[HamWAN PSDR] POLL: How do you feel about HamWAN network having shared control of the microwave modem @ your location?

[Bart Kus]

On 2/28/2013 6:34 PM, Rob Salsgiver wrote:
> I think you're likely to find this a moving target....  As you mentioned,
> most ISPs do this in some fashion already.  Conversely, you can also opt to
> buy your own cable or DSL modem, etc - but the onus is on you to deal with
> any "incompatibilities" identified by the carrier.
Yup, that's the right balance IMHO.
> For the most part, I would be perfectly fine with HamWAN doing the same
> function - provided it doesn't hamper my ability to do what "I want".
That's my intention.
>    Some
> examples of this would be port forwarding,
This should be rarely needed, although it is possible to do. Remember, 
you have real-world IPs you can assign to your LAN and just use firewall 
rules to control access.  No need to deal with translation and 
state-tracking.  It's easier on the apps and the routers to take the 
no-NAT approach.
>   traffic prioritization settings
> (from my internal stuff to the network, not network node to network node -
> that's "the carrier's" responsibility).
This is another tricky open question.  Yes, most fundamentally you do 
need control over your own QoS.  However, HamWAN also provides you with 
multiple tiers of QoS depending on if you're operating emergency 
traffic, VoIP traffic, or regular traffic.  How to implement this on the 
client side is an open engineering problem. It may just be VLAN-based, 
but that's kinda heavy.
>    Routing settings COULD be an issue,
> if I wanted to setup my own preferred alternate routes vs letting the
> backbone handle it (this is one of those "grey" areas).
Absolutely correct, and identified as an open issue in my 
not-so-clarifying clarification email.  :)
> For the most part, I look for the following basic list of features:
>
> 1) My normal path through the network to other HamWAN hosts and the Internet
> is fast, short, and reliable
Agreed.
> 2) If anything in that path fails, my traffic re-routes without my knowing
> it and all continues to work well.
A valid scenario, although I'm sure some would say "you'll run SSL over 
HamWAN unknowingly and violate FCC rules" with this automation.  I'm on 
the side of "Let the individual ham make the decision if they want to do 
automatic or manual default gateway failover".  Can of worms.  Another 
open engineering problem.
> 3) Any inbound defined services, such as port forwarding (for Echolink, etc)
> work under both #1 and #2.
Yup.
> There is one situation I can think of that may run into problems with HamWAN
> managing remote endpoints.... that is the scenario where someone is
> developing RF-link based functionality that may be affected by an
> "auto-overwrite" by the network.... i.e. - someone is working on new
> antennas or testing traffic management possibilities.  As an example - if I
> decide to replace my antenna with something "home brew" and want to modify
> the transmit or receive parameters for specific testing, there may be some
> conflicts here.  Using other vendor radios or developing your own may be an
> issue as well.  These can probably be handled using very few exceptions, and
> likely is not worth making major "policy" changes to accommodate, other than
> the potential for a few select devices to be excluded.
Interesting, but given all the other open work, I'd like to postpone 
solving this.
> Part of the excitement of developing this beast is simply not knowing
> everywhere it might take us.  We may find more potential conflicts down the
> road that will have to be considered if/when they come up.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob Salsgiver - NR3O
Agreed.  And if this email is to teach us anything is that WE NEED MORE 
ENGINEERS WORKING THEIR ASSES OFF.

--Bart





>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PSDR [mailto:psdr-bounces at hamwan.org] On Behalf Of Bart Kus
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:17 PM
> To: Puget Sound Data Ring
> Subject: [HamWAN PSDR] POLL: How do you feel about HamWAN network having
> shared control of the microwave modem @ your location?
>
> Hello,
>
> Keeping the network and all client devices correctly configured is no easy
> feat.  These are complicated devices with 100s of settings, which will need
> to change in coordinated ways over time.  To ensure correct operation, it
> would make sense for the HamWAN network to push updates and change settings
> on end-user modems.  Almost all ISPs run this way already.  The difference
> is you can still login + control your device, but any setting changes you
> make which make the device non-compliant in ways HamWAN cares about would be
> automatically overridden with a config update from the network.  If the
> network can't control and repair your device settings, you would lose
> authorization onto the network until the settings are fixed.
>
> I see this shared administration model as the only one that's feasible in
> keeping a reliable network running.
>
> Please let me know if you are OK with it, if you object to it, or if you
> have a better idea.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Bart
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PSDR mailing list
> PSDR at hamwan.org
> http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org