[bestbits] Net Neutrality in the next Internet

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hello Willi,

Do find inset

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:53 PM, willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> I send my proposal to Netmundial / 1Net entitled "Internet, the
> inter-connection of local net-works" along with 3 contributions to the
> debate on the lists. Perhaps new members are on these lists who have not
> yet read the text.
>
> All specific answers and the discussion you find in the archive of the
> list:
> www.1net.org Mailing List Archive
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/
>

You seem to have referenced the whole mailing list. Not sure that would be
helpful to someone interested in reading your proposal.


>
> Only the principles covered in this proposal. Not the questions of, how we
> can organize this in material form.
>

Maybe that is the problem; the principles may not be as helpful in this
situation especially as they are written by an individual. Since you wrote
the principles, it will be quite logical for you to also provide at least a
rough hypothesis of the "HOW"


>
> In this case something else comes to the foreground. The free technology,
> that is free available to all people of our planet and arises from the free
> cooperation of free people, who want to participate.
>
> The free technology rests on "think globally, act locally" and "Knowledge
> is always world heritage". We turn not to private or public institutions,
> but only to the people directly. No matter where and how they live.
>

There are quite a number of thinking globally but acting local initiative
existing out there...typical examples includes the IXes, RENs, tech Hubs
etc. However there is a basic fact - which is that there is always some
level of cost associated, so the word "free" is relative and its not
something that can be applicable to technology literal manner simply
because technology is not a natural resource.

Cheers!

