200 licensed hams. Become a ham in a day:<div><br></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><a href="http://www.migunowners.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-38711.html">http://www.migunowners.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-38711.html</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>and</div><div><br></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><a href="http://www.w8dc.org/">http://www.w8dc.org/</a></div><div><br></div><div>Ham nets have long used AX.25, an old</div>
<div>telephone company error handling approach:</div><div><br></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FX.25_Forward_Error_Correction">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FX.25_Forward_Error_Correction</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>and have been sending data around for</div><div>at least 20 years. Today that could be </div><div>Internet protocols.</div><div><br></div><div>I guess the real issue is performance and</div><div>cost. I predict that Comcast will start charging</div>
<div>more for what we're already getting. So, in a </div><div>band for the buck way, could a ham-like wireless</div><div>approach make sense. And does it exist now.</div><div><br></div><div>It looks to me like one needs a ham license</div>
<div>first, after which systems exist. Just a guess.</div><div>Being amateur, I take it a for profit ISP could</div><div>not spring up and offer access, or a hardware-software</div><div>package to enable a user. But for starters, the </div>
<div>GRARA does have towers.</div><div><br></div><div> - -Bob</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Michael Mol <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mikemol@gmail.com">mikemol@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">I've got a callsign...KD8KLW.<br>
<br>
I'm not unfamiliar with those, but I wasn't sure their model reflected<br>
what I was interested in trying.<br>
<br>
>From what I've learned about IPv6, a meshy backbone seems very doable.<br>
It's even plausible that it could get public IPv6 addresses allocated<br>
to it, if it were likely to have enough users to successfully justify<br>
the allocation. (I think the going requirement is 'must have at least<br>
200 users', but I'm not sure.)<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Bob Kline <<a href="mailto:bob.kline@gmail.com">bob.kline@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Another: <a href="http://www.echolink.org/" target="_blank">http://www.echolink.org/</a><br>
> You've got to have a ham license, but<br>
> I don't think that is too big a hurdle.<br>
> Otherwise, such networks seem to be<br>
> well oiled operations today.<br>
> Alas, one snag might be Linux - some<br>
> of the operations seem to be windoz based.... :-(<br>
> -- Bob<br>
><br>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Michael Mol <<a href="mailto:mikemol@gmail.com">mikemol@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> I was the one bringing up the idea. I presented it in front of the LUG<br>
>> at Casey's place around then. I recall one person being interested in<br>
>> getting together to discuss it, but we never wound up making a<br>
>> connection. I've been reading up a *lot* on IPv6 and network management<br>
>> in general, and it might still be doable. I wouldn't be ready to leap on<br>
>> it soon, though; I smell a lot more knowledge about networking tools<br>
>> that I need to read through before I can really figure it out.<br>
>><br>
>> One of the key problems, though, is setting up one or two large towers.<br>
>> Mesh networking is useful, awesome and excellent, but there need to be a<br>
>> couple supernodes that represent a fast(er) travel route to another part<br>
>> of the network. A supernode like that Needs to have visibility to a<br>
>> large geographical area, which means (as a WAP) that it has needs to<br>
>> have the characteristics of a cell phone tower.<br>
>><br>
>> A couple friends of mine have been trying to figure out how to set up a<br>
>> simple three-node relay on the south-west side of town, but the physical<br>
>> geography of the region gets in the way. (And there's an airport just<br>
>> west of Wilson Ave. that limits the height of any towers placed in<br>
>> convenient places on that hill.)<br>
>><br>
>> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 16:06 -0500, Bob Kline wrote:<br>
>> > There was actually talk about this<br>
>> > within the group - maybe a year ago.<br>
>> > Something like using radio relay.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > It might come to that.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUSFiber" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LUSFiber</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > Done by the city of Lafayette, LA, it is<br>
>> > perhaps the best Internet system on the<br>
>> > planet. Fiber to the home, full duplex<br>
>> > 50 Mbps service for $58 a month.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > Yes, Verizon and AT&T sued to block<br>
>> > its construction. But it was built, and<br>
>> > can service as model to any properly<br>
>> > managed city.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > Now lets see what Comcast does to us.<br>
>> > Especially if it acquires NBC.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > -- Bob<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Clay Ashby <<a href="mailto:kingpoiuy@gmail.com">kingpoiuy@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> > wrote:<br>
