Slashdot Mirror
A Motley Crew Beams No-Cost Broadband In New York
Peter Meyers points to this article in the Village Voice, one of the best I've seen on the growing guerilla-networking scene. He excerpts a bit for your pleasure: "Along with some 30 other volunteers in a group called NYCwireless, Townsend's on a crusade to set up wireless Internet access zones: small areas, often called free networks, where people can tap into high-speed connections, without cables or phone lines, at no cost. Call it a marriage of the Web and pirate radio, forged even as big telecom interests bicker over the rights to wireless-spectrum licenses."
(and do they use tortorous sentences like the one composed above?)
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
* As far as violating the terms of service, most of the internet connections we are using we are ok, since we are not reselling the service, only sharing it to the our immediate friends and neighbors. Providers may choose to change there terms of services though. We are paying for this service, and choosing to let people use bandwidth we have already bought.
* As far as the network getting used by to many users and becoming useless. Most of the access points have Linux or FreeBSD machines as gateways. If this becomes an issue we will just install traffic shaping software on the gateway. The goal is not to provide you with a superfast connection that will make you give up your home cable modem and DSL line to sit in the park (though that would be nice). The goal is to provide a public free open wireless network for anyone to use. Even if the network gets saturated and we are only providing each person with 10kBytes/sec, that is still double the speed of dialup and adequate for web browsing and email. I watch the bandwidth usage very carefully, and people have been very good about using the free network.
* Wireless is not a replacement for a wired network, and free networks are not a replacement for commercial networks. That being said we are never going to replace commercial wired networks. We can provide an alternative for you to use though.
If your interested in starting a project in your area, do it.
1. Put up a simple web page on geocities or something.
2. Start a mailing list on Yahoo Groups
3. Post links to your website on the Seattle Wireless and Personal Telco web pages. -That is how NYCwireless (originally RooftopsNYC) got started.
-Maybe there is a group in your area, check: Personal Telco Wireless Communties List
If your in New York City, your welcome to use my node at 84th Street and Lexington Ave. Relax at the corner, or have a coffee at the coffee shop.
www.nycwireless.net
I have been pondering what it would take to make a indapendant non corp net for a bit now. All I can see is major implamentation problems.
First we must replace the IP proticals with something more secure and expandable
Second, net hardware may be cheap but unless we where to implament a p2pnet we would need somewhere to connect to localy. The problems of depending on a total p2p based network are plenty odvious to anyone with a cable net connection trying to download a mp3 from someone who has a 14.4 connection.
Third killer apps are needed. Chicken != Egg
Forth a configuration file that says app foo should use TCP/IP and app bar should use XYZ/AB. A bit simplified but you get the idea.
Fifth, a rag tag fugitive fleat of standerds.
Sixth, government intervention and "Protecting the children"
Thats what I just came up with off the top of my head. It would be very nice to see such a thing take off but I doubt that it will happen.
All of these obsticals where overcome the first time we built the net so it can be done again.
Then again it was done again with the Internet2 but thats not for public use.
Also remember that the original net was in 1995-1997 the Information Super Highway. Then it turned into e-business. It was not invissioned as a shoping mall but as a library. You can not take a rouge net with no central authority and keep the corp world out of it.
Ascii artist &
I agree that this and other schemes will soon find themselves in licenseable territory - it only takes a bill through your local legislature to take cb etc into restricted licenced use.
... do BT care? No, they don't. Because the impact on them is ... zero.
...
However, that said, if I have paid for 500 k then I am entitled to 500 k * all the time* - especially if this was leased line rather than dsl/cable.
So from the isp's point of view thats all that will be taken, 500k just most of the time rather than for a few hours in the evening.
If they are not really serious about allowing me to take 500k then they shouldn't try to sell it to me as such.
At work we have a small kilostream link with 5 allocated ip addresses. They (BT) could't care less how many pc's route out through the line, masqueraded or otherwise because all i can do is use all of my 64k.
