Re: [gaia] Fwd: RE: Review required: draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments

[Mitar <[e-mail]>]

Hi!

Those are mostly overlay networks, no? They do not really work on
providing the infrastructure itself? I think this document is
targeting networks which provide infrastructure in some alternative
ways.

Some other similar projects (to my knowledge):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cjdns
https://ipfs.io/


Mitar

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 2:45 PM,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi all,
> What do you think of including potential Future Alternative Networks?
> As i mentioned before-see below- these focus on privacy and security and to
> even replace the current insecure Internet with a new one.
>
> Kind regards
> Fmod
>
> ######################
> Hi,
>
> I think we should discuss this in the GAIA list. I would like to hear
> others' opinions. If you could post this message there, it would be great.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jose
>
> ###########################
>>
>>
>> Hi Jose,
>>
>> yes. Currently there are no wireless communities using this software.
>> But i suggested to put them under a new section:
>> Possible ->Future<- Alternative Networks.
>> Since they are aiming at replacing the existing solutions with more secure
>> and
>> privacy preserving ones- even replacing the existing Internet-protocol
>> stack:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM4J7ljCExM
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Dmos
>>
>>
>> Am 2016-04-11 08:30, schrieb Jose Saldana:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have had a look to the web sites you suggest in your e-mail. The
>> > question is that I think they are not about Alternative Networks, but
>> > about alternative protocols or applications. I mean, none of them is
>> > about deploying new physical infrastructure, but about software. The
>> > draft is about deploying new networks, with physical devices, links,
>> > antennae, etc.
>> >
>> > Do you think this is true for all the links you have sent?
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance,
>> >
>> > Jose
>> >
>> > El 2016-04-06 13:33, [e-mail] escribió:
>> >> Dear authors of "Alternative Network Deployments: Taxonomy,
>> >> characterization,
>> >>                      technologies and architectures
>> >>            draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-04"
>> >>
>> >> I'd find it useful if your draft provided a perspective towards
>> >> future Alternative Networks.
>> >> I am thinking of software projects that have a strong emphasis on
>> >> privacy and security in their network design.
>> >> After Snowden it is only a logical next step in order to meet the
>> >> requirement of providing "freedom to communicate without
>> >> interference, or interception" to explore and develop this kind of
>> >> networks for public use.
>> >> So these projects are for example
>> >>
>> >> * GNUnet [1]
>> >> * Maidsafe [2]
>> >> * Net2o [3]
>> >> * Briar [4]
>> >> * Sneakernet aDTN with its client Timberdoodle [5]
>> >>
>> >> Some of these have developed privacy aware routing algorithms and
>> >> decentral naming systems for about a decade now.
>> >> So in contrast to the existing Alternative Networks they provide
>> >> meta-data-protection (implications of having none: [13]) by design as
>> >> well as the encryption of contents.
>> >> What makes them special is that some of them (the first three) are
>> >> alternative internet protocol stacks which don't depend on servers or
>> >> central authorites. They are fully distributed and decentralized. So
>> >> they not only have the potential to provide a free and open
>> >> communication means to its users but also one that backs up their
>> >> civil rights by being censorship resistant and by keeping its users'
>> >> communication confidental and secure - more than the current internet
>> >> does. [6],[7]
>> >>
>> >> It is only a matter of time that they include the capability to do
>> >> mesh networking.
>> >> GNUnet has its own module for this: CADET [8][9].
>> >> GNUnet has been packed for OpenWRT half a year ago [10] It fits on a
>> >> 8 MB Router and possibly on a 4 MB one, but still needs improvements
>> >> to "dance the wifi" [11].
>> >> Maidsafe is rewritten in Rust- a security aware language. This
>> >> rewrite should fit well on embedded devices.
>> >> When Rust is ported to OpenWRT also Maidsafe can run its first
>> >> experiments with open-wireless-networks.
>> >> Net2o is built to be lightweight as well. It's developer claims that
>> >> there is no reason why it should be not able to do
>> >> wifi-mesh-networking.
>> >>
>> >> You really should mention in your draft, that community networks are
>> >> severely threatend by FCC and EU regulations.[12] Proposal 1: All
>> >> radio equipped hardware being sold must be open and enable
>> >> alternative firmware to be deployed.
>> >>
>> >> The current open frequencies have a very low throughput or need an
>> >> enormous effort and knowledge to use them.
>> >> Wifi delivers very bad results when walls, vegetation or water is
>> >> involved.
>> >> Proposal 2: The most suitable (best throughput under various
>> >> conditions) frequencies must be opened for public use worldwide.
>> >> Under these conditions more people would be able to participate in
>> >> digital communication.
>> >>
>> >> Streets have physical limitations. Who owns them has got a monopoly.
>> >> With telecommunication infrastructure it is quite similar and the
>> >> reason why for example in Germany at last the variety of
>> >> telecommunication providers has declined with the result of one
>> >> telecommunication provider having a monopoly and therefore can
>> >> dictate the prices.(Telekom) Streets as well as communication means
>> >> are vital for the well being of a society.
>> >> To leave these life veins to bodies with commercial interest without
>> >> ethical commitments results in a discrimination (against) the poor.
>> >> In wireless communities the poor depend on the generosity of others
>> >> to pay their access where it is actually the responsibilty of a
>> >> country to provide free access to communication means
>> >> indiscriminately to its inhabitants as it is ususal for streets and
>> >> has been proven to be a good idea.
>> >> Therefore
>> >> Proposal 3: The digital communication infrastructure such as
>> >> conductions and antennas should be mostly tax funded, free to use and
>> >> in public hand.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> [1] https://gnunet.org/
>> >> [2] http://maidsafe.net/
>> >> [3] http://net2o.de/
>> >> [4] https://briarproject.org/
>> >> [5] https://github.com/timberdoodle/TimberdoodleApp
>> >>
>> >> [6] https://www.w3.org/2014/strint/papers/65.pdf
>> >> [7] wiki.c3d2.de/EDN
>> >> [8] https://gnunet.org/cadet
>> >> [9]
>> >> http://mirror.eu.oneandone.net/projects/media.ccc.de/congress/2013/wo
>> >> rkshops/30c3-WS-en-YBTI_Mesh-Bart_Polot-
>> GNUnet_Wireless_Mesh_DHT.webm
>> >> [10] https://github.com/dangowrt/gnunet-15.05
>> >>
>> >> [11] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEBu7u6hZSo
>> >> [12] https://fsfe.org/activities/radiodirective/
>> >> [13] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g00l5qBYXu8, starting from
>> >> minute
>> >> 4:00
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hope this helped.
>> >> Kind regards
>> >> Fmod
>> >>
>> >> Project EDN
>> >> wiki.c3d2.de/EDN
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> gaia mailing list
>> >> [e-mail]
>> >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > gaia mailing list
>> > [e-mail]
>> > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gaia mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia



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