Slashdot Mirror
Lanlink Linking The Coasts
Dan Bricker writes "A guy in Parma Heights, Ohio has a website to promote an idea of linking the east coast to the west coast using standard off-the-shelf 802.11 equipment. He is aiming for a July 4th, 2006 first coast-to-coast ping. This project appears to be totally volunteer based, With no other stated reason than fun with pringle cans and bad weather, and do it just to do it. Can this be done? What real world applications does this have?"
I was a Junior High student when they proposed hands across America, and it was stated it was impossible. As I recall it came off mostly intact. I seem to recall some guffaw about a gap or two, but in general it happened.
Question: Can we, the geeks, mobilize as well as that? My own sedentary nature tends to lead me to be pessimistic.
Yes. No. I would think the time and effort could be better spent trying specifically to get broadband (or at least WiFi) net access to rural areas.
Michael C. Hollinger
is now obsolete... And I just spent the past 15 minutes learning all the stupid glyphs!
Webmaster Wanted - Entropic Reactions
A group of amatures has decided to prevent future energy problems in California. The plan is to route extension cords, connected serially, to California from a power plant on the east coast. When asked if the extension cords could handle the force, they said that it wasn't for everyone, mainly a proof of concept. They made no comment to the argument that there wouldn't be hardly any current left in California. They are taking donations of extension cords of all kinds. "Just as long as it has a ground pluggy thing"
Ok, as we all know there are some pretty desolate regions of the US. Now it would be possible to throw a bunch of routers in the middle of the desert, but they would have to be battery powered or something. The most significant problem would be getting everything to work correctly without even a single down router. Assuming each router covers a tenth of a mile, you'd need about 30,000 routers to make it across the US. Dozens will break or have problems every day, so you'll need at least two per site. That means a total of 60,000 roters. At $100 each that brings the total to $6 million. The battery powered routers for the desert will obviously be more expensive though. Also you'd have to stop people from stealing these somehow, which would be a serious problem.
In conclusion, it would be really hard and really expensive to do this, but it is possible.
Creating ex-temp webs like this might assist insurance adjusters and other computer-needing personnel to work better in emergency hot zones... it would be nice if a company out there started manufacturing the "cans" for emergency use and the FCC made some modifications to the rules for emergency usage ... so every little town could have a few "wi-fi" kits in storage to chain up when a hurricane has leveled everything.. you could also throw some authentication mechanisms on the idea and build a quick "emergency VoIP network" the same way.
Just a thought from the thoughtbrew:
www.bigattichouse.com
meh
Something like 70% of internet backbone is owned by half a dozen companies. The RIAA & co are putting increasing pressure on businesses and universities, and backbone providers may be next.
The Government is, frankly, outright hostile to many forms of free expression, and some basic civil rights we've come to take for granted (abortion rights, for starters, never mind the Bill of Rights).
This project may teach valuable lessons about using open standards to form a non-owned, alternative internet backbone.
Hexayurt - open source refugee shelter,
invest in some blue chip stock, but I think I'll ivest in some obscure potato chip company instead. :p
The real world application is, perhaps, psychological: getting people to realize that with a bit of effort each, we can all be networked to each other at high speed WITHOUT paying some company OR government for the privelege of just moving data around using equipment we own and airwaves that belong to everyone.
Read the last paragraph.
Requirements - May not at any point attach to the real Internet. To be part of LL, a member must abide by any rules or guidelines laid out. In order for a project of this magnatude to work, there must be standards and rules followed.
He's trying to set up a network, not an ISP. There are myriad reasons not to connect this project to "The Real Internet", both legal and technical.
Your hope of open hotspots for WWW surfing and hacking etc. will likely go un-apeased by jumping on this network, unless of course it proves so popular that it becomes a "Second Internet".
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
It depends on what the gain and such is of the antenna. With an omni, maybe, but with a wave-guide cantenna you are probably safe.
See here for details
Besides, I think this is definately more doable that hands across america. With the possible exception of the rockies/cascades etc, just set up some cantenna's, and aim it off into the horizon. With GPS and such, it should be easy to coordinate. A handful of people at each horizon, should do it... How far away is the horizon anyways? I know I can see the buildings in downtown from here, and its like 20 miles from here.
"Second Internet" - Man, how cool would that be... a completely underground (reverse pun intended... gettit... it's overgrou... oh never mind) Internet, detatched from the 'real' one...
In case of an all out war, the 'real' internet may be shut down, but this air based one could keep on keeping on... although without electricity after the war, only as long as all the laptop batteries lasted... so really only about 1 hour after the strike... just long enough for the users to start a thread:
"Woh! What was that?"
"Dunno... kinda bright though"
"Dude... I think this is bad"
"Yup"
"BBFN"
Reality: Assume the project works. They get it done, have a party, and so on. Then what? It's either put to use, or mothballed. And all those people with all that equipment will want to do something with it. Making a hotspot is a natural move.
