on 17/3/03 8:33 AM, Jeremy Derr at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I've got a wireless connection to our ISP, which is how I've even >> heard of >> these things, but it seems to me, that this sort of thing is possible, >> but >> complicated. I know that our connection is very unreliable at the >> moment, >> and our ISP still hasn't figured out how to get it to work... > > we have a very complex wireless network on our campus... but in > essence, my PowerBook sees the network as one-big-wireless-network... > even though there are dozens upon dozens of airport base stations > spread across a half dozen buildings. as i move about, my ip address > doesn't even change (which is impossible if the base stations are in > router/gateway mode).
What I'm envisioning (and it sounds like your campus is sort of doing what I'm thinking) is a network, capable of working independently of the Internet (I'll use capital-i internet to refer to the system which requires 'land lines' and employs a pay-for-bandwidth model). Such a parallel WiFinet has potentially *huge* pipes compared to today's Internet, all for the distributed cost (everyone who uses also pays their share) of the electricity required to run the base stations. Most people out there (60+%?) currently have dial-up, MAXing out at 56 Kbps (0.056 Mbps), fewer have 128 Kbps (1/8 of 1 Mbps), and fewer still have the high-bandwidth 1 Mbps cable-modems/DSL lines, and even fewer have the 4 MBps cable-modems. 11 Mbps wireless is, _in theory_, 11x faster than 1 Mbps and 172x faster than 56 K! 54 Mbps is another 4.5x faster than 11 and 500+x faster than 56 K!!! If you have two or three of these wireless pipes operating in parallel in a neighbourhood that's more than a few dozen T1s (1.5 Mbps), and, the kicker of such a set up is that you'll get more bandwidth as it grows (of course, weak links will really kill such a setup... how weak is weak?)! (can you apply standard electrical theory to distributed networks?... electrical resistance goes down if you hook things up in parallel) For the sake of my next argument I will place one restriction on the setup: NO bridge to the Internet and Internet-only servers/services is allowed. Any "link" between my vision of the WiFinet and the Internet would cost money (airwaves are free; land lines are not). I foresee at least two major problems with this system (one which I think can be overcome in time): 1. a lack of services available on the WiFinet will prevent it from growing and services will not develop until the WiFinet grows! (chicken & egg); 2. when/if services do grow, "hubs"/"repeaters" near such services will see a large amount of traffic. When a critical mass of base stations capable of acting as such hubs develops (to give, let's say a 2x2 block neighbourhood (0.5 km x 0.5 km) saturated WiFi coverage), local businesses, non-profits, etc. could put their own servers on-line merely for the cost of a base station, and the energy required to run the base-stations/computers. Nearly every business/non-profit/etc. now has computers and many of these machines are on 24/7 ANYWAY, even if they don't act as servers, and they could provide local services to local users. This would require the equivalent of a dynamic "local" directory service to be available to local users. Currently it's pretty challenging to find stuff in your OWN town. You can find stuff in the littlest of stores in Timbuktu but don't even think of trying to find your neighbourhood video store on-line (even if they have a presence the chances of finding it are pretty slim). Businesses currently hosting Internet servers could very cheaply make those available through WiFi as well (with a properly configured firewall to prevent Internet-WiFi traffic 'hopping', thereby costing them bandwidth $$$). Similarly, non-profits (who don't count as charitable orgs) often pay scarce resource $$$ for web hosting could do so for much lower cost, and target their target audience (local users). Anyway, these are my muddled thoughts. I'm thinking of putting them together into a more articulate form and sending them to LEM or some other web site. The idea seems neat to me, even if it's not ground breaking, and merely an extension of the current internet. (PS I see many other problems with a WiFinet too... security, latency, reliability, but these are all things that'll have to be dealt with as community WiFinets evolve (I think they will, perhaps not the way I foresee them happening but they seem like the next natural step)) If something like this were ever to take off one consequence would be that the Internet would become a shared public utility in some places -- through the tax rolls you'd pay for community internet access. Hmmm... Perhaps the computer will turn out to be a way to re-build the sense of *local* "community" that has been lost with the advent of commuting to one's job. L8r, Eric. -- G-Books is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> G-Books list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-books.html> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/g-books%40mail.maclaunch.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------- >The Think Different Store http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
