[Freedombox-discuss] Why FreedomBox would not be a router ?
if im not mistaken, if i understand correctly, wouldn't your scenario be
more in tune with a mesh network instead of using 56k dial up. IE users
connect to other users and create a mesh network until connections can be
made to "freedomnet" if you will, and if needed the old regular Internet.
isnt the idea that a network will exist's outside of the normal Internet via
mesh/oslr/darknet ect ect, that is independent and censorship resistant ect
ect. If we are simply connecting to the normal internet than wouldnt it be
extermely easy for ISP's to ... block all connections made by freedombox's
or services that the box's use.
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Marc Loupias <list at marc-loupias.fr> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i was lurking the mail archive and the website to find the architecture and
> hardware config chosen for the freedombox.
>
> If i understand well, you guys wants to make a simple computer (like a
> plug) behind the ISP box to deliver services for the user.
>
> Am i right ?
>
> If theses services have to be reachable on the WAN, how do you plan to
> manage the routing config on the ISP router ?
>
> This is a major problem. Do you plan a specific implementation for each ISP
> box (using Telnet ?) ? Is this only feasible ?
>
> In some ISP boxes, you cannot change the DNS server. Assuming that DNS
> filtering is the easiest measure for censorship (and often the first to be
> applied), a good way to avoid this is to run a DNS server on the Freedombox.
> But it will work only if the FB is a router, not if it is behind the ISP's
> router.
>
> Recently i have searched on the web a DSL internal card to build my own
> router. And surprise, i was not been able to find any.
>
> Maybe the FB Foundation could solve this issue by producing a little piece
> of hardware.
>
> Another good thing would be to have a 56k modem in the FB for urgency
> situations. When the north african revolutions have occurred and governments
> have cut off the internet, the only way to access the rest of the world was
> the standard telephone network. It would be a very effective technique to
> avoid censorship.
>
> To summarize my point of view, i dont understand why you are discussing
> about the software part because the hardware part is critical and it is the
> hardest part to do. One person can handle the software part of this kind of
> project but for the hardware part it is just impossible. That's where i was
> thinking find the Freedombox Foundation and it seems i was wrong.
>
> I think this is a mistake, the hardware first.
>
> Last thing, some organizations questions :
>
> Who leads the project ? Is there a leader like Linus Torvalds for the linux
> kernel or is this democratic ?
> Who makes the decisions, especially concerning the money collected ?
> If the software part runs on Debian, why not using the same organization ?
> Some people present a different roadmap and people vote for a solution ?
>
> I dont know where is the right way, i dont understand how all of this
> works.
>
>
> Thanks for reading me (and my poooooor english).
>
>
> Marc, a french developer.
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.**alioth.debian.org<Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.**org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**
> freedombox-discuss<http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss>
>
--
Thank you for your time
~Nathan
nathan1465 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20110705/155e0b2f/attachment.html>
Reply to: