[GRLUG] NOT LINUX - FCC to vote on net neutrality later today.
Michael Mol
mikemol at gmail.com
Tue Dec 21 17:46:51 EST 2010
I'm looking more toward 802.11abgn techs for layer 2. The hardware's
cheaper and better developed.
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Bob Kline <bob.kline at gmail.com> wrote:
> 200 licensed hams. Become a ham in a day:
> http://www.migunowners.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-38711.html
> and
> http://www.w8dc.org/
> Ham nets have long used AX.25, an old
> telephone company error handling approach:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FX.25_Forward_Error_Correction
> and have been sending data around for
> at least 20 years. Today that could be
> Internet protocols.
> I guess the real issue is performance and
> cost. I predict that Comcast will start charging
> more for what we're already getting. So, in a
> band for the buck way, could a ham-like wireless
> approach make sense. And does it exist now.
> It looks to me like one needs a ham license
> first, after which systems exist. Just a guess.
> Being amateur, I take it a for profit ISP could
> not spring up and offer access, or a hardware-software
> package to enable a user. But for starters, the
> GRARA does have towers.
> - -Bob
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I've got a callsign...KD8KLW.
>>
>> I'm not unfamiliar with those, but I wasn't sure their model reflected
>> what I was interested in trying.
>>
>> From what I've learned about IPv6, a meshy backbone seems very doable.
>> It's even plausible that it could get public IPv6 addresses allocated
>> to it, if it were likely to have enough users to successfully justify
>> the allocation. (I think the going requirement is 'must have at least
>> 200 users', but I'm not sure.)
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Bob Kline <bob.kline at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Another: http://www.echolink.org/
>> > You've got to have a ham license, but
>> > I don't think that is too big a hurdle.
>> > Otherwise, such networks seem to be
>> > well oiled operations today.
>> > Alas, one snag might be Linux - some
>> > of the operations seem to be windoz based.... :-(
>> > -- Bob
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was the one bringing up the idea. I presented it in front of the LUG
>> >> at Casey's place around then. I recall one person being interested in
>> >> getting together to discuss it, but we never wound up making a
>> >> connection. I've been reading up a *lot* on IPv6 and network management
>> >> in general, and it might still be doable. I wouldn't be ready to leap
>> >> on
>> >> it soon, though; I smell a lot more knowledge about networking tools
>> >> that I need to read through before I can really figure it out.
>> >>
>> >> One of the key problems, though, is setting up one or two large towers.
>> >> Mesh networking is useful, awesome and excellent, but there need to be
>> >> a
>> >> couple supernodes that represent a fast(er) travel route to another
>> >> part
>> >> of the network. A supernode like that Needs to have visibility to a
>> >> large geographical area, which means (as a WAP) that it has needs to
>> >> have the characteristics of a cell phone tower.
>> >>
>> >> A couple friends of mine have been trying to figure out how to set up a
>> >> simple three-node relay on the south-west side of town, but the
>> >> physical
>> >> geography of the region gets in the way. (And there's an airport just
>> >> west of Wilson Ave. that limits the height of any towers placed in
>> >> convenient places on that hill.)
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 16:06 -0500, Bob Kline wrote:
>> >> > There was actually talk about this
>> >> > within the group - maybe a year ago.
>> >> > Something like using radio relay.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > It might come to that.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUSFiber
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Done by the city of Lafayette, LA, it is
>> >> > perhaps the best Internet system on the
>> >> > planet. Fiber to the home, full duplex
>> >> > 50 Mbps service for $58 a month.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes, Verizon and AT&T sued to block
>> >> > its construction. But it was built, and
>> >> > can service as model to any properly
>> >> > managed city.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Now lets see what Comcast does to us.
>> >> > Especially if it acquires NBC.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > -- Bob
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Clay Ashby <kingpoiuy at gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > We could start our own internet! :p
>> >> >
>> >> > --Sent from my android.
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Dec 21, 2010 2:13 PM, "Bob Kline" <bob.kline at gmail.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The FCC has spoken. On behalf of
>> >> > > monopoly provider interests that is:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9201918/FCC_approves_compromise_Net_neutrality_rules?taxonomyId=70
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > **
>> >> > > IDG News Service - The U.S. Federal Communications
>> >> > > Commission (FCC), in a historic vote Tuesday, approved
>> >> > > network neutrality rules prohibiting broadband providers
>> >> > > from blocking customer access to legal Web content, but
>> >> > many
>> >> > > consumer groups decried the new regulations as weak and
>> >> > full
>> >> > > of loopholes.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The new rules provide fewer protections for mobile
>> >> > broadband
>> >> > > subscribers and may lead to a fractured Internet, critics
>> >> > > said. The new rules, a compromise championed by FCC
>> >> > Chairman
>> >> > > Julius Genachowski, would bar wireline-based broadband
>> >> > > providers -- but not mobile broadband providers -- from
>> >> > > "unreasonable discrimination" against Web traffic,
>> >> > prompting
>> >> > > some consumer groups to call the rules "fake" net
>> >> > > neutrality.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Genachowski's plan, approved after more than seven years of
>> >> > > debate about whether net neutrality rules are needed, also
>> >> > > contains several loopholes for broadband providers, critics
>> >> > > said, including an exception for managed services separate
>> >> > > from the public Internet.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > **
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Standard hack politics. Clearly monopoly
>> >> > > corporate entities run the Internet now,
>> >> > > and I suspect the rubes will be
>> >> > > squeezed ever harder. Loopholes.
>> >> > > Exceptions.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The day mostly official marks the end of
>> >> > > one Internet. Everyone will now
>> >> > > have to choose which Internet they
>> >> > > want to be on, and have to figure
>> >> > > out just what the monopoly players
>> >> > > are likely to let through. Comcast must
>> >> > > be licking its chops about now, as leader
>> >> > > of the forces tinkering with content and
>> >> > > uses. All hopefully without anyone noticing.
>> >> > > Going forward, it appears it will have a largely
>> >> > > free hand, not even try to hide its actions,
>> >> > > and simply say it's all legal, and of course fair.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > -- Bob
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 2:04 PM, John-Thomas Richards
>> >> > > <jtr at jrichards.org> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > On Tue, Dec 21...
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> >> > > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> >> > >
>> >> > > believ...
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> > > grlug mailing list
>> >> > > grlug at grlug.org
>> >> > > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> >
>> >> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> >> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> >> > believed to be clean.
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > grlug mailing list
>> >> > grlug at grlug.org
>> >> > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> >> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> >> > believed to be clean.
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > grlug mailing list
>> >> > grlug at grlug.org
>> >> > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> >> believed to be clean.
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> grlug mailing list
>> >> grlug at grlug.org
>> >> http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> > believed to be clean.
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > grlug mailing list
>> > grlug at grlug.org
>> > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> :wq
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> grlug mailing list
>> grlug at grlug.org
>> http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> _______________________________________________
> grlug mailing list
> grlug at grlug.org
> http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
>
--
:wq
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the grlug
mailing list