Re: [DC3] IGF 2016 participation

Dear Bob, many thanks for your answer. You wrote: "The real challenge is how to get people to think outside of the telecom framing which is so implicit in the very words we use. I'm open to suggestions." Based on my experience i say, this problem you will find only in the environment of organizations. This people need the theater, the clouds, the mist clouds. Very good you see it in all IGF lists and groups. They don't like to speak about the basic needs. If we focus our view to the packet transport, we have two requirements: a) the flow of the packets from one device to the other b) the content is not altered to a) We use the pathes, what we have to create. You speak also about "roads and sidewalks". Then, we come directly to the question of navigation. If you walk, go with the bycicle, motorcycle, car, bus and trucks, what you do? You use the geografical information from your destination. Easy, or not? But not in the telecommunication. They create the indirect addressing scheme, that they can use centralized institutions. IANA, ICANN, part of IETF, all NICs and so on. All this structures we don't need, if we use the geografical position for our IP destination address. But all our destination devices, or nearly all, are part of a local network. We can also say "Community Network". We split our 128 bit address in two 64 bit addresses. Local and global. And we can say, the local addressing scheme is a decision of the people local. For our global transport we don't need the local address part. And we have two objects. Data and transport information. The data we never open. In our transport system we use only the transport information, the IP header. to b) Historically we use TCP. In this time, with electro mechanical relais, it was impossible to create a checksum for verification. But we do it. In every segment, the way between two routers, we organize the packet verification. Then we don't need TCP. In the IGF or ISOC lists, Vint Cerf never speak against. He know very clear, that TCP is superflous. Maybe, he don't like it. But the others made a big theater. You see, and i know, you see, telecommunication can be very easy. But not with that, what we give the name "Community Networks" like FreiFunk, Funkfeuer, Guifi Net, Buenos Aires Libre, AlterMundi and so on. They are market oriented, create business propaganda and never start to go in in the basics of telecommunication. We have some examples in this list. "Community licence" from Ritu and Nico. We know, what is a licence. It is very simiçar to ownership. You spoke about. The first step always is the general exclusion. The second step is the selective opening for using. "Community Server structure". AlterMundi and Codigo Sur speak about. But in reality, they use the server infrastructure from Guifi-Net in Catalonia. Also for this list. "Libre Router and Libre-Mesh". I searched a little bit. Libre-Mesh don't exist in the last days. Then i searched the design of this embedded control system. The old Atheros AR9344 device. You can find some reference design from Atheros, because TP-Link and others use it. But not the construction data from the Libre Router. Private? Private Ownership? "Routing", We have two principal rooting mechanism. Link State Based and Vector Based. Cisco work with a mix of that (EIGRP). Now it is an open protocol. The Link-State algorithms come from the military research centers. If they want to kill the local people, they come in mobile groups. And every device have to act as a connection node. Then we come to B.A.T.M.A.N. "The real challenge is" to put out this cheap market and controller propaganda from our space. Not the people, because all person have the capability to understand. Also Ritu and Nico. We need a strong discussion about the basics. And at the beginning we have to be radical. many greetings, willi Manaus, Brasil Am 04/06/2016 um 13:58 schrieb Bob Frankston: --- Este email foi escaneado pelo Avast antivírus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus