Jan 192019
 

Recently, I’ve been looking at the problem of how to retrieve IPv6 traffic from the network stack of my workstation and manipulate it for transmission over AX.25.

My last experiments focussed on the TUN/TAP interface in Linux. Using this interface, I could create a virtual network interface that piped its traffic to a file descriptor in a program written in C.

One advantage of using the C language for this is that, as binding to the TAP interface requires root privileges, the binary could be installed setuid root. Thus, any time it started, it would be running as root. From there, it could do what it needed, then drop privileges back to a regular user.

The program would just run as a child process… when there was traffic received from the kernel, it would just spit that out to stdout. If my parent application had something to send, it would feed that into stdin.

6lhagent is an implementation of that idea. It’s pretty rough, but it seems to work. It uses a simple protocol to frame the Ethernet packets so that it can maintain synchronisation with the parent process. All frames are ACKed or NAKed, depending on whether they were understood or not. The protocol is analogous to KISS or SLIP in concept. The framing is very different to these protocols, but the concept is that of frames delimited by a byte sequence, with occurrences of the special byte sequences replaced with place-holders to prevent the parser getting confused.

I then wrote this Python script which uses the asyncio IO loop to run 6lhagent and dump the packets it receives:

$ python3 demo/dumper.py 
Interface data: b'V\xc7\x05\\yA\x05\x00\x00\x00\x00\xca\x04tap0'
Interface: MAC=[86, 199, 5, 92, 121, 65] MTU=1280 IDX=202 NAME=tap0
Ethernet traffic: b'33330000001656c7055c794186dd600000000024000100000000000000000000000000000000ff0200000000000000000000000000163a000502000001008f00f5ec0000000104000000ff0200000000000000000001ff5c7941'
From: 33:33:00:00:00:16
To:   56:c7:05:5c:79:41
Protocol: 86dd
IPv6: Priority 0, Flow 000000
From: ::
To:   ff02::16
Length: 36, Next header: 0, Hop Limit: 1
Payload: b':\x00\x05\x02\x00\x00\x01\x00\x8f\x00\xf5\xec\x00\x00\x00\x01\x04\x00\x00\x00\xff\x02\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x01\xff\\yA'
Ethernet traffic: b'33330000001656c7055c794186dd600000000024000100000000000000000000000000000000ff0200000000000000000000000000163a000502000001008f00f5ec0000000104000000ff0200000000000000000001ff5c7941'
From: 33:33:00:00:00:16
To:   56:c7:05:5c:79:41
Protocol: 86dd
IPv6: Priority 0, Flow 000000
From: ::
To:   ff02::16
Length: 36, Next header: 0, Hop Limit: 1
Payload: b':\x00\x05\x02\x00\x00\x01\x00\x8f\x00\xf5\xec\x00\x00\x00\x01\x04\x00\x00\x00\xff\x02\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x01\xff\\yA'
Ethernet traffic: b'3333ff5c794156c7055c794186dd6000000000203aff00000000000000000000000000000000ff0200000000000000000001ff5c79418700bebb00000000fe8000000000000054c705fffe5c79410e01a02d5c9a6698'
From: 33:33:ff:5c:79:41
To:   56:c7:05:5c:79:41
Protocol: 86dd
IPv6: Priority 0, Flow 000000
From: ::
To:   ff02::1:ff5c:7941
Length: 32, Next header: 58, Hop Limit: 255
ICMP Type 135, Code 0, Checksum bebb
Data: b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\xfe\x80\x00\x00'
Payload: b'\x00\x00\x00\x00T\xc7\x05\xff\xfe\\yA\x0e\x01\xa0-\\\x9af\x98'
Ethernet traffic: b'33330000001656c7055c794186dd6000000000240001fe8000000000000054c705fffe5c7941ff0200000000000000000000000000163a000502000001008f0025070000000104000000ff0200000000000000000001ff5c7941'
From: 33:33:00:00:00:16
To:   56:c7:05:5c:79:41
Protocol: 86dd
IPv6: Priority 0, Flow 000000
From: fe80::54c7:5ff:fe5c:7941
To:   ff02::16
Length: 36, Next header: 0, Hop Limit: 1
Payload: b':\x00\x05\x02\x00\x00\x01\x00\x8f\x00%\x07\x00\x00\x00\x01\x04\x00\x00\x00\xff\x02\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x01\xff\\yA'
Ethernet traffic: b'33330000001656c7055c794186dd6000000000240001fe8000000000000054c705fffe5c7941ff0200000000000000000000000000163a000502000001008f009cab0000000104000000ff0200000000000000000000000000fb'
From: 33:33:00:00:00:16
To:   56:c7:05:5c:79:41
Protocol: 86dd
IPv6: Priority 0, Flow 000000
From: fe80::54c7:5ff:fe5c:7941
To:   ff02::16
Length: 36, Next header: 0, Hop Limit: 1
Payload: b':\x00\x05\x02\x00\x00\x01\x00\x8f\x00\x9c\xab\x00\x00\x00\x01\x04\x00\x00\x00\xff\x02\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\xfb'

The thinking is that the bulk of the proof-of-concept will be done in Python. My reasoning for this is that it’s usually easier to prototype in a higher-level language than in C, and in this application, speed is not important. At best our network interface will be running at 9600 baud — Python will keep up just fine. Most of it will be at 1200 baud.

The Python code will do some packet filtering (e.g. filtering out the multicast NS messages, which are a no-no in RFC-6775) and to add options where required. It’ll also be responsible for rate-limiting the firehose-like output of the tap interface from the host so the AX.25 network doesn’t get flooded.

The proof of concept is coming together. Next steps are to implement an IPv6 stack of sorts in Python to dissect the datagrams.

Jan 122019
 

For 6LoWHAM, it could work that we just use the link-local address space to directly communicate between stations and leave it at that.

If I want to send a message to VK4BWI-5 from my station VK4MSL-9, I could just fire off a packet to fe80::6894:49ff:feae:7318 directed to my 6LoWHAM interface and be done with it. This then requires one of two things:

  1. that VK4BWI-5 can directly communicate with me
  2. that the intermediate stations know to forward my message on to that station

(1) is easy enough. (2) raises the question of “what is local”?

Supposing that this protocol took off, and suddenly the WIA decides to earmark special frequencies on a few bands for 6LoWHAM, with a fairly complete network stretching up the eastern seaboard of Australia. If my station sends a router solicitation from my home QTH in Brisbane, does someone in Melbourne really care to hear it? I’d wager this is a recipe for a very clogged packet network!

In Thread, the “link local” scope only gets you as far as the nodes that can directly hear you. It does mean that protocols like mDNS, which rely on the “link-local” multicast scope aren’t going to reach all nodes, but it also means that far flung nodes don’t need to listen to all the low-level chatter. For communications between nodes, an “on-mesh” prefix is used, and for mesh-wide multicast, a “realm-local” prefix of ff03::/64 is defined.

In truth, it’s highly unlikely that we’d have “one” single network. More likely it’ll be a mesh of interconnected networks with trunk links going via some other band (or perhaps VPNs over the Internet). For that to work, we can’t rely on just link-local networking, we actually need a routable network address for the mesh.

