Alas, we're talking in dream land. None of this really exists in a workable state (so far as I know). Sorry!
-david On 02/04/2011 01:03 PM, Andrew Lewis wrote: > Hey, > > > Came across this as I was looking into something similar with the folks at > telecomix, the group that has been providing dialup access/VPNs to the > protestors. I like the idea, and want to follow along, but have a few > questions. > > > What are you guys doing for internode communications and from there onto the > world? > > I saw mention of flashing routers, alongside LiveCDs, I think that routers > might be a bit much, but LiveCDs seem like a easier way to create nodes on > the network. > > What protocols are you looking at running on top of the network? Email? Chat? > Filesharing? > > > Thanks, > Andrew > > On Feb 4, 2011, at 2:37 PM, David Barrett wrote: > >> On 02/04/2011 12:02 PM, Serguei Osokine wrote: >>> http://blog.quinthar.com/2011/01/how-piracy-will-hyperlocalize-with-mesh.html >>> >>> - albeit with software radio instead of the existing wi-fi hardware. >>> >>> So David, since this mesh hyperlocalization was your own idea, I'm >>> not sure - why would you suggest that ther's no compelling value in >>> mesh networks, even with normally functioning Internet? Except for >>> this pesky ubiquitous wi-fi encryption, of course... >> >> I'm pro-mesh for local activity. Piracy is best done locally (for both >> performance *and* security reasons) so is best done over a mesh. In >> other words, mesh piracy can be *better* than internet piracy. >> >> Global communication, on the other hand, is best done with the internet. >> Mesh communication is *worse* than internet communication, at least >> over large distances. >> >> Ultimately, we should use the best tool for the job. The internet is >> really frickin' good; we should use it whenever it's available and >> preferable. >> >> That's true for piracy *and* communication: neither can get mass >> adoption without seamless internet compatibility. A pirate mesh needs >> to fall back on the internet when it can't find content locally, and the >> communication network should only fall back to the mesh when it can't >> communicate globally. >> >> -david >> >> >> >> >>> >>> 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 Alen Peacock >>> Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 10:55 AM >>> To: theory and practice of decentralized computer networks >>> Subject: Re: [p2p-hackers] What we should build for the Egyptian (and >>> other) protesters >>> >>> 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 >>> >>> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
