[wsfii-discuss] the cooperative way for India?

Sun Jul 9 11:37:37 UTC 2006

Hi Ramon, Aaron and all,

The points you 2 are hitting on in this exchange and the experiences
you have from your real-life community network are so valuable for the
fledgling startups in India that we should not let this go up in
smoke.
I suggest that we work on all this in face to face workshops in the
coming months. 2 great opportunities to meet are in Germany soon.

- First there is the wireless community camp
  5-13 August 2006 in Jersbek near Hamburg.
  https://snr.freifunk.net/trac/wcc

- Second is Wizards of OS 4 in Berlin.
14-16 September 2006
  http://www.wizards-of-os.org/index.php?id=36&L=3

Lets set up camp there if possible and do workshops on "Spontaneous
Networking Platform" development. (thanks for the word,Spontaneous,
Ramon :-)
Other suggestion on the caption text of these workshops are welcome...

Thanks, Fred

On 7/9/06, Ramon Roca <ramon.roca at guifi.net> wrote:
>
> You are hitting good points Aaron, comments in line.
>
> En/na Aaron Kaplan ha escrit:
> > (...)
> >
> >> Some of our conclusions were:
> >> -A local community that just relies with the ability and availability of
> >> a few networks admins can run a network of just about a few dozens of
> >> routers
> >> -By having some utilities, such as a database, wiki ant network console
> >> (cacti, nagios....), it can be up to a hundred interconnected nodes?
> >>
> >
> > Well, the current systems that I know of basically lack a scalable layer
> > 2 (WLAN). So IMHO this goes first when it comes to scalability.
> >
> Yes, the "L" of wLan means "Local". They are designed just for a few
> clients. Does not scale to something larger by his own nature.
> But here I was not referring to wLan scalability, instead, I was talking
> on tools for having lots of wLans, and linked together in a single
> larger network by PtP links, etc.
> If that's has to be done manually by expert net admins, those admins
> will become the bottleneck and jeopardize the goal of easily allow
> acquiring new connections from new users, and building links with the
> communities of everyones  neighborhood.
> >
> >> -By building a database automatic IP provisioning system, maps, forums,
> >> built-in online network monitoring, configuration tools etc... that
> >> could bring us up to thousands?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Maybe this helps:
> >
> > We released our funkfeuer wireless mesh ISP software as GPL.
> >
> >    http://redeemer.sf.net
> >
> >
> > It includes: node registration, user admin, VOIP integration (users can
> > self administer), a nice google map, smokeping, nagios integration, etc.
> > the idea is basically that we explain to people what to do, how to do it
> > and then give them an account on our ISP software. There they can
> > register IPs, register VOIP extensions etc themselves.
> > The best feature about it: you can easily write small drivers that will
> > feed your other systems from the node/user Db. (coding credits go to
> > Wolfgang Nagele)
> >
> Cool. Yes. That's the point.
> Quite similar in many areas with the apps we are using at guifi.net
> The next point here has to be to forget about "easy drivers". Coding is
> only "easy" to coders. Network users/promoters don't know how to build
> drivers, in rare cases are programmers and just use what's available,
> therefore the best will be simply be able to agree with an open XML
> format, with "drivers" already built.
> Something like this:
> http://guifi.net/ca/guifi/nodexchange/2444/nodes
> So, let's work on it ;)
>
> > I know many of the people in the free networking and meshing community
> > don't feel happy about a centralized approach as described above.
> >
> BIG COMMENT HERE: I know about that feeling, but very often that's a big
> fatal error and common misunderstanding. Being able to interchange
> networks descriptions in XML, if someone wants to built in a innovative
> way, will always have a chance to implement it.
> But if simply builds the network in some way that only himself can
> manage/know, in the real world that's not an open network because is
> unable to easily inter operate with other networks, in other words,
> that's closed to himself or his community. I mean, can be based on open
> source, but could result a proprietary network. What's more
> "centralized" than admins taking decisions of what/how/when and without
> publishing their networks?
> As an example, is like when someone says that is producing Open
> Software, and certainly is willing for, but has only a working copy in
> his well firewalled server at home and no CVS/SVN/tarball.
> In the meantime, local wireless communities are still de-centralized by
> his own nature, you know, wLan (L=local) works only in a local
> environment, therefore, why the people have to be afraid? afraid of what?
> The real challenge to scale is the ability to connect those still local
> networks or consolidate them in something larger, and the turnkeys, the
> methods and tools that allow this. In the real world, without those
> "enablers",... just sexy local wLans, never more. We can talk a lot,
> have tons of code, but do nothing.
>
> > So...
> > There is a very nice second project "AcDc" (which I am proud to be
> > mentoring at the Google SoC)
> >
> > http://www.reseaucitoyen.be/wiki/index.php/AcdcProposal_en
> >
> > It is a decentralized p2p DNS & captive portal system with XML beneath
> > it for describing the configuration.
> >
> Interesting. I'm not very familiar en ad hoc networks for the very last
> mile in urban areas. I do realize that distinct scenarios might have
> different solutions. That shows that different solutions to different
> scenarios have to be complementary.
> To give you an example, an approach of "no node can be more important
> than another" can be true in a region-scale network like this:
> http://guifi.net/ca/node/2444/view/map
> (> than 500 km2, combining small to medium urban areas and rural areas,
>  > 800 radio devices, some of them having dedicated p2p links (we call
> them "supernodes"), other simply regular users or repeaters...)
>
> BTW, can you provide the real world communities/sample servers to see
> the apps. you mentioned live?
>
> >
> >> Wireless community is not just about socializing, wifi state-of-the-art
> >> technology is a huge challenge and it isn't at the hand of a few
