[HamWAN PSDR] hamwan.net DDNS [was: hostname on ampr.org?]

[Bill Vodall]

>
> If you're referring to the use of TSIG as a signature at the end of a
> message, then yes, that hash is not encrypting any information, it's simply
> signing something as being legitimate.  But when you're talking about
> getting a private key from point A to point B over the network, and
> encrypting it during transmission so that it's not visible to others, then I
> believe that's violating FCC regulations.

Secure 'administration' is not an issue.  It's within the intent of
the rules if not the letter.  Many more words than this have been
written about it over the past 20+ years.  Nobody notices.  Nobody
cares.   There are far more fragatent and obvious bendings of the
rules.  Still nobody notices and nobody cares.


> Yup, we're in a bad spot here.  Presently trying to figure out how to enable
> SSH with authentication and integrity, but not encryption.

SSH had cipher=none.  They disabled it.  They removed it because
somebody might accidentally use it.

The High Performance SSH folks put it back.

  https://launchpad.net/~w-rouesnel/+archive/openssh-hpn

I'd start there if (when) I get back to 44 net use.


> No need to worry about changes here.  HamWAN authoritative DNS servers shall
> forever and always(*) be on 44.24.244.2 and 44.24.245.2.

Who has the 44.44.44.44 address?   44.24.24.24 ??   That would make
for interesting 44net or wwa.44net DNS access.

> Yeah, but I aspire to provide the best solutions I can.  I've got no
> interest in releasing half-assed designs.

Perfect is the enemy of good enough...   It's nice to build an
enterprise class secure system - but is that what the customers want
and need?    Doing it 'because' is great but that doesn't sell
hamburgers...

> I think hams are really into the theory of being on a microwave
> digital network, but not so motivated to go out and buy the hardware,
> configure it, install it, align it, and integrate it into their home
> network.  I know of at least 2 examples where folks have actually bought the
> hardware and have been in a coverage zone for months, but just haven't
> deployed it.  This may very well be a ham culture issue.  Ham radio has been
> very focused on analog voice systems.  Learning how to do digital network
> comms does take time and effort.  Time changes all things though, and I'm
> encouraged by the new hams we've minted through this project.  I'd like for
> us to focus on ham-recruitment of digital-savvy folks in the future.  They
> may have an easier time of adopting HamWAN type technologies.  And of
> course, we eventually need to get down to an appliance solution.  There's a
> whole bunch of UI work involved with that.  We need programmers!

The biggest problem - still - as I mentioned at dinner at Kirkland
last year - is finding a use case and selling it.  That's a bigger
problem than all of these RF and TCP technologies.   Alternate
internet access is nice but not the magic silver bullet.  Some of the
other uses are nice but not the big thing everybody can use.  I've
heard 3 independent repeater discussions where folks were thinking and
excited they could replace their existing $30 per month internet with
$20 per month HamWAN.  I don't believe that's a real option due to the
Amateur Realm.    (The answer is 'Facebook' but that's a different
discussion which I hope to start on the 44net sig later this week...)


> As well as could be expected, I suppose.  I'm pretty sure I lost both
> audiences, except for 1-2 guys in each one who had previous network
> experience.

The Microhams talk didn't have time to address the posted subject..

Bill, WA7NWP