The Thread “mesh local” prefix is actually defined by the network’s extended IEEE-802.15.4 PAN ID, which is a 64-bit number that you define when setting up the network. Thread simply takes the most significant 40 bits of this, slaps fd in front and pads it out with zeros to 64-bits. The PAN ID 0x0123456789abcdef forms the subnet fd01:2345:6789::/64. This can be seen in the OpenThread sources.

This wastes 16-bits of address space normally reserved for the ULA subnet ID and throws away 24-bits of the PAN ID. For our network, we don’t need 16-bits worth of subnets, we just need one. We also don’t have a PAN ID in AX.25.

The thinking is, we’ll use a “group” address. This will be a regular AX.25 SSID, which will translate to a MAC which has the group bit set. (Exactly how I’ll differentiate between a station SSID and a group SSID I’m not sure. Probably will look at the destination IP, if it’s multicast then the group bit gets set.)

Supposing we were to use this for the International Rally of Queensland (an event which is now defunct), we might create a 6LoWHAM network with a group address of “IROQ19”. The MAC address used for group-wide communications would be 03:01:cd:e5:a9:f8.

We can derive a prefix from this MAC address. A ULA normally consists of a 7-bit ULA prefix, a 1-bit “global/local” bit, a 40-bit global ID, and a 16-bit subnet ID.

The ULA prefix is fc::/7. The global/local bit is always set to 1 (local) because no one has come up with a way that ULAs can be globally administered. 40 bits is a bit tight, we could truncate our MAC to 40 bits and ignore the subnet ID like Thread do, that gives us a subnet of fd03:1cd:5ea9::/64.

The last 3 bits of the SSID though, are like a subnet ID. So if we move those 3 bits to set the last 3 bits of the prefix, we can make some use of that subnet ID, but still waste 13 bits with zeros.

Alternatively, we can consider the global ID and subnet ID to be one 56-bit field. We effectively shrink the subnet ID to 3 bits. That gives us a 53-bit global ID, which now fits the remaining 45-bits of our MAC and leaves us with 8 bits left over.

We can discard the lowest two bits in the first byte of the MAC as those (the group and local bits) will be the same for all groups, so that gives us another two bits. 10 bits isn’t a lot, but it’s enough to encode “AR” (amateur radio) in ITA-2, thus giving us a recognisable subnet mask for all 6LoWHAM networks. We wind up with the following:

┌─ULA─┐L┌──"AR"──┐┌───────────── Network Address ──────────────┐
1111110100010010100000000000000111001101111001011010100111111000
└──┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┼───┤
   f   d   1   2 : 8   0   0   1 : c   d   e   5 : a   9   f   8 /64

This actually has me thinking whether the call-sign part of the SSID should be right-padded out to make the network address consistent. Maybe my SSID to MAC algorithm could do with a tweak there as it may make routing easier as it’ll put all those zeros to the right.

In Thread, the mesh-local prefix isn’t route-able beyond the mesh, there’s a separate prefix handed out by border routers for that. In our case, I don’t think there’s any point in complicating matters by having more than one route-able prefix for a mesh. If a station participates in two networks that share a frequency, then sure, that node may have an address on each network, but each network should share a common identity.

Thus in the contrived example of having a large network along the coastline: it’d be an “inter-network” of smaller meshes, linked together via router nodes which know how to hop between them. Those routes may be via point-to-point microwave links, HF, Internet tunnels, etc.

The subnets used for these other networks may be assigned a “context identifier” which is 4-bits. I’ll have to figure out if there’s a sane way to do that on a given network. Most 802.15.4 networks have a “PAN co-ordinator” which could be looking after that. Thread networks elect a “leader” node.

Given the small number of identifiers, and the low probability of this being used, this should be manually administered. Even without a context ID being assigned, one can still route between the subnets, just that the full IPv6 address needs to be given for the foreign node, so you incur a 16-byte penalty doing so. Thus the context IDs will probably be handed out for “popular routes”, with the mesh prefix being “context 0”.

I haven’t yet given thought to how this “context” would be disseminated over the mesh or kept updated. That is a can of worms for another day.

Jan 122019
 

One of the aims of 6LoWHAM was to provide a means to send IPv6 traffic between user applications and the AX.25 network.

In order to do this, the applications have to have some way of injecting their IP traffic. The canonical way this is done is through the operating system’s TCP/IP stack. This requires that we have an interface to the operating system kernel in order to receive that IP traffic destined for the airwaves.

Now, we could write a kernel driver for this, but it’s going the long way around to do it. Especially as we intend to interface to software that runs in userspace for the actual transmission. Our driver at best would be just taking the raw Ethernet frame, extracting the IP part, and forwarding that back to our program running in userspace.

There’s a driver that does that for us: TUN/TAP. This driver can either create a TUNnel device, which forwards IP datagrams, or a TAP device, which forwards Ethernet frames. We’ll focus on the TUN mode of this driver here.

The idea is this will create an IP tunnel, with one side exposing a network device to the kernel, and the other side being a file descriptor in a userspace application that just reads and writes raw IP frames. How it generates and processes those frames is entirely up to the software author. Most famous uses for this device are VPNs, so taking the IP datagram, encrypting it, then encapsulating it in an IP datagram (usually UDP) to be sent over the Internet to some other peer, which reverses the process and writes the original packet to its tunnel file descriptor.

In our case, we’ll be dissecting it a bit to extract the key fields, then applying our own “compression” defined in the 6LoWHAM specs, then forwarding it on to our AX.25 stack (probably LinBPQ or Direwolf) to be sent as an AX.25 UI frame.

The first step in this journey was actually figuring out what the packets look like on a tunnel device. I created this little program to explore the idea.

It just needs the usual C toolchain and libraries on a Linux system. I tested with Gentoo and Linux kernel 4.15. Building it is a simple make command. If you then run the resulting binary as root, you’ll find a tun0 device (or maybe some other number) created.

Bring the interface up, and you should start to see some traffic as the host tries to talk to is new (and very much mute) peer:

RC=0 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ make 
cc    -c -o linuxtun.o linuxtun.c
cc    -c -o main.o main.c
cc -o packetdumper linuxtun.o main.o
RC=0 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ sudo ./packetdumper 
Password: 
^Z
[1]+  Stopped(SIGTSTP)        sudo ./packetdumper
RC=148 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ sudo ip link set dev tun0 up
RC=0 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ fg
sudo ./packetdumper
Flags: 0x0000  Protocol: 0x86dd
  48:  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
   0: 60 00 00 00 00 08 3a ff fe 80 00 00 00 00 00 00
  16: 5e be 89 41 7b 19 d5 60 ff 02 00 00 00 00 00 00
  32: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 85 00 44 bd 00 00 00 00
Flags: 0x0000  Protocol: 0x86dd
  48:  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
   0: 60 00 00 00 00 08 3a ff fe 80 00 00 00 00 00 00
  16: 5e be 89 41 7b 19 d5 60 ff 02 00 00 00 00 00 00
  32: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 85 00 44 bd 00 00 00 00

I didn’t bother to decode the IP datagram further, but if you look at the Wikipedia IPv6 Packet article, it isn’t difficult to see what’s going on. In this case, we can see it’s an IPv6 packet both from the Protocol field (0x86dd is the Ethertype for IPv6), and from the first 4 bits of the frame payload.

