Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.dne3.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Toaster <toaster@dne3.net>
Newsgroups: news.software.nntp
Subject: Re: ad-hoc wifi news transport
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:17:37 -0400
Message-ID: <20250408151737.00003dcf@dne3.net>
References: <20250320204547.0000274b@dne3.net>
 <874izak212.fsf@gmail.com>
 <vshbnj$3nh1s$1@dont-email.me>
 <x87plhsax2t.fsf@somewhere.edu>
 <vspreu$ouq9$1@dont-email.me>
 <vt14tg$dj1$1@news.dne3.net>
 <vt18nn$graf$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: news.dne3.net;
	logging-data="83095"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@dne3.net"
Bytes: 3839
Lines: 68

On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:23:35 -0000 (UTC)
bp@www.zefox.net wrote:

> Toaster <news@dne3.net> wrote:
> > On 4/4/2025 7:54 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
> > snip
> >> I don't think it required unique hostnames, though they were
> >> preferred, since the bang paths generally were different for
> >> different hosts even if the had the same name. In a sense the bang
> >> path was the identity of any given host.
> >> 
> >> UUCP died out because DNS and ICANN made TCP/IP much easier to
> >> administer and was incomparably faster. With with some thought it
> >> might be useful again.
> >> 
> >> Thanks for reading,
> >> 
> >> bob prohaska
> >>   
> > I'd like to experiment around with uucp and nncp. looking at nncp 
> > protocol currently.
> 
> Are you thinking of using WiFi LANs as the transport layer? 
> 
> My router can see about a dozen WAPs, each of them can likely see 
> more than a dozen each. If I could peer with just a few of them and
> we all agreed to share some fraction of our bandwidth back to our
> ISP and other peers it would make for a rather dense mesh.
> 
> bob prohaska
> 

Yes, that's the idea. I'm also looking into yggdrasil network. Zero
configuration, end to end encrypted. The idea would be everyone peers
together via wifi, directional links or omni-directional. Directional
is more scalable. Then you share resources with people you know
(internet access, files, etc) via public key. I.e. my friend and I
trust each other, we both share our internet access to each other and
allow default routing out.

If enough people do this then it would be a good auxilliary to standard
internet access, good for low to mid bandwidth localized traffic. Right
now most traffic on the internet goes to a few centralized sites, but
does that have to be the case?

In a peer to peer network, you just install an application that
communicates directly with the person you are trying to reach, no
server needed. All it would take is a small shift in which applications
are used.

Another idea is to ditch IP communication altogether and just use the
mesh as a news network. Articles bounce around the mesh like they do on
usenet. That's a tough sell, can't do much other than post like we do
here on usenet.

Zero infrastructure cost, run by volunteers = free communications. I
could see using it for out-of-band access to home servers, private sms,
zero infrastructure chat applications. I'd put a news server and irc on
it, make a phone app and dress it up nice and pretty for my friends
that aren't technical. Could even support voip to your landline/hotspot.

The dream is the ability to connect your phone to this free net, and
talk to your friends in your community directly instead of trusting
some far off thing. Battery powered nodes would work when nothing else
would (i.e. tornado took out most of everything, enough nodes remain
and the network persists). All this needs is enough buy in from people
to make a minimal network. I'd even pay for the units because im weird
like that.