Upping The Softmodem Code Bounty -- To $20,000

Alex Pilosov writes: "I've announced a bounty for completion of softmodem code (20k$) on linmodems-discuss list. If this is successfully completed, we'll have a completely universal driver for any kind of winmodem without any proprietary code which result in all sorts of kernel version problems." Here's the full text of the announcement and conditions.

Comments

Reasons why this would be interesting!

[denisb]

Can't people figure out the following reasons for such a project being interesting ?

- Low cost internet station for places out of reach of xDSL / cable modem connections.
- Viable internet connection for legacy hardware / second hand hardware
- Excellent solution for development countries where xDSL is faar away yet.

The keywords here are LOW and COST.. Did you ever consider that Linux and second hand hardware might be the ultimate combination for places where they don't have as much cash as yourselves ?

d9s

Re:high price for a modem

[Kraft]

think laptops...

I have a thinkpad t21, and from what I have read, one of the common linux problems with this laptop is bad modem support. As I use this machine on the road from time to time, I want that modem to work (hotels, friends house etc.) and if it doesn't it will be a deterrent to install linux.

I do think you are right in suposing that many linux fans are early adopters, but what I find interesting is the possibility of more "regular" users switching to linux, because of proper hardware support and thus: ease of use.

Re:restrictions?

[krokodil]

You MUST have background in signal processing

Dear Mr. Torvalds,

We could not permit your so-called "operating system" to use GNU license because you do not have proven experience in the operating system design and your background is not sufficient. In order to satisfy our customers,
and maintain high project code quiality, we accept contributions only from candidates who have experience in the particular area and passed interview with some of our managers.

(signed)
Free Software Foundaiton

Patents on modem algorithms?

[dido]

I'm just wondering if perhaps someone has patented the algorithms used to drive these soft modems. A Free Software implementation of a soft modem driver will thus be in violation of the patent then. As far as I can tell the ITU, the standards body that defines these modem standards, allows what the W3C calls RAND licensing, as they state in patent policy (excerpt):

2 If an ITU-T Recommendation is developed and such information as referred to in paragraph 1 [patents and other intellectual property claims], three different situations may arise:

2.1 The patent holder waives his rights; hence, the Recommendation is freely accessible to everybody, subject to no particular conditions, no royalties are due, etc.

2.2 The patent holder is not prepared to waive his rights but would be willing to negotiate licenses with other parties on a non-discriminatory basis on reasonable terms and conditions. Such negotiations are left to the parties concerned and are performed outside the ITU-T. [emphasis mine]

2.3 The patent holder is not willing to comply with the provisions of either paragraph 2.1 or paragraph 2.2; in such case, no Recommendation can be established.

It's paragraph 2.2 that worries me. If any patents exist on the modem standards implemented by soft modems that are thus RAND-licensable, any GPL implementation is impossible. I believe some of the compression algorithms used in some of the modem standards are already known to be patented, such as the infamous LZW compression algorithm held by Unisys that has caused the huge flap over GIF's a couple of years back.

How do we know that this is genuine?

[HuskyDog]

I don't want to be rude, but how do we know that this guy will produce the money? Can anyone we trust vouch for him?

Perhaps if he placed a deposit with some trusted third party (Mad Dog, Eric Raymond etc) people might be happier to devote the time.

Re:Bounty won't matter much.

[pjrc]

A couple years ago I designed a product with an embedded modem (H8800-1 at this page). I used a rockwell chip and associated components, which is a hardware modem.

Device is the keyword here, and the device (winmodem) has already been certified. The software driving the device doesn't need certification.

This may not true. When we tested the H8800-1 for FCC part 68 compliance, the test was for the whole system. We had to provide ways for them to access the modem to test both originate and answer modes (though the H8800-1 only answers and never originates). We had to do this, despite the fact that the signals were all generated by the Rockwell chip.

However, the majority of the trouble with FCC part 68 is the surge tests. The basic idea behind these tests is to apply a massive surge on the line which is certain to destroy the modem. The modem is required to fail in a manner where it does not conduct, so it looks like it's on-hook (not in use) to the phone network. This is purely a function of the hardware. The lab we sent the prototypes to did many other tests, but they were all pretty easy to pass (using the rockwell chip).

Reading through these regularity requirement documents is a mind-numbing experience (if you can stay awake). If you're feeling maschoistic, here is the page for requesting the Part 68 technical requirements. If anyone takes the time to actually read and make some sense out of this stuff, please post your informed opinions. Part 68 applies only to the US, so repeat for whatever other countries you're interested in...

Re:problems

[pubjames]

M$ has convinced many hardware makers that M$'s method of code breaking and bloat are the only way to drive new hardware sales.

I think this probably underestimates the sophistication of thinking at hardware manufacturers, and the diversity of the market.

Take, for instance, the 3D computer graphics sector. I am sure Intel was very pleased when Microsoft started to make a big drive to get NT used by companies in the 3D graphics production/rendering market, because they regularly buy lots of boxes. However, I bet they are even happier now that NT/Windows is no longer seen as attractive in this sector, and everyone is moving to Linux. Why? Because now they can add features to their chips that make them more attractive to this sector, and release the code as Open Source to stimulate need and uptake. They tried to do something similar before with Windows, but MS firmly stamped on their efforts.