"Meshing may not be free. I think we agree." Well, parts of it will not be free. However, I still think that even though routing someone else's packets does not benefit me directly, it is this activity which gives rise to the mesh. I guess, "do unto others..." P2P is basically the same...remember, in the simplest versions there was never any need to make content available. However, P2P-ers seemed to innately understand that P2P won't really be possible unless one is a source as well as a sink. In the WiFi version it'll be easy to start to "triage" certain kinds of activity as battery power runs thin...first, a throttle down to only routing packets of a certain application (or VLAN or whatever). (This actually does make sense because it eats a hell of a lot more battery power transmitting a packet than receiving it.) Second, when the battery is within X minutes of dying then only listening and not transmitting. But I think my main point holds: even 'reglar' folks will realize that there's a "gobal" benefit to routing someone else's packets, even if that does eat into remaining battery time. -TD

From: "Major Variola (ret)" <mv@cdc.gov> To: "cypherpunks@al-qaeda.net" <cypherpunks@al-qaeda.net> Subject: Re: Meshing costs, the price of RAH's battery Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:09:45 -0700

At 02:36 PM 4/10/04 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:

...

At 9:03 PM -0700 4/9/04, Major Variola (ret) wrote:

...

So, get a clue. When your battery runs out, you get *zero* benefit from the mesh. Or even your local device *sans network*.

Yes, and as your battery starts to run out, you raise the price on switching.

Yes, as I speculated.

...

Your point is?

Meshing may not be free. I think we agree.

_________________________________________________________________ MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page  FREE download! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/