Re: [gaia] Difference between FON and a "manyfolks Community Network"

[Rohan Mahy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dirk,
I don’t think Openreach+Retail ISP meets my straw man definition of
user-extensibility. At a casual glance I do not see how a customer of an
ordinary retail ISP in the UK will be able to add network segments such
that the new segments take on the same characteristics (ex: IP addressing,
routing) and the new users can in turn add additional segments and so
forth. Please correct me if I am wrong.

That said, there is more to GAIA than community networks.
Thanks,
-rohan


On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Trossen, Dirk <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>  Rohan, all,
>
>
>
> I cannot help but notice that the discussion on definitions already
> reveals core principles that this community sees at the heart of their work
> – so good to see this discussion but necessary to capture these various
> viewpoints more distinctively as ‘principles’.
>
>
>
> As for your definition, Rohan:
>
> User-extensible network: A network in which any participant in the system
> may add link segments to the network in such a way that the new network
> segments can support multiple nodes and adopt the same overall
> characteristics as those of the joined network, including the capacity to
> further extend the network. Once these link segments are joined to the
> network, there is no longer a meaningful distinction between the previous
> extent of the network and the new extent of the network.
>
>
>
> I wonder how my ‘passive infrastructure’ based DSL or cable network fits
> in here. Let’s start from scratch: a housing community (e.g., in the middle
> of London) will add link segments to the network, often through a
> commercial offering. If it is a new development, cables need to be pulled
> and laid in the new development, again often through an (open?) access
> provider. If it is an existing development, the existing cable
> infrastructure is likely re-used, although at the network level you are
> repeating the process of ‘add link segments’ by re-activating, e.g., the
> DSL line to the apartment(s). So a standard BT OpenReach+Retail ISP way of
> doing things seem to be fitting under that definition, doesn’t it?
>
>
>
> Nevertheless, as pointed out in the beginning, your very definition
> entails a set of principles for ‘building networks’ that is worthwhile
> capturing as such.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Dirk
>
>
>
> *From:* gaia [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Rohan Mahy
> *Sent:* 19 June 2014 07:15
> *To:* [e-mail]
> *Subject:* [gaia] Difference between FON and a "manyfolks Community
> Network"
>
>
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
>
> Just to briefly introduce myself, my most relevant experience to this
> group is that I helped build a large portion of a long-range 5Ghz WiFi
> backbone in Haiti with Inveneo; before that I was an active participant in
> the IETF in the RAI space for many years; currently I work as a field
> logistician for an international non-profit in South Kivu, Democratic
> Republic of Congo.
>
>
>
> To me the key difference between FON and what the authors call a community
> network is the ability to actively enlarge the network. FON capitalizes on
> an existing network. It does not extend that network, it merely allows
> reciprocal access to that network by individual nodes. While this is
> already a good and useful thing, I think what many of the authors of the
> draft want to define is a user-extensible network. Below is my strawman
> definition.
>
>
>
> User-extensible network: A network in which any participant in the system
> may add link segments to the network in such a way that the new network
> segments can support multiple nodes and adopt the same overall
> characteristics as those of the joined network, including the capacity to
> further extend the network. Once these link segments are joined to the
> network, there is no longer a meaningful distinction between the previous
> extent of the network and the new extent of the network.
>
>
>
> Note that this covers a large part of the Free Network Foundation's
> Freedom 1 as posted by Roger, but not all of it.
>
>
>
> Practically I think this means that new segments of a user-extensible
> network do not involve IP address translation at the boundary of the
> network. This is important architecturally, so if someone has a good
> counter-example, please respond.
>
>
>
> For me it does not matter if the network is wired or wireless, licensed or
> unlicensed spectrum, or what technologies are used. It does not matter if
> the network has a fee structure or who administers the network. I agree
> with Steve that commercial extensible networks should be included. In Haiti
> and the parts of sub-Saharan Africa where I have lived (Benin, South Sudan,
> DRC) a commercial entity has a better chance of getting off the ground.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> -rohan
>
>
>
>
>
>  Dirk Trossen
>  Principal Engineer
>  InterDigital UK, Inc.
>  Shoreditch Business Center
> 64 Great Eastern Street
>  London, EC2A 3QR
>  T: [phone]
>  [e-mail]
>  www.InterDigital.com <http://www.interdigital.com/>
>
>
>   This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
> confidential and/or otherwise protected from disclosure to anyone other
> than its intended recipient. Unintended transmission shall not constitute
> waiver of any privilege or confidentiality obligation. If you received this
> communication in error, please do not review, copy or distribute it, notify
> me immediately by email, and delete the original message and any
> attachments. Unless expressly stated in this e-mail, nothing in this
> message or any attachment should be construed as a digital or electronic
> signature.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gaia mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
>
>