>
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works
> Datum: Sun, 04 May 2014 01:00:13 -0600
> Von: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
> An: 1net discuss <discuss at 1net.org>
>
> Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works
>
> Dear friends,
>
> from the final document of NetMundial we can see, that this organization
> has no interest to strongly support the self-organization of the people for
> their global communication systems. Rather, institutions are installed to
> continue the principles of monopolization and representation.
>
> Now I want to submit my proposal for a real Internet in this discussion
> group.
>
> 1) The local networks
>
> The Internet is nothing more then the connection of local, independent
> networks. They have at least one server, which is connected to the local
> router and this router connects to the adjacent networks.
>
> These local networks have a maximum of sovereignity and independenence,
> because they maintain all the necessary resources and functions locally.
> These local networks are organized by the local people themselves.
>
> 2) The inter-connection of local net-works
>
> The Internet rests on three levels.
>
> a) connection of the adjacent local networks
> b) the regional network of regional centers
> c) the global network of regional centers
>
> The technology is based primarily on directed microwave radio links. The
> components are manufactured locally or regionally.
>
> All types of data are transported. Text, graphics and speech. This
> eliminates all separate instances for the data transport.
>
> The transport capacities are symmetric in principle. Thus, each client
> can themselves act as a server.
>
> 3) The IP address
>
> The IP address is derived from the geographical position in the world
> coordinate system. We use 64-bit for global and 64-bit for local
> address. Because the world coordinate system WK84 is distributed
> asymmetrically, we should strive for a symmetrical system of
> coordinates. Maybe it already exists.
>
> The routing (geo-routing) is based on the destination address of the
> packet relative to the position of the router. From the distance and the
> angle wc can easy make the decisions.
>
> This eliminates all institutions, which deal with the management of
> number spaces and routing. There is no Internet governance more. It is
> not necessary.
>
> Conclusions
>
> This concept rests on the responsibility to all people on our planet.
> Only if they can operate at a most independently locally or regionally
> level, our global communication system can arise. People are important
> and not the institutions.
>
> It also follows, that we have to manufacture the hardware components
> local and regional self. Any form of incapacitation of people by private
> or public institutions is terminated. But this is only possible if we
> determine the technology itself and organize itself. We do this
> according to the principle: Think globally, act locally.
>
> many greetings in solidarity, willi uebelherr
> Quetzaltenango, Guatemala
>
>
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: [discuss] Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works
> Datum: Sun, 04 May 2014 22:37:43 -0600
> Von: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
> An: 1net discuss <discuss at 1net.org>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> I am very grateful for the constructive responses. In particular, the
> critical questions are important. They force us to organize our thinking
> and to substantiate our views.
>
> In this response, I will deal only with the philosophical basis for my
> proposal. Some answers are originated from a different orientation. In a
> second response I want to discuss some technical aspects that are
> general in nature. Special reviews and questions I want to answer
> specifically, as far as I am able.
>
> The background
>
> We can distinguish two extremal poles.
> a) we support the desire from all people to a free communication
> b) we use the communication requirements in order to realize our own
> interests.
>
> To a) I stand and many members of this list.
>
> To b) stay all those for which the current structures and organizations
> are important. Be it to stabilize their jobs or to secure their
> livelihood in any other form. But it is also important to organize
> governance and to try anything that the people in the regions can not
> organize independently. And therefore are not in a position to shape
> their communication system itself. As part of the many actors worldwide.
>
> As in all questions of constructive design also flow into our principles
> of the design of our communication systems our philosophical
> orientations and ultimately determine our methods. We always have to
> deal with limitations in the technical possibilities. But from the
> contradiction between target and condition arise the driving forces.
>
> This also applies to those for which the needs for communication are
> only objects for their money-oriented actions.
>
> In general I formulate the following development principles:
> a) massively decentralized
> b) massively parallel
> c) massively redundant
>
>  From that directly follows that our global communication system rests
> on independent local networks. It also follows that the people in the
> regions concerned in parallel with the development of technical
> components that they need for their communication systems. And it also
> follows that the capacity should be well above the maximum demand.
>
> The current restrictions are primarily the monopolization of knowledge
> and a specific concentration of technical infrastructures. But these
> restrictions have no inherent legitimacy. They are the result of
> constructive design.
>
> Where the boundaries lie for distributed and parallel development of the
> necessary technical components, we do not know. But we know that
> diversity is an essential prerequisite for a strong development.
>
> We are inevitably confronted with the private appropriation of human
> knowledge. This is not a problem for me, because for me knowledge is
> always world heritage. This eliminates all the justifications for legal
> systems to patents and licenses. This is because basically our
> individual knowledge rests on the knowledge of our ancestors and
> contemporaries.
>
> Because not the needs of the people to free communication are the
> foundation in the technical development of components for communications
> systems, but the interests of capital utilization, there are no reasonable
> technological systems. Therefore, we can never make the present state of
> the technology to the basis of our discussion.
>
> Communication is always bidirectional. It also follows that we consider
> in our technical terminology the client and server as a unit. In our
> direct verbal communication, we also do this. Technically that's not a
> problem.
>
> If we treat our connection paths for data transport such as public
> roads, which everyone can use, then we immediately see the massive
> limitations. Again, there is no technical reason. Always the people in
> the local regions make their paths and trails usable for guests.
>
> Communication takes place primarily locally and regionally. In families,
> between friends and colleagues. Therefore, it is natural to organize our
> technical communication systems locally and regionally. This eliminates
> much of the meaningless data transports.
>
> I will summarize it briefly. We focus on the needs. We decentralize and
> parallelize our activities for the construction of the components for
> our global communication systems. We cooperate worldwide. We help each
> other worldwide. We can do this because we have the same needs for a
> free communication worldwide.
>
> Many greetings in solidarity, willi uebelherr
> Quetzaltenango, Guatemala
>
>
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: [discuss] Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works
> Datum: Thu, 15 May 2014 20:41:17 -0600
> Von: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
> An: 1net discuss <discuss at 1net.org>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> for the delay in my second reply I beg your pardon. In this response, I
> will discuss some basic technical issues that were discussed in some
> answers.
>
> 1) The local responsibility for the whole.
>
> In money-oriented, capitalist environments there is no responsibility
> for the whole. Only the quantum of money-flows are crucial. The fact
> that this discussion is about communication is for that actors secondary.
