Would it be possible for "power" FBX users to provide a PageKite-equivalent service for other users on dynamic IPs? Could these services be advertised within the FBX network maybe? On Aug 30, 2012 5:39 PM, "Michael Rogers" <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 30/08/12 15:38, Nick Daly wrote: > > This is also what makes it really difficult for a FBX to receive > > email. :\ > > > > I think some folks were talking about buying records, of some sort, > > a while ago. Don't recall what came of it, though. Anybody with > > a better memory want to pipe up? > > I believe this is the single biggest obstacle the FreedomBox has to > overcome, and I'm surprised it hasn't received more attention. > > To put it bluntly, an unskilled user can't run a server on a typical > home broadband connection. There are several reasons: > > * Most home broadband connections have dynamic IP addresses > * Forwarding a port through a home router requires skills that many > people don't have; the process can't be automated or reduced to simple > instructions because home routers have non-standard password-protected > web interfaces > * UPnP and NAT-PMP are unavailable, disabled or broken on many home > routers > * Even if you get past the home router, some ISPs have a second layer > of NAT, or a firewall that blocks incoming connections > > Dynamic DNS solves the first problem, but the other three aren't so > easy. Based on data collected from millions of LimeWire peers, only > 25% of home computers can receive incoming TCP connections even if > they use UPnP and NAT-PMP. > > As far as I can see, the only solution is to use a service like > PageKite, so any box that's unable to receive incoming TCP connections > can instead make an outgoing connection to a reverse proxy that > receives incoming connections on its behalf. > > Tor hidden services are fine for box-to-box connections, but they > don't allow people to run web, email and chat servers that their > non-box-owning friends can connect to, which I thought was the whole > point of the project. > > If that analysis is correct, we should look at the reverse proxy issue > in more depth. Questions to ask include: > > * Are the protocols open standards? > * Are the implementations free software? > * Are there any limitations on what services can be run (email, XMPP)? > * How much trust must the user place in the provider (MITM, logging)? > * Are there any providers other than PageKite? > * Can we expect other providers to emerge? > * Will users be able to switch providers? > * Should the service be bundled with the box? > > Cheers, > Michael > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQP5c7AAoJEBEET9GfxSfMIYoH/0aLQO7oHwESyGNn0n0Qlf9f > y/5iyKHA1X7Ln6iXgHQv/G7zDGgO9ZOUGsIc2dKBLqyejsQPu9OdC0hUaUy6K0SJ > lJBJchXETAaz97b1mtOWPYgjvOwwDOlsMZis8AdivpphKY6RvHuwvSnOXojxDYnp > kysoSReuCIa/HGUFM1JyzBzg8uphpLI26LHEiBY6pJaJxrNavzkXkeNXeQEReBDl > x1PH6lGXGOk4WfJERqC5J2gfYYDipesbxuYAn6h12CoylgoxXK+mkBzCisKhof4I > K3C0fI620nuJtFhPP0h4hqTMfpO5FMJjWZsOM3uR7yfHJWEgV/Z59DN9+xxa/lE= > =3PpL > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > Freedombox-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss >
_______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