The traffic class and flow label are both 0s here. The IPv6 payload length is just 8 bytes, so most of this is in fact IPv6 header data. Next header is type 0x3a (IPv6 ICMP) and the hop limit is 255. This is followed by the source address (my laptop’s link-local address fe80::5ebe:8941:7b19:d560) and the destination address (all link-local routers multicast address ff02::2).

The ICMPv6 message is the last 8 bytes; and in this case, it’s type is 0x85 (router solicitation), the code is 0x00, the two bytes after that are the checksum and the message (4 bytes) is all zeros.

Quite how that address was chosen is something I’ll have to get to grips with. Yes, it’s SLAAC, but where did it get the hardware address from? That I’ll have to figure out.

The alternative is to use a TAP interface, which means I choose the MAC address, and thus can control what the SLAAC-derived address becomes. Ohh, and it goes without saying that the privacy extensions will be a big no no on the air: we’re relying on the fact that we can derive the IPv6 address from the SSID of the station both for technical reasons and to legally meet the requirements for stations to “identify” who they are and whom they are talking to. SLAAC privacy will make a mess of that.

So controlling this link-local address is a must. I guess next stop: let’s look at a tap device. I’ve just made some changes to explore the differences from the application end. There isn’t a lot of difference here.

RC=130 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ sudo ./packetdumper -tap
Password: 
^Z
[1]+  Stopped(SIGTSTP)        sudo ./packetdumper -tap
RC=148 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ sudo ip link set tap0 up
RC=0 stuartl@rikishi ~/projects/6lowham/packetdumper $ fg
sudo ./packetdumper -tap
Flags: 0x0000  Protocol: 0x86dd
  90:  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
   0: 33 33 00 00 00 16 ce 65 0c 34 48 34 86 dd 60 00
  16: 00 00 00 24 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  32: 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  48: 00 00 00 00 00 16 3a 00 05 02 00 00 01 00 8f 00
  64: 27 22 00 00 00 01 04 00 00 00 ff 02 00 00 00 00
  80: 00 00 00 00 00 01 ff 34 48 34
Flags: 0x0000  Protocol: 0x86dd
  86:  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
   0: 33 33 ff 34 48 34 ce 65 0c 34 48 34 86 dd 60 00
  16: 00 00 00 20 3a ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  32: 00 00 00 00 00 00 ff 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  48: 00 01 ff 34 48 34 87 00 af 03 00 00 00 00 fe 80
  64: 00 00 00 00 00 00 cc 65 0c ff fe 34 48 34 0e 01
  80: 61 78 48 c1 ac aa

The big difference is now we have an Ethernet header prepended. The proto field in the packet information now duplicates what we can see in the Ethernet frame header (bytes 12 and 13), and the IPv6 packet starts from byte 14.

I think this is the mode 6LoWHAM will use. It’s possible to set the MAC address on the created tap0 device to whatever 46 bits we like, the remaining two bits in the MAC address are for defining whether the address is global or local (we’ll set ours to “local”), and the other sets whether this is a multicast or unicast address. The SLAAC address will closely match this address with two differences:

  1. The MAC will have the bytes 0xff 0xfe inserted into the middle.
  2. The “global/local” bit is inverted. So for the 2001:db8::/64 prefix:
    • aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff becomes 2001:db8::a8bb:ccff:fedd:eeff
    • a8:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff becomes 2001:db8::aabb:ccff:fedd:eeff

That latter point had me confused at first, I thought it might’ve been that a bit got cleared, but instead it’s just inverted, so completely reversible.

Nov 212018
 

Thinking about the routing problem a little more… if I wanted to do a purely “native” routing scheme not involving Net/ROM routing update broadcasts, one has to wonder what such a system would look like.

Net/ROM L3 is really just intended to “bootstrap” things… there’s the prospect of using Net/ROM L4 for tunnelling TCP traffic, but really it’s the L3 part that interests me as a way of hopping between fragments of the mesh that may be linkable via a non-6LoWHAM capable digipeater.

Net/ROM’s periodic broadcasts are inefficient, divulging a node’s entire routing table is not an ideal situation.  So what’s the alternative?  IPv6 nodes already send a “neighbour discovery” packet when they don’t know the MAC address of a neighbour, this is a trigger for a “neighbour advertisement” response.

I’m thinking 6LoWHAM will send NAs periodically anyway.  ACMA rules require identifying every 10 minutes.  Since the NA will include the call-sign of the station (in bit-shifted ASCII), doing that every 10 minutes takes care of the ACMA requirement.  An IPv6 NA message is not a big payload.

Given this will be sent to the ff02::1 multicast group, all nodes able to hear the beaconing station will receive it.  Unlike a IEEE 802.11 or 802.3 network though, not all nodes on the mesh will hear it.

The same is true of ND messages.  If the neighbour is in ear-shot and able to respond, it likely will, but that isn’t a guarantee.  Something in the link-local scope will likely be the answer, probably a daemon listening on a UDP port and sending to the ff02::1 group.

Unicast routing

When a station wishes to make contact with a station that’s not an immediate neighbour, I’m thinking of a broadcast similar to how APRS does things.  APRS uses special call-signs WIDEn-m, where the hop-limit is encoded in those messages.

A UDP message would be constructed asking “Who can reach X within N hops?” and sent to ff02::1 to some “well-known” port.

The first second is reserved for responses from nodes that know a route, either through Net/ROM, or maybe they’ve been in contact with that station before.  They respond something along the lines of “X via A,B,C, quality Q”, where A, B, C are digipeaters and Q is some link quality value.

Not sure how I’ll derive Q just yet.  Possibly based on packet loss… we’ll think of something.

If no responses are heard, the routers that heard the message re-broadcast it and listen for replies.  In the re-broadcast, each router appends its 48-bit 6LoWHAM address and a link quality to the message payload.  The hop limit would also get decremented.  That way, it can break cycles, and it gives a direct unicast path for the distant node to respond.

The same algorithm applies: wait a second for immediate responses, then any routers downstream append their addresses/link quality values, decrement the hop limit, and re-broadcast.

Again, any node that overhears the message (including the target node), may respond.  It does so via a direct unicast, sent using conventional AX.25 digipeating.  Any router en route that relays the message may also cache the result.  The “mesh” gets to learn of where everyone is as-required rather than by default with Net/ROM.

If the hop limit reaches zero, no further re-broadcasts are made, the message stops there.

When the source node hears the replies, each reply resets a 100msec timer.  100msec after the last reply, it chooses three “best” routes, and sends a ICMPv6 ND message via each one to the target station.  The station replies to all three back via those routes with an ICMPv6 NA.  If a message is lost via one of those routes, that route is demoted in quality.

Once replies have arrived back at the source, it picks the best route based on the updated quality information, and begins communications via that route.

Multicast routing

This, is more tricky.  I think the link-local should mean what it means on Thread… that is ff02::/16 just gets processed by immediate neighbours that are in direct RF range.

Realm-local (RFC-7346), ff03::/16 should be used for stuff that’s mesh-wide.  Those messages may be repeated by routers provided those routers have at least one subscriber for the given multicast group/port listening.

Multicast Listener Discovery looks to be the tool for that, although it could do with some 6LoWPAN-style optimisation.

I’m thinking the first time a router hears a datagram destined for a particular group, it should send a query out asking “who is listening” to the said group.

Following that first message, it should be up to the downstream node to inform the local routers that it intends to receive messages from a given group.  This should be periodic, maybe hourly, so that routers are not re-broadcasting messages for a node that has gone off-air.

Routers that have no listeners for a group, do not rebroadcast that group’s traffic.  Similarly, if the hop limit has been exhausted, the messages do not get rebroadcast.

Nov 182018
 

So today I was meant to be helping re-build a deck, but that got postponed to next weekend.  Thus, I had an extra free day I wasn’t counting on.

I wound up looking at LinBPQ in detail, to see if I can get it to run.  I downloaded the sources, and sure enough, they do compile on my x86-64 laptop, but does it work?  Not a chance.  Starts parsing the configuration file, then boompa, SEGFAULT.

I run the binary through gdb, and see this:

GNU gdb (Gentoo 8.1 p1) 8.1
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.  Type "show copying"
and "show warranty" for details.
This GDB was configured as "x86_64-pc-linux-gnu".
Type "show configuration" for configuration details.
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
<https://bugs.gentoo.org/>.
Find the GDB manual and other documentation resources online at:
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/documentation/>.
For help, type "help".
Type "apropos word" to search for commands related to "word"...
Reading symbols from /home/stuartl/projects/6lowham/linbpq/linbpq...done.
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/stuartl/projects/6lowham/linbpq/linbpq 
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1".
G8BPQ AX25 Packet Switch System Version 6.0.17.1 November 2018
Copyright � 2001-2018 John Wiseman G8BPQ
Current Directory is /var/lib/linbpq

Configuration file Preprocessor.
Using Configuration file /var/lib/linbpq/bpq32.cfg
Conversion (probably) successful


Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00005555555f8a7b in Start () at cMain.c:1190
1190                    *(ptr3++) = *(ptr2++);
(gdb) bt full
#0  0x00005555555f8a7b in Start () at cMain.c:1190
        cfg = 0x555555b91c40
        ptr1 = 0x555555ba60c0
        PORT = 0x5555558f6aa0 
        FULLPORT = 0x558f7928
        NEXTPORT = 0x5555558f6de0 <DATAAREA+832>
        EXTPORT = 0x7ffff6eb7953 <_IO_file_overflow+291>
        APPL = 0x5555558f49e0 
        ROUTE = 0x559085e8
        DEST = 0x870b07e2ddd5f300
        CMD = 0x5555558d79e0 
        PortSlot = 2
        ptr2 = 0x555555ba6849 "K4MSL Test station \r"
        ptr3 = 0x55912549 
        ptr4 = 0x5555558d7183 <COMMANDS+1667> "         \003"
        CWPTR = 0x5555558f6b18 <DATAAREA+120>
        i = 0
        n = 119
        int3 = 1435466024
#1  0x000055555563e35c in main (argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffe518) at LinBPQ.c:598
        i = 1
        user = 0x0
        conn = 0x7ffff7ffa298
        STAT = {st_dev = 140737354131120, st_ino = 140737488347784, st_nlink = 140737488347780, st_mode = 4160741648, 
          st_uid = 32767, st_gid = 4143745959, __pad0 = 32767, st_rdev = 140737488348192, st_size = 140737488347784, 
          st_blksize = 1700966438, st_blocks = 26577600, st_atim = {tv_sec = 140737354113688, tv_nsec = 140737488348000}, 
          st_mtim = {tv_sec = 140737354113448, tv_nsec = 140737488347780}, st_ctim = {tv_sec = 140737488347984, 
            tv_nsec = 140737354131160}, __glibc_reserved = {1, 4150715120, 0}}
        PORTVEC = 0x7ffff7ffe6b0

Ookay then… so invalid pointers, what fun!  More to the point, have a close look at the underlined addresses… I’m beginning to understand why it was called BPQ32.

The culprit for this wound up being little gems like this:

			//	Round to word boundary (for ARM5 etc)

			int3 = (int)ptr3;
			int3 += 3;
			int3 &= 0xfffffffc;
			ptr3 = (UCHAR *)int3;

There were a few other instances of this, and variations on the theme too, but one way or the other, linbpq basically assumes that all pointers are 32-bits, and so are ints.

Four hours later, I finally had something that started, but there are probably lots of landmines for anyone running the binary to inadvertently stomp on.  The code is pointer-arithmetic city!  Much of the time, code is casting pointers to unsigned int, or back again.  If I submitted code like that at work, they’d have me hauled ’round the back of the building and shot!

I’m left wondering if it’s worth getting to understand, or should I shove it in a VM, write some code based on my understanding of the protocols, do some integration testing with it, then abandon LinBPQ for something I can have confidence in.

The use and re-use of certain variables makes me wonder if the code is actually a port from the DOS-based BPQCode which was likely written in 8086 assembler.  This would make a lot of sense as to why I’m seeing the sorts of software coding patterns I’m seeing in that code.  The logic seems to have been ported to C just enough to get it to compile and work like the assembly version.

Reasonable enough… but there’s a lot of technical debt there still waiting to be paid back.  On paper, there’s a lot of benefit in using LinBPQ as the back-end, and I am thankful that John Wiseman made the decision to release the code under the GPLv3 so that I can at least investigate the possibility of using that code here.

I’ve thrown what I’ve got up on Github for now, and there’s a Gentoo overlay for installing it.  Add the overlay and run emerge linbpq, and you should find yourself with an installation of LinBPQ that just needs some OpenRC scripts and some work with an editor on /var/lib/linbpq/bpq32.cfg to get going.

If I get further on the code front, I might look at some init scripts, both OpenRC and systemd ones, then I can produce a few Debian binaries so you can run apt-get install linbpq on your Raspberry Pi and have a packet station going quickly.

Nov 172018
 

Today, I decided to get cuddly with the relevant RFCs and see if I could adapt them into something that would work for AX.25. The following roughly describes how one might stuff IPv6 datagrams into AX.25.

Much of this is heavily influenced by RFC-4944 and RFC-6282, the latter of which looks to be the heart-and-soul of Thread.


Stateless Automatic Addressing

We have a mechanism by which an AX.25 call+SSID can be losslessly mapped to a 48-bit MAC address. This is built on Radix-50 and can work as a stand-in for the EUI-48. The pseudo EUI-48 procedure mentioned in section 6 of the RFC-4944 standard is not required.

An EUI-64 is generated from an EUI-48 by chopping the EUI-48 in half and inserting the bytes ff:fe in the middle. So the EUI-48:

00:11:22:33:44:55

becomes the following EUI-64:

00:11:22:ff:fe:33:44:55

SLAAC therefore will work the same way it does for Ethernet.

Frame format

1. AX.25 UI Frame header

Size: (17 + (D*7) bytes, where D is the number of digipeaters being used

  • PID = 1100 0101 (tentative) IPv6
  • Control = 0000 0011
    • Frame type: UI, P/F = 0 (final)
  • Must contain source and destination AX.25 callsigns, may contain up to 8 digipeater AX.25 callsigns.

For a direct station-to-station contact:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│       AX.25 Flag (0x7e)       │ Destination AX.25 Call+SSID   │
├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Source AX.5 Call+SSID                                         │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┬───────────────────────────────┤
│                               │          AX.25 PID            │
├───────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────┤
╎             AX.25 UI frame payload starts here                ╎
└╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘

or for contact via a few digipeaters:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│       AX.25 Flag (0x7e)       │ Destination AX.25 Call+SSID   │
├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Source AX.5 Call+SSID                                         │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┬───────────────────────────────┤
│                               │    Digipeater 1 Call+SSID     │
├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Digipeater 2 Call+SSID                                        │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┬───────────────────────────────┤
│                               │          AX.25 PID            │
├───────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────┤
╎             AX.25 UI frame payload starts here                ╎
└╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘

2. Mesh Addressing Header

To be used when two stations are not able to directly communicate, or when multicasting.

In this scenario, the AX.25 frame source and destination indicate the addresses of the directly-communicating nodes (e.g. source and digipeater, intermediate digipeaters, or digipeater and destination), and the fields given here will be the addresses of the source and destination AX.25 stations.

e.g. sending from VK4MSL-0 to VK4MDL-9 via
VK4RZB-0 and VK4RZA-0:

  1. First transmission:
    • AX.25 Src: VK4MSL-0
    • AX.25 Dst: VK4RZB-0
    • Mesh Src: VK4MSL-0
    • Mesh Dst: VK4MDL-9
    • Hops: 7
  2. Intermediate hop:
    • AX.25 Src: VK4RZB-0
    • AX.25 Dst: VK4RZA-0
    • Mesh Src: VK4MSL-0
    • Mesh Dst: VK4MDL-9
    • Hops: 6
  3. Final delivery:
    • AX.25 Src: VK4RZA-0
    • AX.25 Dst: VK4MDL-9
    • Mesh Src: VK4MSL-0
    • Mesh Dst: VK4MDL-9
    • Hops: 5

Unlike 802.15.4, we do not have 16-bit short addresses. Since these bits would otherwise always be set to 0, we will use these to provide a 6-bit “hops left” field. We shall use the value 63 (0x3f) to indicate when there are 63 or more hops remaining.

We will use the raw 48-bit addresses here. In keeping with amateur radio conventions, the source and destinations are flipped compared to RFC-4944.

Header format (13 bytes):

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│ 1   0 │       Hops Left       │      Destination Address      │
├───────┴───────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┬───────────────────────────────┤
│                               │         Source Address        │
├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
│                                                               │
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┬───────────────────────────────┤
│                               │    Remaining AX.25 Payload    │
├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
╎                                                               ╎
└╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘

4. Fragmentation header

To be used when a IPv6 datagram is greater than L bytes, where L may be defined to be between 64 and 216 bytes.

This part is identical to that of RFC-4944 (section 5.3). I’ll come back to this bit.

5. IPv6 datagram

This can be encoded in a number of ways depending on requirements:

5.1. Raw IPv6 datagram

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│ 0   1 │       6LP_IPV6        │                               │
├───────┴───────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
╎                  Raw IPv6 datagram with payload.              ╎
└╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘

6LP_IPV6 is the value 0x01, as per RFC-4944. The IPv6 datagram is encoded as per RFC-2460, and includes its payload.

The AX.25 frame is finished off with the frame-check sequence.

5.2. Compressed IPv6 datagram

In this format, the datagram fields are compressed, either through making static assumptions, or by deriving them from things such as the AX.25 header, or a previously agreed-to context.

The first field in such payloads is the 6LP_IPHC field:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│ 0   1   1 │               6LP_IPV6 with CID=1                 │
├───────────┴───────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┤
│        Context ID Byte        │                               │
├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
╎             Compressed IPv6 datagram with payload.            ╎
└╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘

or without the context ID

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│ 0   1   1 │               6LP_IPV6 with CID=0                 │
├───────────┴───────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
╎             Compressed IPv6 datagram with payload.            ╎
└╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘

The 6LP_IPHC field is a 13-bit field, optionally followed by a context ID extension byte. The bit allocations are as follows:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12
├───┴───┼───┼───┴───┼───┼───┼───┴───┴───┼───┼───┼───┤
│  TF   │ NH│ HLIM  │CID│SAC│  SAM      │ M │DAC│DAM│
└───────┴───┴───────┴───┴───┴───────────┴───┴───┴───┘
  • (MSB) 0-1: TF Traffic Class, Flow Label. See 5.2.1 below.
  • 2: NH Next Header encoding
    • =0: Given explicitly
    • =1: Encoded using 6LP_NHC
  • 3-4: HLIM Hop Limit
    • =00: Given explicitly
    • =01: is set to 1
    • =10: is set to 64
    • =11: is set to 255
  • 5: CID Context Identifier Extension
    • =0: No CID byte follows
    • =1: A CID byte follows
  • 6-8: SAC Source Address Compression / SAM Mode
    • =000: No compression applied, whole address given
    • =001: Prefix is link-local prefix, remaining bits are given.
    • =x10: Not used in 6LoWHAM (we don’t support 16-bit addresses)
    • =011: Prefix is link-local, figure the rest out from the source address in the AX.25 header.
    • =100: Unspecified address ::
    • =101: See the context for the prefix, remaining bits are given.
    • =111: Figure out the address from the AX.25 header and context.
  • (LSB) 9-12: M Multicast, DAC Destination Address Compression
    DAM Mode

    • =0000: No compression, not multicast, whole address given
    • =0001: Prefix is link-local prefix, remaining bits are given. Not multicast.
    • =xx10: Not used in 6LoWHAM (we don’t support 16-bit addresses)
    • =0011: Prefix is link-local, figure the rest out from the destination address in the AX.25 header. Not multicast.
    • =0100: Reserved
    • =0101: See the context for the prefix, remaining bits are given. Not multicast.
    • =0111: Figure out the address from the AX.25 header and context. Not multicast.
    • =1000: No compression, multicast address, whole address given
    • =1001: 48-bits of multicast address given, fill in the blanks: ff__::00__:____:____.
    • =1010: 32-bits of multicast address given, fill in the blanks: ff__::00__:____.
    • =1011: 8-bits of multicast address given, fill in the blanks: ff02::00__.
    • =1100: 48-bits RFC-3306/RFC-3956 address, ff__:__LL:PPPP:PPPP:PPPP:PPPP:____:____ where P and L come from the context.
    • =1101: Reserved
    • =1110: Reserved
    • =1111: Reserved

The context ID extension byte has the following format:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7
├───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┤
│      SCI      │      DCI      │
└───────────────┴───────────────┘
  • (MSB) 0-3: Source Context Identifier
  • (LSB) 4-7: Destination Context Identifier

These two sub-fields indicate which specific context is being used to fill in the blanks.

