[nos-bbs] 44-net

[Brian]

<rant>

On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 18:50 -0800, ac7yy wrote:
   
> I am curious as to why you say that a 44.x.x address should be used?

> Kim - AC7YY

A better question really would be:
"how would 44-net be best used?"

to which a good answer could be:
"whenever hams are running low-bandwidth networked applications
requiring the tcp/ip protocol suite."

There are very little packet applications that use tcp/ip out there that
honestly require 9600 baud speeds (or 1200 baud speeds for that matter),
and in such cases it'd be a great idea to keep the ampr.org alive and
well with activity. Over the course of time, there's been many many hams
who've dedicated an extreme amount of hours writing source-code and
coming up with applications for the amateur community to use and enjoy,
primarily with the intent that 44-net space would be used.

We as amateurs have been blessed with the gift of a full /8 subnet in
which to carry on our radio experiments with... and if we don't use it,
there will be a good fight against us in which we can very well lose
it... infact such a battle has already started.. by your ISPs! One could
easily say "so what, I have a dynamic assignment and I use dyndns or
no-ip, etc... what do I need 44-net space for?" Remember, when you sign
up for internet service from your provider whoever it is... you're
leasing a connection and right to use *their* network, and if you tear
apart your ToS (term of service) you'll find as you read between the
lines that the network you're being allowed limited usage for is however
they wish to manage it. If they wished to cut off UDP access, that's
*their* right to do such... and there's nothing you can do but switch
providers until you find one that will let you do what you wish to do.

A benefit of using an encapsulated tunnel with ampr.org space is that it
gives you a way to provide tcp/ip services for the amateur community
which has global internet connectivity that your ISP could be filtering
on you without your knowledge if you were to run such services on ports
being filtered. Such a case would be SMTP on RoadRunner cable
connections. RR is very strict in their outbound SMTP policies, however
by using a tunnelled 44-net subnet on boxes I've assisted in getting
such things working, their SMTP servers are working just fine now
totally bypassing the filters incorporated by RR. As botnets, worms,
viri, etc continues to grow don't be surprised to see more and more
ports and protocols being filtered by ISPs in an attempt to keep their
own networks clean.

Sure, it's not an easy thing to get up and running properly, but we're
in this hobby because we're inventors, experimenters, and in a sense
hobby scientists... it's what's supposed to keep us separated from the
standard end-user who's lost if they don't have a "setup.exe" file and a
mouse to click on it to execute it. Learning things is supposed to be a
huge part of the "fun" of all this. 

If you dig deep into that which is now a way of life for many people,
you'll find SMTP, NNTP, and IPIP RFCs were all developed and written by
Brian Kantor (aka: Mr. Ampr.org), who to this day works very diligently
in maintaining a full /8 subnet for us all to enjoy world-wide... while
developers such as Maiko, Barry, Tomi... and the list goes on...
continue to do work in helping provide us with usable applications and
services we can use on the ampr.org. The best way to compliment these
guys who put in more than their share of time and efforts is if you use
their products, use them on ampr.org.

Technically speaking do you *need* to? By all means _no_, however it
seems the less we use something we've had given to us, the more we tend
to lose it such the case with 11-meters, and also such with part of the
220 band allocations. If someone has trouble with setting it up, the
amprgate list is a great resource to use (and is a quiet list at that).

</rant>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/nos-bbs_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20080122/049ba12d/attachment.asc>