>> > We could start our own internet! :p<br>
>> ><br>
>> > --Sent from my android.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > On Dec 21, 2010 2:13 PM, "Bob Kline" <<a href="mailto:bob.kline@gmail.com">bob.kline@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> > > wrote:<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > The FCC has spoken. On behalf of<br>
>> > > monopoly provider interests that is:<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9201918/FCC_approves_compromise_Net_neutrality_rules?taxonomyId=70" target="_blank">http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9201918/FCC_approves_compromise_Net_neutrality_rules?taxonomyId=70</a><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > **<br>
>> > > IDG News Service - The U.S. Federal Communications<br>
>> > > Commission (FCC), in a historic vote Tuesday, approved<br>
>> > > network neutrality rules prohibiting broadband providers<br>
>> > > from blocking customer access to legal Web content, but many<br>
>> > > consumer groups decried the new regulations as weak and full<br>
>> > > of loopholes.<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > The new rules provide fewer protections for mobile broadband<br>
>> > > subscribers and may lead to a fractured Internet, critics<br>
>> > > said. The new rules, a compromise championed by FCC Chairman<br>
>> > > Julius Genachowski, would bar wireline-based broadband<br>
>> > > providers -- but not mobile broadband providers -- from<br>
>> > > "unreasonable discrimination" against Web traffic, prompting<br>
>> > > some consumer groups to call the rules "fake" net<br>
>> > > neutrality.<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > Genachowski's plan, approved after more than seven years of<br>
>> > > debate about whether net neutrality rules are needed, also<br>
>> > > contains several loopholes for broadband providers, critics<br>
>> > > said, including an exception for managed services separate<br>
>> > > from the public Internet.<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > **<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > Standard hack politics. Clearly monopoly<br>
>> > > corporate entities run the Internet now,<br>
>> > > and I suspect the rubes will be<br>
>> > > squeezed ever harder. Loopholes.<br>
>> > > Exceptions.<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > The day mostly official marks the end of<br>
>> > > one Internet. Everyone will now<br>
>> > > have to choose which Internet they<br>
>> > > want to be on, and have to figure<br>
>> > > out just what the monopoly players<br>
>> > > are likely to let through. Comcast must<br>
>> > > be licking its chops about now, as leader<br>
>> > > of the forces tinkering with content and<br>
>> > > uses. All hopefully without anyone noticing.<br>
>> > > Going forward, it appears it will have a largely<br>
>> > > free hand, not even try to hide its actions,<br>
>> > > and simply say it's all legal, and of course fair.<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > -- Bob<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 2:04 PM, John-Thomas Richards<br>
>> > > <<a href="mailto:jtr@jrichards.org">jtr@jrichards.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > > On Tue, Dec 21...<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > --<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
>> > > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > believ...<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > > grlug mailing list<br>
>> > > <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
>> > > <a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
>> > ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > --<br>
>> ><br>
>> > This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
>> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
>> > believed to be clean.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > grlug mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
>> > <a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > --<br>
>> > This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
>> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
>> > believed to be clean.<br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > grlug mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
>> > <a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
>> believed to be clean.<br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> grlug mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
> believed to be clean.<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> grlug mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
</div></div>:wq<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5">This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
believed to be clean.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
grlug mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:grlug@grlug.org">grlug@grlug.org</a><br>
<a href="http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug" target="_blank">http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br />--
<br />This message has been scanned for viruses and
<br />dangerous content by
<a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/"><b>MailScanner</b></a>, and is
<br />believed to be clean.