[GRLUG] NOT LINUX - FCC to vote on net neutrality later today.
Matt Michielsen
mattmichielsen at gmail.com
Wed Dec 22 08:15:03 EST 2010
The biggest issue with the ham license is that you aren't allowed to use
encryption. I'm KD8EVV but haven't had a radio turned on in years.
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Bob Kline <bob.kline at gmail.com> wrote:
> And there's a lot one can do with antennas.
> c.g. Cyberguys, or Amazon.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11n>Outdoor ranges of over 800 feet,
> with
> much more to come.
>
> -- Bob
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shinobu.grlug.org/pipermail/grlug/attachments/20101222/578b0082/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the grlug
mailing list