more than spread spectrum
There are alternatives to spread spectrum, if we're threatened with loss of freedom to communicate. We could lay our own wires/fibers. We could set up a mesh network of infrared lasers through the air. Last time I looked, there were no laws against shining lights out your window as long as they didn't bother anyone. An infrared laser could hardly bother anyone. We could produce a line of cheap cards to plug into a PC which would do packet routing, using a variety of physical links -- our own wires, lasers, very low range radio, .... Each card would connect to three or more neighbors and become part of the global mesh. Adaptive routing with no global map would suffice for the card and would keep the whole system peer-to-peer with no need for central control and no chance for central tapping. Of course all of these solutions require a high density of users. A college campus might be the right place to start. We could then branch out to cities. I suspect that a place like Chicago or NYC with high rise apartments might be the place to start -- many options for line-of-sight communications. The benefit isn't just for Cypherpunks. It's a free network for the masses -- like the original USENET (with each user donating routing and store/forward) but with unrestricted, low-range, continuously operating physical links. I'll volunteer to do the software for the node card. Does anyone have hardware design/fab to donate to the effort? - Carl
In <9309150353.AA06198@ellisun.sw.stratus.com>, Carl Ellison wrote...
There are alternatives to spread spectrum, if we're threatened with loss of freedom to communicate.
We could lay our own wires/fibers.
Well, we'd like crypto for the masses and I don't think that the masses are yet ready to put out the bucks for spread spectrum boards and infrared laser communications gear... It'd be really nice to have such a decentralized network, though.
We could set up a mesh network of infrared lasers through the air. Last time I looked, there were no laws against shining lights out your window as long as they didn't bother anyone. An infrared laser could hardly bother anyone.
...
very low range radio, .... Each card would connect to three or more neighbors and become part of the global mesh. Adaptive routing with no global map would suffice for the card and would keep the whole system peer-to-peer with no need for central control and no chance for central tapping.
This would be the perfect network in which to deploy DC nets.... (dining cryptographers). ;; __________________________________________________________________________ ;; Stig@netcom.com netcom.com:/pub/stig/00-PGP-KEY ;; It's hard to be cutting-edge at your own pace... 32 DF B9 19 AE 28 D1 7A ;; Bullet-proof code cannot stand up to teflon bugs. A3 9D 0B 1A 33 13 4D 7F
In reply to (Carl Ellison): | I'll volunteer to do the software for the node card. Does anyone have | hardware design/fab to donate to the effort? Hmm, this is nice timing I guess :-) Over the last 3-4 weeks I have been mulling over in my head (you know, that process before you actually start putting down on paper) a design for a relatively 'simple' learning bridge, using off the shelf support chips. I'm currently in the middle of an academic semester, and if I don't happen to work during the coming break (for the non-australians, our academic year is mar->nov), then this is something I will take up. The actual design I have in mind has a 839X IEEE802.3 CSMA/CD ethernet controller on the network side plus an 8088 embedded controller to do all the work (or, maybe something else, but 8088 assembly is familiar to me and its a real cheap chip). The output stage is a synchronous HDLC varient (SABM mode, cut down for pp operation) running at a select- able synch rate (anywhere from 19.2k to 10mbps, obviously @ 19.2k you would have problems on a loaded ethernet). One of the main reasons for starting this is that another colleague of mine has an interest in constructing the 2mbps microwave (10GHz) project as seen in your local ARRL handbook. This would tie in nicely, but further to this, it has the possibility to interface to any communications medium you desire (as long as it can handle a synch incoming data stream). It oculd plug into the other side of a spread-spectrum board, it could be used with an async interface and a pc to tunnel traffic across another network, and so on. There is also a possibility to use some of the HDLC initialisation phases to exchange public keys :-), and to encrypt information frames (headers == plaintext) on the fly. 'Generic' and 'Modular' is a basic philosophy of mine. If I do have the time, and complete this project, then I hope to make it 'available' to the masses (so to speak). I can envisage that there would be people interested in such a setup. As an undergrad Computer Systems Engineer student, there are no problems with access to appropriate design and testing equipment, its just a matter of me getting the time. Of course, all this is 'in my head' at the moment, so nothing is definite. Discussion, ideas and pointers are welcome, although the technical side of things maybe straying from the cypherpunk agenda. Matthew. -- Matthew Gream,, M.Gream@uts.edu.au -- Consent Technologies, 02-821-2043.
This idea of setting up your own independent network isn't as far fetched as it sounds, at least in a relatively local area with critical mass. The router nodes already exist, in the form of my own TCP/IP code for the PC, or any of several other packages including the various freeware UNIX clones. Radio transmission equipment operating under Part 15 of the FCC rules is already available. Under Part 15, you don't need a license; the radio transmitter does have to be "type accepted" by the FCC but since you buy that as a prepackaged box you don't have to worry about it. The section of Part 15 that is particularly interesting is either 15.247 or 15.249 (can't remember which). It allows you to run up to 1 watt of power, quite a bit for an unlicensed service, on any of several "ISM" (aka "garbage") bands as long as you use spread spectrum with a minimum processing gain of 10dB. The most popular is 902-928 Mhz, with another band in the vicinity of 2450 Ghz coming up fast. Ahthough most Part 15 equipment is designed primarily for use within office environments, it can be and is used over point-to-point paths of 5-10 km with the proper directional antennas. Although Part 15 users are not allowed to cause harmful interference and must accept interference from other users (microwave ovens generally operate on 2450 Mhz), in practice these nets seem to work pretty well if they're properly engineered. Besides, the inherent distributed redundancy available in a packet network should be able to compensate for momentary outages due to interference. Unlike the amateur service, which has some particularly draconian "acceptable use" policies (despite a recent liberalization, encryption is still illegal), there are *no* restrictions on the use of Part 15 equipment. Encryption is not only legal, some boards have hardware encryption support (e.g., the NCR Wavelan has a DES chip). This particular board operates at 2 megabits/sec on the 902-928 Mhz band with 250 mW of power. There is an even more interesting development in the works: "data PCS". In essence, this is "Part 15" style operation on dedicated spectrum, i.e., new spectrum in the 1.8-2.2 Ghz band that will not have to be shared. The specific intent of data PCS is to allow users to build their own ad-hoc networks without having to rely on the facilities of (and pay money to) carriers such as telephone companies. Phil
participants (4)
-
cme＠ellisun.sw.stratus.com -
karn＠qualcomm.com -
mgream＠acacia.itd.uts.edu.au -
stig＠netcom.com