What if I now connect to another sub branch across the street by using wireless
The kind of "up to 512k" access that is being advertised is basically dodgy because this 512k is not deliverable unless most of the people on that switch are not using it. One outcome of local wireless networks might be the withdrawal of this spurious 512k promise - probably better in the long run.
God this is a tortous post
But I am sure you see what I am driving at.
Interesting. Of concern to me would be accountability for those using your network. If some joker decides to download kiddie porn or engage in some other illegal action, the IP law enforcement will see is yours and not that of the law breaker. You'd have a tough time explaining that you weren't the one engaging in the activity.
Now, perhaps if there was some kind of free registry service that tracked users by the MAC.
At the time of the purchase of a wireless card, they would be entered into the registry and a digital certificate issued binding their name, address, public key and MAC address. When the user entered a free zone, they would exchange their credentials and you'd be able to provide the feds with the necessary tracking information.
Of course, this takes the fun out of the project as you'd have a lot of record keeping to do. Just how much...I dunno.
Anybody think such a service could work? If not, why? What would you do to improve upon it?
RD
Networking stuff is CHEAP. A few people here already have their own home networks.
Link them, leap over the technological hurdles, create an internet where big commerce does not exist.
Sorta like hands around the world, but with cat-5.
Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
Instead what they will do to discourage this is they will point out, just as I will, that this is a precarious thing. It's a great anonymous platform for introducing worms and viruses into the wild, and a nice way to control a zombie army without worrying at all about being traced to your home IP. All this on top of a protocol that's as secure and solid as swiss cheese. Really, you'd have to be asking for trouble to do this.
Actually, some companies might object: the ones who have to deal with the repercussions of this, be they ISP's having to clean up the mess, or other companies (or governments) hit by guerilla network crackers. This is very unfortunate, but it's an old principle. It only takes one person to pee in the pool.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
Those are your major hurdles if you want to Cat-5 it all the way down the line. The Wireless stuff, at least the high quality stuff you'd need for an alternanet isn't as cheap as wiring the apartment.
OK, I'm beginning to think really big here. So please, someone shoot me down on any point below that seems like nonsense to you:
;-), to raise the profile of free public Internet access in the general public is something that could do no harm.
;-)
The best way to preserve and nurture the trend is to link the idea of free public wireless with free public spaces. What am I saying: make areas like Washington Square Park, Central Park, Thompson Square Park, Prospect Park, etc. zones of free Internet. Of course, lots of nonpublic spaces are ideal for free wireless access as well, but for different reasons that are not as symbolic.
So then the issue becomes one of petitioning Henry Stern, the New York City parks commissioner, to pony up a little city $, and to start a volunteer program to support the infrastructure? Is that the wrong way to think about it?
Interestingly, we have the mayor, comptroller, and public advocate up for reelection this year. There might be some election year steam that could be funneled behind this. A candidate could get a big bang for their buck by taking a stand behind free public Internet in public spaces. It would have sound bite value and would play in the press well. It is something that would be interesting to the electorate and draw positive attention. Even if only at the gimmick level (thinking cynically about politics? forgive me
But then, of course, this access must be truly public. A lot of what we are talking about here is sort of "for the geeks, by the geeks." We would have to talk about truly free, public access, which means providing the terminals as well... handing out laptops in a New York City public park to ensure free and equal access is a daunting task indeed. I don't even know where to begin to think about how to make that work, if at all.
I'm thinking aloud here, forgive me if I have missed anything, but there is so much promise and peril and I salute the pioneers!
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
A recent test in Zurich showed that as long as you have a notebook with a 802.11b wireless Ethernet card, you can freely use someone else's high speed Net connections as long as your battery lasts.
:)
In about 2 hours of driving through central Zurich, the testers found no less than a dozen open, unrestricted corporate wireless LANs. Getting the gateway's IP was not a problem thanks to most 802.11b base station's built in DHCP server. If you live near any of these companies, all you need is an external antenna for your card and off you go at someone else's cost - and it's their own fault.
But what's even greater is that around Lake Zurich, you can use broadband 802.11b for free, legally
See the project's official site.