And even if it is put to use, for what? A private community? People will be all over this network like white on rice, rules or no. It may not be connected to the internet by a member, but someone will hook it all together.
Or, say the project fails. You've still got the same situation, but if anything, with more drive. You've got lots of people, with lots of equipment, who are stinging from failure. Setting up a hotspot would be a natural move toward some sense of "Well, at least I accomplished something.
best web host ever
Indeed... However, all it takes is one internet uplink and the packets will get through. It doesn't take much, just one computer with a wireless card, that also happens to be connected to the internet. Perhaps this will happen enough that there will be constant connectivity.
It might gain popularity, but it's fundamental design prohibits anything resembling the current internet. It is imposible to get a world-wide network without commercial backing, and the free-ness of this would eliminate much profit. Also, rural areas would be completely cut off.
Perhaps more importantly, this network would be verymuch unreliable... $20 in equipment to make a device that interrupts all 802.11b/g signals in the area. That's not going to be a good thing if EBAY wants to put a site up...
About the only thing this network would be good for is P2P applications... Gnutella would do just fine, since it can handle hosts disconnecting, can download from multiple sources, and most importantly, people don't demand real-time connectivity, so being off-line for a short time wouldn't be much of a problem.
Add to that the fact that your connection is free, faster than 99% of internet connections, and doesn't really need to be used for anything else at the same time, and it all indicates Gnutella would do very very well.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
He is aiming for a July 4th, 2006 first coast-to-coast ping.
Considering the latency, I'd aim for July 4th, 5th, and 6th.
Please donate your spare CPU cycles to help fight cancer and other diseases
No more pringles cans.
I was recently involved in a fairly casual discussion of how to create a WAN link between computer labs at two different campuses of a university in Ghana. The main campus, in the capital city of Akra (sp?) has a limited satellite connection to the Internet costing something around a few thousand a month, supposedly. None of the other three campuses have or can afford a similar connection. This isn't a big enough gateway to share WWW access, but a WAN could allow Intranet and Internet-based email, as well as Intranet sites, file sharing, and perhaps even VoIP to augment the poor phone systems.
So the big problem was how to set up this connection. The telco system apparently isn't too good; only around 400 new lines are added per year, so getting ahold of a large number of leased lines would be virtual impossible. Obviously, setting up an independent wired backbone is financially out of the question. So we started toying with the idea of a WiFi link, which seemed like the only possibility.
The only problem is that if we are trying to set up a 200km link (between the main campus and one in the north; I don't recall the name of the city) we would need repeaters in some remote areas without consistent power, not to mention having to plot good line-of-site and build fairly secure base stations. What we realised was that we could attempt to piggyback the existing private cell-phone infrastructure. There is a cell system spanning the north and south, which means a stable backbone, on which we can either rent data bandwidth (probably expensive) or, better yet, on who's repeater stations (probably microwave antennas) we could rent physical space.
Our informal conclusion was that the University should consider renting space on repeater stations for their own WiFi hubs and create a WAN using long-distance line-of-site connections with off-the-shelf, inexpensive WiFi components. Projects like this pave the way to practical, inexpensive applications of WiFi technology.
Are we talking about a giant, shared, 10mbs pipe across the US that we could all use together? Wow, that would really last for at least 10 seconds. Talk about /. effect....
The routes:
Eastern Section
Central Section
Western Section
Interesting side note: I was looking at the area around my hometown of San Antonio, TX (on the Central map) and noticed a spur of the route leading to LBJ's ranch near Blanco/Johnson City Texas. These tower routes were designed to facilitate cross-country communications for the public but they also had a wartime mission--keeping the President in commo during WW3.
I meant other than the max power for the license. Since my license says that I can transmit at 1500 W on almost band I please with a few exceptions, I assume that I can also do that in the microwave range. They don't expressly limit it, therefore, it is the maximum for the license.
Of course, it isn't exactly smart since 1500 W at 2.4 GHz would most likely boil all water within quite an impressive distance in a few seconds.
that was one example of a network whose structure could handle host disconnects. also freenet, which has redundancy built into its design. and gnutella, as you point out.
all of these essentially use P2P as their structure, but fidonet and freenet remind us that P2P-the-structure has a far wider range of uses than just downloading mp3's. right now the internet dominates "cause it's there" but even its structure was historically envisioned (by some, anyway) as much more decentralized than it is now. as it moves toward centralization it becomes increasingly unsatisfactory for many purposes, and momentum grows to build and use alternative, decentralized structures.
Standard 802.11b ethernet won't get this accomplished. There's no way. Can a packet ping from the east to west and back again in 255ms? with Wifi?
I don't think so. I think we should observe the way
Amature Radio Operators have ran packet radio stations. We'd need to write drivers that would
emulate a packet radio connection. There's will be
too many hops to implement a 802.11 WiFi solution.
We would have to go with packet switching.
We'd be able to use WiFi hardware, but all the drivers would need to be written to emulate packet switching.