Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #5: Community Networks

[Mitar <[e-mail]>]

Hi!

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Jose Saldana <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> "A Community Network is a network in which any participant in the system
> may add
>> link segments to the network in such a way that the new 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 and the new extent of the network."
>>
>> Isn't this definition of the Internet? Just replace "segment" with
> "autonomous
>> system" and "community network" with "Internet". :-)
>
> This is true. I have added "individuals".

I think another important difference is the control aspect. One can
much easier add new device to the community network than one is to add
it to the Internet BGP peering.

> This is the new version. Feel free to make some improvement suggestions:
>
> 5.1.  Community Networks
>
>    +--------------------+----------------------------------------------+
>    | Commercial         | community                                    |
>    | model/promoter     |                                              |
>    +--------------------+----------------------------------------------+
>    | Goals and          | reducing hurdles; to serve underserved       |
>    | motivation         | areas; network neutrality                    |

We should expand this list with others we added to the overall "goals
and motivation" dimension.

>    new extent of the network.  The term "participant" means an
>    individual, who may become user, provider and manager of the network
>    at the same time.

Hm, there can also be organizations and companies participating with
nodes in the network. I like the addition, so explanation, that the
participant is in multiple roles at the same time, not just
user/consumer, but they are probably not necessary an individual.

>    infrastructure).  In Community Networks, everybody keeps the
>    ownership of what he/she has contributed.

I would suggest the following wording:

In Community Networks, everybody keeps the ownership of what he/she
has contributed, or contribute it to the network as a whole, commons,
loosing track of the ownership of a particular equipment itself, in
favor of the community stewardship of said equipment.


Mitar

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