5.2.1: Traffic Class and Flow Label

These may be partially or completely omitted depending on the TF setting in the previous field.

  • TF=00:
      0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
    ├───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┤
    │  ECN  │         DCSP          │ 0   0   0   0 │               │
    ├───────┴───────────────────────┴───────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
    │                          Flow Label                           │
    └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
    
  • TF=01:
      0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
    ├───┴───┼───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
    │  ECN  │ 0   0 │                                               │
    ├───────┴───────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┬───────────────────────────────┤
    │           Flow Label          │                               │
    ├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
    ╎                   Remainder of IPv6 datagram.                 ╎
    └╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘
    
  • TF=10:
      0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
    ├───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
    │  ECN  │         DCSP          │                               │
    ├───────┴───────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
    ╎                   Remainder of IPv6 datagram.                 ╎
    └╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘
    
  • TF=11: Flow label, ECN and DCSP are set to 0.

5.2.2: Next Header

If 6LP_NHC is not explicitly enabled, the next header byte will appear next.

5.2.3: Hop Limit.

Again, if not explicitly defined in the 6LP_IPHC header, the hop-limit byte will appear next.

5.2.4: Source address

The format here is determined by the values of SAC/SAM:

  • 000: Entire IPv6 address, 16 bytes given here.
  • x01: Last 8-bytes of the address given here
  • For all other values, the source address is omitted.

5.2.5: Destination address

The format here is determined by the values of M/DAC/DAM:

  • x000: Entire IPv6 address, 16 bytes given here.
  • 0x01: Last 8-bytes of the address given here.
  • 1001: 6-bytes of address given here, fill-in-the-blanks.
  • 1010: 4-bytes of address given here, fill-in-the-blanks.
  • 1011: Last byte of address given here, fill-in-the-blank.
  • 1100: 6-bytes of address given here, fill-in-the-blanks.
  • For all other values, the destination address is omitted.

6. 6LoWPAN Next Header

This is used to encode selected IPv6 extensions or L4 protocol headers.

6.1. IPv6 extension headers

A select number of IPv6 extensions may be encoded by replacing the usual “Next Header” byte with the following:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7
├───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┼───┤
│ 1   1   1   0 │    EID    │ N │
└───────────────┴───────────┴───┘

where EID (bits 4-6) is one of:

  • =0 IPv6 Hop-By-Hop options
  • =1 IPv6 Routing
  • =2 IPv6 Fragment
  • =3 IPv6 Destination Options
  • =4 IPv6 Mobility
  • =7 IPv6 Header

and N (bit 7) indicates whether the header’s payload is followed by another 6LowPAN Next Header, or a regular IPv6 Next Header (with its “Next Header” byte). For EID=7, N MUST be 0.

Length fields within the header payload should be counted in bytes instead of 8-byte blocks.

7. Datagram payload

7.1. Non-UDP payloads

For payloads other than UDP packets, these should be inserted into the AX.25 payload as-is following the extensions.

UDP packets with uncompressed headers should also be inserted
in this manner.

7.2. UDP payloads with header compression

For these payloads, the following UDP header should be used:

  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┼───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
│ 1   1   1   1   0 │ C │   P   │           Source Port         │
├───────────────────┴───┴───────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
╎                                                               ╎
├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
╎                         Destination Port                      ╎
├ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
╎                                                               ╎
├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                     Checksum (unless C=1)                     │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
  • (MSB): bits 0-4: Compressed UDP header marker. Literal 11110₂
  • Bit 5: C Compressed UDP checksum
    • 0= UDP checksum is given (recommended value)
    • 1= UDP checksum is omitted
  • Bits 6-7: P Ports
    • 00=Both source and destination addresses are
      given in full

        0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
      ├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
      │                         Source Port                           │
      ├───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
      │                      Destination Port                         │
      └───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
      
    • 01=Source port is given in full, Least significant 8-bits of destination given, destination port is 0xff00-0xffff (65280-65535)
        0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
      ├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
      │                         Source Port                           │
      ├───────────────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────┤
      │       Destination Port        │                               │
      ├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
      ╎                    Remainder of UDP packet                    ╎
      └╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘
      
    • 10=Destination port is given in full, Least significant 8-bits of source given, source port is 0xff00-0xffff (65280-65535)
        0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
      ├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
      │          Source Port          │        Destination Port       │
      ├───────────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────────┤
      │    Destination Port (cont.)   │                               │
      ├───────────────────────────────┴ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ┤
      ╎                    Remainder of UDP packet                    ╎
      └╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌╌┘
      
    • 11=Only least significant 4-bits of source and destination ports are given. Port LSB range is 0xf0b0-0xf0bf (61616-61631)
        0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15
      ├───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┼───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┴───┤
      │         Source Port           │       Destination Port        │
      └───────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────┘
      

The C bit should only be set if the upper-level application asks for it. Whilst 802.15.4 does its own CRC as does AX.25, the field is mandatory in UDP and the recommendation is to only drop it if the application says it’s okay.

Nov 162018
 

I’ve been doing more pondering on the routing side of things.  The initial thought was to use Net/ROM L3 to figure out the source route of who can hear whom.  Getting access to that via BPQ’s interfaces may not be easy unless we happen to eavesdrop on the broadcasts, and of course, there’s no service discovery in BPQ.

The thought came to me, what does ICMPv6 offer me in terms of routing?  If I can ask “who has a route to node X?” or announce “I know how to reach X”… I could just skip Net/ROM L3 altogether, since there’s a good chance both will co-exist quite happily on the same AX.25 network, we just take a ship-pass-in-the-night approach.

ICMPv6 Router Advertisements basically just say “I’m a router and this is my local prefix”, similarly, ICMPv6 Router Discovery messages just ask “Who’s a router?” … not greatly helpful.

RFC-4191 gets close, specifically the Route Information Option, but this is again, targeted at reaching a node on a differing subnet to the local one, and only applies to RAs.

This is a service that 802.15.4 actually provides to 6LoWPAN (RFC-4944), so from the point of view of IPv6, a 802.15.4 network translated through 6LoWPAN “looks” like one L2 network, it just needs to know a node’s extended address which is what made me think about Net/ROM L3 in the first place.

RFC-6775 looks to enhance things a little bit, by considering the fact that it’s not just one big happy family however, not everyone can talk to each-other, and links come and go.

One thing is clear, not everybody will be a router.  Specifically, a node should definitely not advertise itself as a router unless it can hear at least two other nodes, or knows routes to nodes learned either through static configuration or via Net/ROM node advertisements.

Two nodes can just exclusively use link-layer communications, so there’s no need for either to be “routers”.  Soon as a third joins in, potentially all three could be routers if they can all hear each-other, but if you have a linear topology where only the central node can hear the other two, it is logical that that node becomes a router, and not the others.