Yeah Bandwidth was capped at 240 mb/day down 240 mb/day up (total of 480 mb/day in both directions). Its done pretty well, with a counter at the gateway, so theres really no way around it.
If you cross the limit you are shut down for an entire week. *ouch*. Its been good for getting kids to not leave napster or gnutela running in their systrays unattended.
Have people found ways around this? A few - but its only been temporary. Someone in my network last year kept hopping blocked IPs. This was learned of and eventually they mapped his MAC every morning and shut whatever IP he was using down. It was tough. He even went so far as to buy new NETWORK CARDS to change his MAC.
After much discussion, we figure dout one way that would work. Get a group of seven guys together - each running the same custom-written client/server proxy software. Each day everyone uses the same proxy. When that IP is shut off the next morning for bandwidth violations, siwtch to the next of the sveen proxy boxes. By the time the seventh gets shut down, the first is being re-activated by the university.
Its Genius!
At least under some OSes you can use something like ipfw's queue command to put all of the WiFi traffic on a lower priority queue so it will only use the bandwidth you are not using. For that to be most effective you need to set that at the far end of the connection as well, but even if you don't you can kludge it by feeding all incoming traffic through a dummynet pipe with slightly less bandwidth then the real thing and again favoring the non WiFi traffic. That will get TCP (and TCP like things) enough drops to back off.
Using different priority queues is nice because the full bandwidth (or very close to it) will be available for WiFi when you aren't using the link yourself. If your OS doesn't support priority traffic queues you may be able to use fixed size traffic shaping.
This of corse does raise the fixed cost a little, unless you are already doing NATing and the NAT box can do your traffic shaping.
I would rather avoid the government sponsoring since it will either take spending from things that deserve it more, or raise taxes (or both). Plus whenever the government sponsors something it thinks it has the right or even responsibility to regulate it...
It is nice Tommy Lee is no technologicaly inclined. Should have realized though, he is ALL over the internet.
Well, I have a cable modem, which costs me around £20 per month. A lot of the time I'm not really using it. The connection is always on, with more-or-less the same IP address, but perhaps with some mail coming and going, nothing else, while I'm not here.
If I had any PC-using friends within wireless range, I'd be quite happy for them to "borrow" some of my connection. To paraphrase, "512kb ought to be enough for anybody".
Of course, we did this in Aberdeen, Scotland, three years ago using Cat 5 and a 128k leased line. Out the window of the flat where the line came in, back in my window, a floor below. There were other people going to be added in as well. Never quite got the cable across the street though. Wireless would have been great for that.
This actually really works, on a lot of things - including murder! I saw something on A&E, a program called (I think) "Cold Case Files"...
Basically, there was this case of a small town in which this very bad individual (I think he was a serial killer or murder/rapist, something) kept eluding the law, and settled (I believe) in his hometown, where the shit began anew. The police and the law were having a hard time getting anything on the guy, and when they did, he always seemed to get out on bail or something, and resume his ways.
He essentially had the entire town scared for their lives - no one would go out after dark, and everyone kept a gun near them.
One day, the town "boys" got together to discuss what to do, how they could get rid of the guy - drive him out of town or something. Just as the meeting was getting underway, one guy popped in and told them that the man was at the local bar (apparently the favorite watering hole). All the men in the meeting grabbed their guns, and drove over to the bar...
They all walked into the bar, the suspected murderer was still there. He noticed what was going on, decided to pay his tab, and leave. He walked out, and what happened next is "conjecture"...
Apparently, several shots were heard, the police arrived, and the suspected murdered was found shot in the front seat of his car. Stone cold dead.
The FBI was called in, and everyone at the bar was questioned. Every last one of them said they were hiding when they heard the shots. The FBI continued the questioning, eventually questioning nearly every person in the town. Everyone gave the same story - nobody knew or seen nuthin'!
The FBI knew that the "town" had murdered that man, regardless of his guilt or innocence in the crimes he supposedly committed - however, with everybody backing each other up, there was nothing they could do, nobody they could arrest. They never found the murder weapon, either.
As far as the problems the town was having prior (murders/rapes)? They stopped...
Needless to say, that is one town that you don't cross...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
i'm worried about this phenomenon being snuffed out... there are so many angles to how it could be killed: spectrum rights, terms-of-use, 802.11 security...
i live in manhattan... does anybody want to get together with me and try to propose to city hall that these entities should be legally protected? do it fast and stealthily enough, with the right level of positive community mojo, and it could sneak under the radar of the huge corporations with vested interests and reversing it would only be a pr embarassment for them...
people have water at home, sometimes metered, they buy bottled water, but everyone is used to the idea of the free public water fountain. why should it be any different with these little cells?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
These groups will start when -you- start them. Become invloved, get a bunch of people together than want this, pool your money, use the free technology available out there to make it happen.
I don't really see how, to an ISP, this is any different a beast from splicing cables. They're both taking a single resource with the expectation of one person using it, and turning it into a shared pool.
That's precisely what it is - "stealing" cable access by offering it to people other than the account holder. It's rather like college students in dorms or off-campus housing quietly setting up home networks off one cable line, instead of doing the honest thing and letting the ISP know what they're up to.
First, I can guarantee that these wireless pirate networks will be disconnected very, very soon; ISPs will not stand to see their own bandwidth and equipment costs skyrocket because some freeloaders are abusing someone else's connection. Second, there will be much whining and screaming from said freeloaders, claiming they were doing nothing wrong, when in fact it's almost certain the ISP contract clearly states that a customer cannot use their service to offer Internet access to others. Third, I bet you'll almost never actually see one of the piraters actually go out, lease a T3 or something from a backbone provider, and cover the costs of setup and maintenance of a legal wireless freenet. Why spend that kind of money, when one can simply abuse a cable connection and Fight The Man?
No, corporations shouldn't be allowed to swallow wireless spectrums whole, but if you can't do it legally, don't do it at all. You're only hurting yourself, your ISP, your users, and any future attempts to set up a legit service. Seriously, grow up.
There are motley crews beaming no-cost broadband in several dozen cities around the world. Unless they've managed to slather the entire Lower East Side with access points and get a fair number of end-user type participants, what the hell is so special about New York's version of this idea?
I'm doing this in Chicago (things are moving slowly). My personal favorites in the community wireless world are Seattle Wireless and Green Bay Professional Packet Radio (GBPPR has some great tech and a very experimental bent, but they won't give you the time of day unless you can convert mw to dBm in your head... fine with me).
The way DSL is going, I can't wait for stuff like this to pick up some momentum.
I like to play children's songs in minor keys.
"We're all sons of bitches now." --J. Robert Oppenheimer
Actually you pay for a lot less then that bandwidth costs your ISP, they like all other flat rate consumer/small business ISPs make assumptions about the amount of idle bandwidth and buy far less bandwidth out of their colo/POP/HUB then their customers buy into it. Much higher prices are charged to folks who buy the right to resell the connections because the ISP needs to allocate more bandwidth out of their colo/POP/HUB.
You do (probably) have the right to use all the bits you can push up and down the line, but (probably) no resale rights. Who knows what counts as a resale though.
Is it a resale if I don't charge money (say it is my home DSL connection, and a friend comes over with a laptop...or someone I don't know parks in my driveway)? What if I don't charge money for bandwidth, but I'm selling coffee? What if I'm not selling coffee, but merely the right to come onto my property, where 802.11 just happens to be set up?
Anyway if "freenets" become popular, and get charged the same amount "normal" home DSL connections are charged, it will have to push up the prices for "normal" home DSL connections (assuming the current prices don't have much profit margin -- which seems likely given the number of bankruptcies in that area)
Urban wireless cells are nice, but you obviously need to have a landline at some point. Immediately you run into the problem of dependency on DSL or leased-line services that may or may not permit line-sharing in the TOS. What's the next step? Get off the landline. Us urbanites need to get in touch with our suburban and hillbilly roots, and convince them to run repeaters in order to connect multiple metropolitan areas. Really.
Here's the deal: I'm in Seattle. I looked at the Seattle Wireless map, and I could plug into the local network and just be another bump on the freeloading log. Or I could use the fact that I'm on one of the highest points in the city, and run a long-haul repeater w/~15mi range to a relative's place north of Federal Way, from there ~15mi to my brother-in-law in Tacoma, then I only need to find one willing person to bridge the haul to my in-laws in Olympia. What, four more hops to Portland? I've got more freinds and relatives down there too. Likewise, it's only a half a dozen hops north to Vancouver BC. It may not be much of a service to start, but it won't take much either.
Frankly, this is how McCaw Cellular (now AT&T Wireless, my former employer) built much of the North American Cellular Network (NACN). McCaw bought up ~200+ local operating companies, put in *tiny* connections between them to optimize the expensive traffic, wrote software to dump local traffic where it was cheapest, and the rest was marketing (hence the "NACN" name). It is very much within the realm of possibility to do this successfully.
I think the participation & sustainability problems can be turned around the other way -- instead of people on the wireless freenet only wanting to get off and connect out, it should be possible to build enough resources & self-sufficiency on the wireless network that people want to get into the freenet. Convince a few major businesses that there is revinue to be had by participating (just as commercial endeavors on the web were initially driven by sales of geek toys to geeks) and combine that with a rich geek participatory network mesh, and you have the foundation for a sustainable infrastructure.
Jon
I think not...(*poof*)
What I'm wondering about this is how Townshend expects to support more than a few people on that connection. Let's just say he has cable. If 1 person is playing Counter-Strike, or any bandwidth intensive game for that matter, and has 5 other people surfing the net, this guy won't have any bandwidth to spare.
And mind you, this is all coming from his own peronsal line. I don't know many people who would just go ahead and give away bandwidth to anyone for the hell of it. Regardless, for this kind of thing to happen everywhere would constitute either a huge non-profit organization with lots of funds, or government sponsoring...
--NovaScorpio
Matt
Wouldn't it be nice if these wireless networks became ubiquitous enough that you could use IP telephony software on a handheld as a replacement for cell phones... No roaming and 1440 anytime minutes / day ; )
This style of 'rebel' tech reminds me of some of the philosophics of Hakim Bey and the Temporary Autonomous Zones line of thinking.
'Cellular' resistance...
No one person on the network is allowed to take up too much bandwidth. I could just picture some teen downloading 20 songs simultainiously off of Napster, while 10 other people are trying to share the bandwidth and getting dial up speeds. They should set up a QOS system, where each person gets a minimum amount of bandwidth, but is still allowed to burst to whatever they might need.
These "30 volunteers" would soon be branded as "30 inmates" if this ever got popular. Why? they're playing with a cool new technology at the bandwidth expense of of their educational and/or corporate providers.
From the article:
So basically what he's doing is leeching off of NYU's pipes to anyone with a wireless card. Maybe I should look for real estate in his area.
Any college Dorm Network Administrator can tell you how expensive reliable bandwidth is. Last month an unchecked DiVX FTP site here at Rutgers trafficked nearly 15 gigs A DAY, costing the university almost 10 grand in surcharges due to it's "bursty-bandwidth" contract. In short, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Due to its relatively low profile, this wireless project has and will continue to avoid radar screens in city NOCs. Apparently many people dont feel the need to download porn while sitting on park benches :). If they ever do, you can bet people like Mr. Townsend will be disciplined by IT staff, if not fired outright for violating some school network tenet.
Mine says the same thing... luckily neither my computer or my cable modem will physically be connected to anything outside of my premises!
Are YOU listed?
And boy, do I use it. When my cable access in Toronto goes down, and I am in Asia or at the office, I telnet to a nearby TCP/IP gateway, then telnet to my hambox node via packet!
And all my email goes out: the gateway is also a mail gateway. Anyway, see www.mvw.net/radio
Oh, and I connected to the ISS (Space station) for the first time recently.
The ampr. org (44.) has plenty of IP's left. So all hurry up and get your ham radio license!
Michael
---
BDOS ERR ON A:>