. Our better version can be and do
what we want... It's the concept, and beyond, that we need to work
on.

Bill

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

ve7dhm@...
 

Well, thanks for the feedback.  All comments interesting.

44 allocation request: I have a request in at portal.amp.org
The BC admin emailed me and after some discussion he forward
my allocation request up to Luc Pernot.  That's where that
stands.

Existing LAN or my own LAN.  Just trying to find out what other
UDRX-440 users plan to do in the Puget Sound area.  Yes I could
do my own thing.  But considering what was in place years gone
by with the 1200 baud 2M / 220 / 440 Vancouver/Victoria/Seattle
packet system I was wondering if it might be able to rebuild it
but having increased speed / capacity.  This would require some
frequency and IP co-ordination.

Basil, N7NIX, thanks for the WL2K message.  Great to see there is
a 2M path between us.  Looking forward to trying the UDRX-440 between
us.

John, K7VE, thanks for the info and yes the map says it all.  Once
the UDRX-440 hits the street I am sure more orders will follow to
get in on the action.  After some initial testing my plan is to give
a presentation, to several groups in the Victoria area, on how the
UDRX-440 can be used to supplement or replace existing equipment.
1200 baud 2M and or 440 packet is in all 10 municipal EOCs and 3
districts over here on southern Vancouver Island.  An interesting
project would to make it a UDRX-440 MESH network with also mobile
units.

Richard, VE7CVS, thanks for the comments.  Lots to play with and lots
to learn...just like the long past years of VARPA and VAPO when packet
radio was new.  Back a few years ago I helped setup a local network,
using ID-1s for the Swiftsure Yacht Race.  The rounding mark vessels
where equipped with a laptop, ID-1, antenna, and camera.  I setup an
ID-1 on a hill top with a wifi link back to my house as a gateway.
The hams on the boats took photos and short length videos and ftp the
files back to a server.  Many megabytes of data were successfully sent
to the server.  The rocking of the boats caused some problems but the
fog really killed the ID-1 signal when it rolled by down the strait!
It was an interesting experiment and fun to do.  Really looking
forward to playing with the UDRX-440.

Paul VE7DHM

Re: 44 addresses / JNOS 56K / Gateway Security ?

ve7dhm@...
 

Amateur radio was/is portable/mobile/base station radios giving those
who can pass an exam the capability to talk across town or around
the world using voice and data. No infrastructure required.

Commercial development morphed it into a capability for the masses. So
now a greater part of everyones paycheck goes to pay for their monthly
communication expense than when it was landlines and over the air TV.
A huge infrastructure is required.

A friend went to an emergency planning group meeting and as he was
describing 1200 baud packet radio, the equipment, the nodes for
extending communication range, and the application software a couple
of IT guys at the table scoffed at the idea of using such a slow
system for an EOC emergency message system as a backup.  The friend
walked over to the IT guys and handed them a pencil and piece of paper
and said well then you had better start learning to write real fast
because that's all you are left with when infrastructure fails.

So maybe showing the kids of the world a UDRX-440 based network isn't
so bad after all.  It doesn't have to mirror the commercial world...
where is the innovation in that?  But it certainly has the potential
capability of handling text, voice, pictures, GPS data faster than
writing with a pencil.

Revolutionary....no monthly user fee and the capability to keep working
when the infrastructure fails....something to show the kids.

Paul VE7DHM