nanog mailing list archives
Re: motivation for routing a bit of 44.0.0.0/8
From: Neal R <neal () lists rauhauser net>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 21:16:10 -0500
I think based on the way things are going the city will be just fine with it :-) Of course, if I had a nickel for every time I've had this theoretical discussion I'd jingle when I walk, so we'll see how it plays out. Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 19:49:49 CDT, Neal R said:Set up a separate SSID exclusively for HAM use. Use IPsec AH - cryptographically signed traffic keeps the unlicensed out without breaking the no payload encryption requirements. City gets help with the civil defense radio of the 21st century, HAMs get a new toy, and everyone is happy. Sure, there are security concerns, but the interface to the outside world is a proxy server HAMs can use while doing storm watch and such ... nobody gets in or out without a note from the FCC ...Or am I making this just a bit too simple?The hams might be OK on it. The city probably won't be thrilled unless you can find a way to get their legal staff to sign off on it. Remember, most lawyers aren't geeks, and will judge a proposal on a different basis than geeks do.
Current thread:
- Re: OK - functioning administration of 44.0.0.0/8 Brandon Butterworth (May 21)
- Re: OK - functioning administration of 44.0.0.0/8 David Conrad (May 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: OK - functioning administration of 44.0.0.0/8 Brandon Butterworth (May 21)
- motivation for routing a bit of 44.0.0.0/8 Neal R (May 21)
- Re: motivation for routing a bit of 44.0.0.0/8 Valdis . Kletnieks (May 21)
- Re: motivation for routing a bit of 44.0.0.0/8 Neal R (May 21)
- motivation for routing a bit of 44.0.0.0/8 Neal R (May 21)