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

[Mitar <[e-mail]>]

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

-- 
http://mitar.tnode.com/
https://twitter.com/mitar_m