The question is then, if one of those peripheral nodes disappears, what should the router do?  I’m thinking it should remain a router for a limited period of time (configurable, but maybe measured in hours), just in case that node returns or other nodes appear.  After some time, it may “demote” itself to non-routing node status and relinquish control of the on-mesh prefix.

Where a node promotes itself to router, if an existing on-mesh prefix is in use, it should continue to use that, otherwise it should derive a suitable ULA prefix for use.

It may also follow that a ULA is configured for certain nodes, and they are configured to remain in the router role, regardless of the number of neighbours.  Repeater sites would be prime candidates for this.  They’re in a position where they should have good coverage, and thus should be prime candidates to be routers.

Since we can do multi-hop source routing with AX.25, there’s scope to perhaps exploit this in a higher level protocol which we might build on UDP messaging, as it doesn’t look like the existing standards provide for this sort of route path all that well.  TCP/IP is after all destination routed whilst AX.25 is source routed.

I think maybe tomorrow (which is predicted to be wet), it’ll be a good day to sit down and prototype something that maybe takes care of the IP messaging side of things and at least gets two AX.25 stations exchanging messages, then we can start to build something atop that.

Nov 152018
 

Having discussed the idea with a few people, both on the linux-hams mailing list and off-list, I’m starting to formalise a few plans for how this might work.

One option is to augment existing software stacks and inter-operate not just over-the-air, but at an API level.  Brisbane WICEN have a fleet of TNCs all running TheNet X1J, which was a popular Net/ROM software stack for TAPR TNC2-compatible TNCs in the early 90s.  Slowly, these are being replaced with Raspberry Pis equipped with Pi-TNCs and running LinBPQ.

These two inter-operate quite well, and the plan looks to be, to slowly upgrade all the sites to LinBPQ nodes.

Now, 6LoWHAM on TNCs that are nearly as old as I am just isn’t going to fly, but if I can link up to LinBPQ, this alternate protocol can be packaged up and installed along-side LinBPQ in an unobtrusive manner.

There are two things I need to be able to do:

  • Send and receive raw AX.25 frames
  • Read the routing table from LinBPQ

Sending and receiving raw frames

Looking at the interfaces that LinBPQ (and BPQ32) offers, the most promising option looks to be the AGWPE-compatible interface.  The protocol is essentially a TCP link over which the AX.25 frames are encapsulated and sent.

There’s a good description of the protocol here, and looking at the sources for LinBPQ (third link from the bottom of the page), it looks as if the necessary bits of the protocol are present to send and receive raw frames.

In particular, to send raw UI frames, I need to send these as ‘M’ (direct) or ‘V’ frames (via digipeater), and to receive them, I need to make use of the monitoring mode (‘m’ frame).

Reading the routing table

This, is where things will be “fun”.  The AGWPE interface does offer a “heard” frame, which can report on what stations have been heard.  This I think isn’t going to be the holy grail I’m after, although it’ll be a start, maybe.

Alternatively, a way around this might be to “eavesdrop” on the Net/ROM routing frames.  In monitor mode, I should theoretically hear all traffic, including these Net/ROM beacons.  It’s not as nice as being able to simply read LinBPQ’s routing table, but at least I don’t have to generate the Net/ROM messages.

The other way would be to connect to the terminal interface on LinBPQ, and use the NODES command, parsing that.  Ugly, but it’ll get me by.  On that same page is NRR… which looks to be similar in function to TCP/IP’s traceroute.  The feature is also supported by JNOS 2.0, which was released in 2006.  Not old by packet radio standards, but old enough.

Identifying if a remote station supports 6LoWHAM

Now, this is the tricky bit.  Identifying an immediate neighbour is easy enough, you can simply send an ICMPv6 neighbour solicitation message and see if they respond.  In fact, I’m thinking that could be the immediate first step.  There’s no support for service discovery as such, but nodes could advertise an “alias” (just one).

The best bet may be a suck-it-and-see approach.  We should be able to “digipeat” via intermediate nodes as if they were plain L2 AX.25 digipeaters, thus if we have a reason to contact a given node (i.e. there’s unicast traffic queued up to be sent there), we can just try routing an AX.25 frame with a ICMPv6 neighbour solicitation and see if we get a neighbour advertisement.

This carries a risk though: a station may not react well to unknown traffic and may try to parse the message as something it is not.  Thus for unicast, it is not a fail-safe method.

Multicast traffic however will be a challenge, and much of IPv6 relies on multicast.  The Net/ROM station will not know anything about this, as it simply wasn’t a concept back in the day.

For subnets like ff03::1, which on Thread networks usually means “all full-function Thread devices”, this could be sent via non-6LoWHAM digipeaters by broadcasting via that digipeater to the AX.25 station alias “6LHMC” (6LoWHAM Multicast).

This could be used to provide tunnelling of multicast traffic where a route to a station has been discovered via Net/ROM and we need to safely test whether the station can in fact understand 6LoWHAM traffic without the risk of crashing it.

I think the next step might be to look at how a normal IPv6 node would “register” interest in a multicast group so that routers between it and the sender of such a group know where to forward traffic.  IPv6 does have such a mechanism, and I think understanding how multicast traverses subnets is going to be key to making this work.

Oct 272018
 

So earlier, I had mentioned that it’s really not desirable to have ARQ (automatic repeat request) on a link carrying TCP datagrams.  My comment is based on this observation:

http://sites.inka.de/bigred/devel/tcp-tcp.html

In that article, the discussion is about one TCP connection being tunnelled over another TCP connection.  Basically it comes down to the lower layer buffering and re-sending the TCP datagrams just as the upper layer gives up on hearing a reply and re-sends its own attempt.

Now, end-to-end ACKs have been done on long chains of AX.25 networks before.  It’s generally accepted to be an unreliable mechanism.  UDP for sure can benefit, but then many protocols that use UDP already do their own handling of lost messages.  CoAP for instance does its own ARQ, as does TFTP.

Gerald Wagenknecht, Markus Anwander and Torsten Braun discuss some of the impacts of this on a 802.15.4 network in their thesis “Hop-to-Hop Reliability in IP-based Wireless Sensor Networks – a Cross-Layer Approach“.  In this, they talk about a variant of TCP called TSS: TCP Support for Sensor Networks.  This was discussed at depth in a thesis by Adam Dunkels, “Towards TCP/IP for Wireless Sensor Networks“.

This latter document, was apparently the inspiration for 6LoWPAN.  Section 4.4.3 discusses the approaches to handling ARQ in TCP.  Section 9.6 goes into further detail on how ARQ might be handled elsewhere in the network.

Thankfully in our case, it’s only the network that’s constrained, the nodes themselves will be no smaller than a Raspberry Pi which would have held its own against the PC that Adam Dunkels used to write that thesis!

In short, it looks as if just routing IP packets is not going to cut it, we need to actually handle the TCP side of things as well.  As for other protocols like CoAP, I guess the answer is be patient.  The timeout settings defined in RFC-7252 are usually tuneable, and it may be desirable to back those off just a little for use over AX.25.

Oct 202018
 

So, doing some more digging here.  One question people might ask is what kind of applications would I use over this network?