> >> volunteers. There are never excedent on volunteers.
> >>
> >> Major problem I do envision now here is uniformity. Local communities
> >> are plural and self-centered (they should be, that is the basis). No way
> >> to share anything if there are no common practices. So what we can share?
> >>
> >> There have to be a motivation for sharing not only experiences, also
> >> resources. How many of us are really sharing resources across
> >> communities? But might be different approaches for solving technology
> >> problems (i.e. routing, hardware...) so.... what?
> >>
> >> What about at least having the ability to syndicate community networks
> >> by describing them in XML? So regardless of how you do run a given
> >> network, you still are able to see others, if someone finds out a good
> >> hardware configuration tool solution, by providing your network
> >> information to it you are just able to take advantage of it without
> >> disrupting other features that maybe you have and love...
> >>
> >>
> >> Ramon.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> En/na Ken DiPietro ha escrit:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Vickram (et al)
> >>>
> >>> I find this thread fascinating from a couple of different standpoints.
> >>> First and foremost is the dynamic we are discussing between,
> >>> government, private business and local communities. I applaud you
> >>> being able to clearly and concisely explain some of the reasons each
> >>> component of this structure is not capable of managing this work on
> >>> it's own.
> >>>
> >>> If that is the case, I would suggest that each one of these segments
> >>> must take responsibility for a piece of the job and this is how I
> >>> would suggest one possible solution could be implemented.
> >>>
> >>> Government -  The national government in partnership with local
> >>> governments create a training facility to educate a staff of young,
> >>> resilient workers capable of deploying this equipment even under the
> >>> most adverse local conditions. Additionally, government either
> >>> mandates the manufacture of this equipment at a subsidized price or
> >>> provides tax incentives to make the manufacturers of this equipment
> >>> eager to produce it. From what I can tell, the government will also
> >>> have to remove the mountains of red tape that it seems to thrive on to
> >>> make this project go forward as well as removing any tariffs that
> >>> might also add to the cost of this equipment.
> >>>
> >>> Business - Private sector must be motivated to build this equipment. I
> >>> would suggest that this could be done by using a combination of tax
> >>> incentives weighed against the threat of allowing the importation of
> >>> goods should the local businesses not meet the demand in a reasonable
> >>> time period. Specifications for interoperability as well as
> >>> environmental hardening need to be mandated. Another possibility would
> >>> be for the government to subsidize the training of qualified employees
> >>> to manufacture this equipment.
> >>>
> >>> Local communities - This is where the demand is generated. One of the
> >>> ways these communities can pay for this connectivity is to supply
> >>> labor to the manufacturers as well as to the installation staff. These
> >>> trained people could return to their communities to keep the network
> >>> operational after a set period of time and it would be up to the
> >>> community as well as government to pay for the workers (or a portion
> >>> of their salary/expenses) during this time.
> >>>
> >>> Please note - many of these communities will be able to work together
> >>> as this connectivity will be supplied by passing through one community
> >>> on the way to delivering to another community further down the line.
> >>> It will be critical that these groups can work together or the segment
> >>> of the network will eventually collapse.
> >>>
> >>> I realize this outline is full of holes and is not intended to be a
> >>> boilerplate for how this project should be rolled out but rather a
> >>> staring point for discussion.
> >>>
> >>> Respectfully,
> >>>
> >>> Ken DiPietro
> >>>
> >>> New-ISP.net/NextGenCommunications.net
> >>> Wireless solutions - not concessions.
> >>> http://www.nextgencommunications.net
> >>> 1044 National Highway LaVale MD 21502
> >>> Tel# (301)789-2968 Cell (301)268-1154
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> vvcrishna at radiophony.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Quoting Balaji G <balaji_g1947 at yahoo.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> What should these mechanisms be ? I have my doubts on the scaling of
> >>>>> community based approaches, but one must develop the area further,
> >>>>> as well
> >>>>> as explore other mechanisms.  Hope is in strenghtening the energies of
> >>>>> communities as against burdening them with another development task,
> >>>>> which
> >>>>> is easier done by Government and moneyed industry.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Community based approaches, on the contrary, are probably the most
> >>>> powerful in
> >>>> terms of scaling. Half the reason that mobile networks in rural areas
> >>>> are so
> >>>> pathetic as that no urban executive wants to go spend months in the
> >>>> boondocks
> >>>> wrangling with ticklish local issues of electricity, workers, spares,
> >>>> drinking
> >>>> water, food etc.
> >>>> That critical problem is erased when the work is community-driven. But
> >>>> unfortunately, decades (centuries) of autocratic rule has damped down
> >>>> the
> >>>> desire of most rural Indian groups to do things for themselves, which
> >>>> is why
> >>>> the most genuinely successful ICT projects are in places where a
> >>>> significant
> >>>> amount of preparatory work has been done, sometimes for years.
> >>>> Depressing, perhaps, but no reason to lose hope or abandon this
> >>>> country's fate
> >>>> solely to 'big' governments and (essentially greedy) private
> >>>> businesses to come
> >>>> to the rescue.
> >>>> Vickram
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> >>>> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> >>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> >> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > wsfii-discuss mailing list
> > wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>