I'd always hoped that a global ad-hoc wireless network would spring from something like MIT's RoofNet (http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/roofnet/doku.php).
There's still a lot of academic research into ad-hoc networks, but I'm not aware of anyone really pursuing something like this in the commercial space -- anyone been following closer than me? Alen On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Serguei Osokine <serguei.osok...@efi.com> wrote: > On Friday, February 04, 2011 wrote: >> The only way something like this will take off is if it provides >> some *very* compelling value even when the internet is functioning >> normally. > > Two things that spring to mind first are CB-like (as in "CB radio") > anonymous contacts with people who are in the vicinity, and the p2p > traffic anonymization through local relay chains. 802.11 typically > has plenty of spare bandwitdth, being much faster than your normal > ISP broadband link, so you can have, say, five-hop relays without > any service quality degradation whatsoever. Kind of like local Tor, > except that in 802.11 space you're not paying for forwarding traffic > with your own service quality, and tracking the ad-hoc MAC-address > routing is pretty challenging for an adversary. > > Of course, 802.11 traffic is routinely encrypted these days, so that > might be a bit of a challenge - but this challenge is present in any > ad-hoc scenario. > > Best wishes - > S.Osokine. > 4 Feb 2011. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: p2p-hackers-boun...@lists.zooko.com > [mailto:p2p-hackers-boun...@lists.zooko.com] On Behalf Of David Barrett > Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 9:12 AM > To: theory and practice of decentralized computer networks > Subject: Re: [p2p-hackers] What we should build for the Egyptian (and other) > protesters > > On 02/04/2011 08:58 AM, Julian Cain wrote: >> >> This is false. Egypt cut ALL Internet traffic including mobile. Having said >> this the only solution is an AD-HOC network built with existing hardware w/ >> internet gateways somewhere along the path. This technology has been around >> for quite some time. The downside is that it takes an incredible amount of >> effort to daisy chain home and office routers in a manner that will "act" >> like the Internet. This is the only solution to a complete >> government/corporate takeover. Build a new Internet with existing hardware >> that gateways users into the public Internet. > > Just to clarify, did Egypt cut *domestic* phone and internet, or just > *international*? For example, if I had a server inside Egypt, using an > Egyptian domain, could users inside Egypt generally access it? > > >> Most home routers can perform this either by extending the network or >> bridging networks. > > The only way something like this will take off is if it provides some > *very* compelling value even when the internet is functioning normally. > Otherwise it'll always be relegated to being a tiny fringe project. > > > I think a better approach is to prepare a system that uses the internet > when it's available (as it almost always is), but then offers to set up > a DHT or even, ad hoc mesh network -- or even a "sneakernet" -- if it > detects the internet has stopped functioning. > > For example, imagine that everybody's mobile Twitter device, upon > discovering a loss of connection to twitter.com, offered to connect to > the "BlueTooth mesh". In high-density environments like a protest, I > imagine it could actually work. Then all the laptops that had domestic > internet access establish a DHT (perhaps they quietly had it established > all along) and bridge the various bluetooth meshes that have sprung up > around the nation. And at that time also mention that it can just > "manually synchronize" using a USB keydrive or MP3 player. > > But all this needs to be kept quiet, totally automated, and entirely > unobtrusive in normal operation; it can't bother people to even consider > these options when the internet is available, because the internet is so > much more convenient to use. Nobody will care about any of these > features, and they'll be an active *demerit* to the application that > *reduces* its adoption -- up until everybody absolutely depends on them. > > -david > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers > > Confidentiality notice: This message may contain confidential information. > It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not > that person, you should not use this message. We request that you notify us > by replying to this message, and then delete all copies including any > contained in your reply. Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers > _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
