Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #1: Motivations

["Jose Saldana" <[e-mail]>]

This is a good point.

These would be goals (why the network is useful, what is its main
"service"):

We can split the list into two, with different introductory paragraphs. We
should take into account that these motivations are used in the
classification.

Something like:

Alternative Networks can also be classified according to the underlying
motivation 
for them, i.e. the goals it tries to accomplish:

> >>     o  Reducing initial capital expenditures (for the network and the
end
> >>        user, or both).
> >>
> >>     o  Providing additional sources of capital (beyond the traditional
> >>        carrier-based financing).
> >>
> >>     o  Reducing on-going operational costs (such as backhaul or network
> >>        administration).
> >>
> >>     o  Reducing hurdles to adoption (digital literacy; literacy in
> >>        general; relevance, etc.)
> >>
> >>     o  Extending coverage to underserved areas (users and communities).
> >>
> >>     o  Providing an alternative service in case of natural disasters
and
> >>        other extreme situations.

The motivations of the users who deploy them can be diverse:
> >>
> >>     o  Leveraging expertise, and having a place for experimentation and
> >>        teaching.

> >>     o  Becoming an active participant in the deployment and management
of
> >>        a real and operational network.
> >>
> >>     o  Various forms of activism, looking for network neutrality
> >>        guarantees, anti-censorship, decentralization to minimize
control,
> >>        creating and sharing of "commons" (i.e. information and
knowledge
> >>        resources that are collectively shared), etc.
>>>
> >>     o  Free sharing of Internet connectivity, including altruistic
> >>        reasons.
> >>
> >>     o  Preferring alternative ownership model (co-owning, co-operating)
> >>        of the networking infrastructure.

Do you agree with the separation?

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: gaia [mailto:[e-mail]] En nombre de panayotis antoniadis
> Enviado el: jueves, 14 de abril de 2016 10:51
> Para: [e-mail]
> Asunto: Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar
review,
> question #1: Motivations
> 
> 
> Dear Mitar, Jose,
> 
> I am not sure if it is meaningful, and helpful, to mix goals (why the
network is useful,
> what is its main "service") with motivations (why someone contributes to
the
> creation of the network) in the same list.
> 
> The former I think is a useful classification variable and more or less
easy to
> identify. The latter is a rather complex behavioural aspect and in my
opinion it is
> really beyond of the scope of this document to touch on.
> 
> Asking someone "what is your motivation?" and recording the answer is just
not
> enough. Motivations shouldn't be treated similarly to protocol variables
and unless if
> there is a really good reason I wouldn't place them side by side.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Panos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 14/04/16 09:52, Mitar wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Jose Saldana <[e-mail]>
wrote:
> >>> - Various forms of activism, looking for network neutrality
> >>>    guarantees, anti-censorship, decentralization to minimize control,
> >>>    building of commons, etc.
> >> When you say "building of commons", do you mean "Digital commons"
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons#Digital_commons .
> > Various forms of commons, but mostly commons in the sense of Internet
> > connectivity. If we see Internet connectivity as a human right, then
> > commons is a social way to provide that. Like drinking water can be
> > seen as commons, public spaces as well. It is commons to access
> > digital commons. :-) The network itself becomes a virtual public space
> > where people can participate without censorship, oppression. So
> > commons in very broad term. It is really the best term I can find to
> > explain various aspects of community networks.
> >
> > For example, we can see the infrastructure put up by community
> > networks as commons. Not owned by any one particular entity, but
> > operated and maintained by a community.
> >
> > This research paper talks more about this view on community networks:
> >
> > http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2725358
> >
> > (It talks also about organizational structures and motivations for
> > such networks.)
> >
> >> - Various forms of activism, looking for network neutrality
> >> guarantees, anti-censorship, decentralization to minimize control,
> >> creating and sharing of "commons"  (i.e. information and knowledge
> >> resources that are collectively shared), etc.
> > But also infrastructure, the network itself as communication space,
> > and control is often similar to other commons-based projects (open
> > source projects, etc.).
> >
> >> 4.2.  Goals and motivation
> >>
> >>     Alternative Networks can also be classified according to the
> >>     underlying motivation for them, e.g., addressing deployment and
usage
> >>     hurdles:
> >>
> >>     o  Reducing initial capital expenditures (for the network and the
end
> >>        user, or both).
> >>
> >>     o  Providing additional sources of capital (beyond the traditional
> >>        carrier-based financing).
> >>
> >>     o  Reducing on-going operational costs (such as backhaul or network
> >>        administration).
> >>
> >>     o  Leveraging expertise, and having a place for experimentation and
> >>        teaching.
> >>
> >>     o  Reducing hurdles to adoption (digital literacy; literacy in
> >>        general; relevance, etc.)
> >>
> >>     o  Extending coverage to underserved areas (users and communities).
> >>
> >>     o  Free sharing of Internet connectivity, including altruistic
> >>        reasons.
> >>
> >>     o  Becoming an active participant in the deployment and management
of
> >>        a real and operational network.
> >>
> >>     o  Various forms of activism, looking for network neutrality
> >>        guarantees, anti-censorship, decentralization to minimize
control,
> >>        creating and sharing of "commons" (i.e. information and
knowledge
> >>        resources that are collectively shared), etc.
> >>
> >>     o  Providing an alternative service in case of natural disasters
and
> >>        other extreme situations.
> >>
> >>     o  Preferring alternative ownership model (co-owning, co-operating)
> >>        of the networking infrastructure.
> > Looks better and better. Great! Thanks!
> >
> >
> > Mitar
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gaia mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia