On Wednesday 08 July 2009 05:22:31 Alan Grimes wrote: > Jelbert Holtrop wrote: > > What just happened in Iran made me thinking, would it be possible > > to communicate with others without making use of the IT infrastructure. > > The mobile phones that have wifi could talk to each other without an > > external hub. So i'm imagining a network where users transport the > > mesages by moving around with their phone. When the phone is > > in poximity of other phones with the software they transmit the mesages > > from the network. If a user travels to an other town the mesages will be > > spread to that other town. Maybe it could intergrate with freenet to > > also have a faster distribution world wide. > > way way back in the long long ago, there was a protocol called UUCP, if > I recall. The internet backbone hadn't yet been built, see, so how it > had to work was each mainframe/mini/BBS, etc, collected mail from all of > its users each night at around 2 AM, and then dialed up each of its > peers. it would then exchange usenet news postings and e-mail. Each > e-mail address was something like f...@bar!baz!bat!boof etc... This was > called a bang path. So the first machine would dial boof and send the > message, the second would dial bat and send the message, and baz would > dial bar... > > fuckit, I have a dusty old book I was about to chuck, lemme see what it > sez; bleh, why bother.... > > The thing that bothers me the most about using mobile fonez is that > they're pre-0wn3d by the NSA coming out of the store. I do not own one > and I do not want one. > > > What do you guys think of this? It would be complicated to make. I'm > > not a very good programmer, never got the hang of oo. So where to > > start? Are there any other programmers out there interested in this? > > When the Shit Hits The Fan (TM), and there is no if, then another thing > to consider is sneakernet. Portable media these days has huge capacity > and is very tiny. Every time you meet someone, ask them if they have a > chip to swap with you. If they do, then take it read it, update the > files in any way you choose, then swap it with someone else. The > gubbernment would have to go to absurdly extreme lengths to even try to > shut down sneakernet! =P Unless they go totally orwellian, there is no > way to detect it much less stop it more than a small handful of > participants.
Most of the above points hold. There are 3 different network principles here: 1. Opportunistic networking (assuming phones can be trusted, which IMHO is not a valid assumption). Basically the principle is you get on a bus, your phone announces "I WANT ILLEGAL FILE NUMBER 27", and any phone in the vicinity sends you it. This works (you hope) because you spoof the MAC address on the wifi and hope it's not practical to trace you before you get off the bus. Work on this principle: Haggle, Pocket Switched Networking. 2. Simple Sneakernet: The simplest way to do sneakernet is to assume everyone has infinite storage capacity, and/or everyone is interested in more or less the same thing. So everything that you receive you rebroadcast. This is fine for some emergency situations, and it can be implemented manually - and if the latter, it can be filtered manually. Other options include some level of automated relay via subscriptions. 3. Freenet with hard stego. IMHO it is perfectly reasonable in the future (approx post-1.0), for Freenet to function over both sneakernet and opportunistic networking (as well as other non-realtime transports) - but with the caveat that it remains darknet i.e. you only communicate with your friends. If there is enough light, and the data involved is small enough, that you can use the above options, they may be better. After the changes scheduled for 0.10, Freenet will support long-term (non-realtime) requests, passive requests and some form of publish/subscribe, meaning it will be able to efficiently propagate the popular data while still allowing for requests to propagate until they find a copy of the desired file - our key feature being routing. Another interesting point is that in safer environments we can combine sneakernet with conventional transports to increase performance - daily swaps of an 8GB USB key give bandwidth of 1Mbps per peer each way. In more hostile environments, traditional transports just won't work - either internet connectivity is illegal, or it is so severely locked down or surveilled that we can't use it.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ chat mailing list chat@freenetproject.org Archived: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chat Or mailto:chat-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