Bear in mind that it’s running at 1200 baud!  If we use HTTP at all, tiny is the word!  No bloated images, and definitely no big heavy JavaScript frameworks like ReactJS, Angular, DoJo or JQuery.  You can forget watching Netflicks in 4k over this link.

HTTP really isn’t designed for low-bandwidth links, as Steve Netting demonstrated:

The page itself is bad enough, but even then, it’s loaded after a minute.  The real slow bit is the 20kB GIF.

So yeah, slow-scan television, the ability to send weather radar images over, that is something I was thinking of, but not like that!

HTTP uses pretty verbose headers:

GET /qld/forecasts/brisbane.shtml?ref=hdr HTTP/1.1
Host: www.bom.gov.au
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:62.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/62.0
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8
Accept-Language: en-AU,en-GB;q=0.8,en-US;q=0.5,en;q=0.3
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
Referer: http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDR664.loop.shtml
Cookie: bom_meteye_windspeed_units_knots=yes
Connection: keep-alive
Upgrade-Insecure-Requests: 1
Pragma: no-cache
Cache-Control: no-cache

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Encoding: gzip
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Server: Apache
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Content-Length: 6321
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2018 10:56:12 GMT
Connection: keep-alive

That request is 508 bytes and the response headers are 216 bytes.  It’d be inappropriate on 6LoWPAN as you’d be fragmenting that packet left right and centre in order to squeeze it into the 128-byte 802.15.4 frames.

In that video, ICMP echo requests were also demonstrated, and those weren’t bad!  Yes, a little slow, but workable.  So to me, it’s not the packet network that’s the problem, it’s just that something big like HTTP is just not appropriate for a 1200-baud radio link.

It might work on 9600 baud packet … maybe.  My Kantronics KPC3 doesn’t do 9600 baud over the air.

CoAP was designed for tight messages.  It is UDP based, so your TCP connection overhead disappears, and the “options” are encoded as individual bytes in many cases.  There are other UDP-based protocols that would work fine too, as well as older TCP protocols such as Telnet.

A request, and reply in CoAP look something like this:

Hex dump of request:
00000000  40 01 00 01 3b 65 78 61  6d 70 6c 65 2e 63 6f 6d   @...;exa mple.com
00000010  81 63 03 52 46 77 11 3c                            .c.RFw.< 

Hex dump of response:
    00000000  60 45 00 01 c1 3c ff a1  1a 00 01 11 70 a1 01 a3   `E...<.. ....p...
    00000010  04 18 64 02 6b 31 39 32  2e 31 36 38 2e 30 2e 31   ..d.k192 .168.0.1
    00000020  03 64 65 74 68 30                                  .deth0

Or in more human readable form:

Request:
Constrained Application Protocol, Confirmable, GET, MID:1
    01.. .... = Version: 1
    ..00 .... = Type: Confirmable (0)
    .... 0000 = Token Length: 0
    Code: GET (1)
    Message ID: 1
    Opt Name: #1: Uri-Host: example.com
        Opt Desc: Type 3, Critical, Unsafe
        0011 .... = Opt Delta: 3
        .... 1011 = Opt Length: 11
        Uri-Host: example.com
    Opt Name: #2: Uri-Path: c
        Opt Desc: Type 11, Critical, Unsafe
        1000 .... = Opt Delta: 8
        .... 0001 = Opt Length: 1
        Uri-Path: c
    Opt Name: #3: Uri-Path: RFw
        Opt Desc: Type 11, Critical, Unsafe
        0000 .... = Opt Delta: 0
        .... 0011 = Opt Length: 3
        Uri-Path: RFw
    Opt Name: #4: Content-Format: application/cbor
        Opt Desc: Type 12, Elective, Safe
        0001 .... = Opt Delta: 1
        .... 0001 = Opt Length: 1
        Content-type: application/cbor
    [Uri-Path: coap://example.com/c/RFw]

Response:
Constrained Application Protocol, Acknowledgement, 2.05 Content, MID:1
    01.. .... = Version: 1
    ..10 .... = Type: Acknowledgement (2)
    .... 0000 = Token Length: 0
    Code: 2.05 Content (69)
    Message ID: 1
    Opt Name: #1: Content-Format: application/cbor
        Opt Desc: Type 12, Elective, Safe
        1100 .... = Opt Delta: 12
        .... 0001 = Opt Length: 1
        Content-type: application/cbor
    End of options marker: 255
    Payload: Payload Content-Format: application/cbor, Length: 31
        Payload Desc: application/cbor
        [Payload Length: 31]
Concise Binary Object Representation
    Map: (1 entries)
        Unsigned Integer: 70000
            Map: (1 entries)
                ...0 0001 = Unsigned Integer: 1
                    Map: (3 entries)
                        ...0 0100 = Unsigned Integer: 4
                            Unsigned Integer: 100
                        ...0 0010 = Unsigned Integer: 2
                            Text String: 192.168.0.1
                        ...0 0011 = Unsigned Integer: 3
                            Text String: eth0

That there, also shows another tool to data packing: CBOR.  CBOR is basically binary JSON.  Just like JSON it is schemaless, it has objects, arrays, strings, booleans, nulls and numbers (CBOR differentiates between integers of various sizes and floats).  Unlike JSON, it is tight.  The CBOR blob in this response would look like this as JSON (in the most compact representation possible):

{70000:{4:100,2:"192.168.0.1",3:"eth0"}}

The entire exchange is 190 bytes, less than a quarter of the size of just the HTTP request alone.  I think that would work just fine over 1200 baud packet.  As a bonus, you can also multicast, try doing that with HTTP.

So you’d be writing higher-level services that would use this instead of JSON-REST interfaces.  There’s a growing number of libraries that can consume this sort of thing, and IoT is pushing that further.  I think it’s doable.

Now, on the routing front, I’ve been digging up a bit on Net/ROM.  Net/ROM is actually two parts, Net/ROM Level 3 does the routing and level 4 does the circuit switching.  It’s the “Level 3” bit we want.

Coming up with a definitive specification of the protocol has been a bit tough, it doesn’t help that there is a company called NetROM, but I did manage to find this document.  In a way, if I could make my software behave like a Net/ROM node, I could piggy-back off that to discover neighbours.  Thus this protocol would co-exist along side Net/ROM networks that may be completely oblivious to TCP/IP.

This is preferable to just re-inventing the wheel…yes I know non-circular wheels are so much fun!  Really, once Net/ROM L3 has figured out where everyone is, IP routing just becomes a matter of correctly addressing the AX.25 frame so the next hop receives the message.

VK4RZB at Mt. Coot-tha is one such node running TheNet.  Easy enough to do tests on as it’s a mere stone throw away from my home QTH.

There’s a little consideration to make about how to label the AX.25 frame.  Obviously, it’ll be a UI frame, but what PID field should I use?  My instinct suggests that I should just label it as “ARPA Internet Protocol”, since it is Internet Protocol traffic, just IPv6 instead of v4.  Not all the codes are taken though, 0xc9 is free, so I could be cheeky and use that instead.  If the idea takes off, we can talk with the TAPR then.