>
> In user-oriented environments, the whole is always the basis for the
> individual. The communication requires the action of at least two
> partners. From the interest of a free and unfettered communication for
> ourselves necessarily follows the interest in free and unfettered
> communication for the other.
>
> 2) Geographical or virtual location.
>
> There is no virtual locality. Location is always defined geographically.
> Every person may define their own terminology. Whether they however can
> enter into a communication depends on the willingness of others.
>
>  From the clear determination of a locality follows the clear
> determination of the address of a location. It is the geographical
> location. And this is only necessary to transport a data packet as
> desired from one location to another.
>
> 3) Multicasting
>
> With unique addresses no multicasting is possible. It is not the task of a
> transport system for data packets to multiply them. This task will
> always have the transmitter.
>
> However, it is technically very easy to activate in regional and local
> node dynamic distribution server, which then multiply a package for
> distribution. One example is mail distribution or streaming server.
>
> 4) Transport types.
>
> There are only 2 types of transportation. Asynchronous and synchronous.
> Due to the time requirements of synchronous packets this are preferred.
> They are usually smaller. They are like kids who aspire between the legs
> of the adults to the front. Or even like dogs, they will always find a way.
> Even with a large storage of adults.
>
> Within the synchronous packets, we distinguish those for emergency
> calls, which are always given preferential treatment. All others have to
> wait.
>
> 5) Server instances
>
> We do not distinguish between specific clients or servers. Each node can
> always be both. If two communication partners have the functionality for
> client and server, the packets flow directly from one partner to the other.
> Between are just transport nodes. But these are only interested on the IP
> header. The content remains closed as in a letter.
>
>  From this symmetry of the operators, the requirement for symmetry of
> the transport capacity directly follows. And since each local network
> also has a central server node, all those they do not wish to maintain
> her own server can outsource their requirements. Because the server
> management is not a major technical problem, most end nodes in the
> network will evolve to Client/Server instances.
>
> Central server structures such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Hotmail,
> Yahoo and any else will dissolve. They are unnecessary. The data remain
> decentralized, as they always are. How we make visible the decentralized
> distributed data on our client, it is entirely another topic.
>
> 6) backbones and ISP's.
>
> Such designs are not necessary for us, because they are technically not
> required. In the discussion "African take on Net Neutrality" we can see
> with what nonsense people play, because they can not construct her
> network. They are fence-sitters that are not allowed to go inside. They
> have to stay before the fence and can only use a few doors.
>
> 7) Transport technologies
>
> In my proposal I pointed out that today's technical limitations can
> never be the basis for this discussion. What methods we use has little
> to do with the discussion on principles. It is primarily a question of
> rational knowledge. It remains free to continue today's nonsense in the
> future.
>
> We can look at the technologies for data transport as a global community
> task. This corresponds to their real content for a global and free
> communication system, in which all people in our small world want to be
> involved. Or at least most of them.
>
> 8) Mobile communication partner.
>
> Each mobile communication device contacts over a local access point to
> the global communication system. And this will not change because there
> is a physical constraint for it. Thus, each mobile communications
> partner have the global address of the local access point.
>
> Always the same applies to moving equipment. We disconnect and make a
> new connection, or vice versa. A simple method.
>
> 9) The analogy to the street.
>
> Our transport system for data packets is comparable to the transport
> systems on the road. There are community responsibilities because they
> are important for communities.
>
> 10) State, private companies and Comunas.
>
> In my design, I am guided for the local communities, the Comunas. States
> and private companies are not important, because they are not really
> necessary. Communication always takes place between people and not between
> virtual, not real structures.
>
> Local communities realy exist. States and companies exist only in the
> imagination. That's why I do not concern myself with it.
>
> The need for worldwide communication exists in reality. It is a basic
> need of people to contact each other, share ideas and experiences. So,
> if we omit the foreign interests, eliminate their material bases by
> making them superfluous, our action spaces are wide open and freely
> accessible to go inside.
>
> A summary.
>
> In our considerations we need to make the focus to that what we want to
> achieve. We disolve all dogmas. If we want a world-wide communication
> for all people, then we should also make this the subject of our
> thinking. With side scenes, we need not concern ourselves.
>
> Many greetings in solidarity, willi uebelherr
> Jinotepe, Nicaragua
>
>
>
> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Betreff: Re: [discuss] Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works
> Datum: Fri, 23 May 2014 17:18:34 -0600
> Von: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
> An: discuss at 1net.org <discuss at 1net.org>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> this discussion now focuses on the question:
>
> Direct or indirect addressing in the Internet?
>
> But this question we can answer only if we understand the requirements
> of the data packet transport properly.
>
> The transport of data packets is a geographical task because origin and
> destination in communication are at different geographical locations.
> Otherwise, these questions would not arise. It makes no sense to apply
> the methods of internal addressing of CPU's, because it is a completely
> different tasks in a completely different environment.
>
> When we realize what to do in order to transport data packets and what
> information is necessary so that the packets even reach their goal, then
> it becomes very easy.
>
> Andrew has taken leave with great speech from this discussion.
>
> He wrote:
> "Today, on the actual Internet we have, if I am the registrant of an IP
> address range and I move my data centre from one location to another, I
> make a new announcement and everyone can find me automatically".
>
> Because he does not understand the content of DNS processes, he also
> does not know what lies behind the facade of his "announcement". But he
> acts as if he would be familiar.
>
> Meanwhile, we have several examples of supposed experts on this list who
> do not understand the contents of that of which they speak.
>
> JFC Morfin (Jefsey) has disappointed me a little. He knows very well the
> history of the Internet, he knows many names. But is this sufficient? If we
> do not develop our own criteria, then it is better that we go to the
> church. Like small child we can run behind the religious dogmas. Luis
> Pouzin put it clearly in his texts to the catenet. Never stand the physical
> requirements in the foreground. At that time the project was stopped
> because the telecommunication companies of the different state were afraid
> of a possible loss of their monopoly position. They prefer the X25 protocol.
>
> The main forces for indirect addressing in the Internet are government
> intelligence agencies and the military authorities; public or private.
> And it seems like their needs were always the most important in the last
> 40-50 years. There are not helpful many names of famous people.
>
> Luis Pouzin was also fixed to the indirect addressing. Following of that
> was developed such illustrious names such as "Virtual Geo Network". Each
> person can build such a virtual network if they want. Even virtual
> communities of any kind. But we never allowed to make this nonsense to the
> base.
>
> The same is true for the pseudo-model OSI. Each person can think up to
> any models. But models always remain just perceptions. They arise from
> the attempt to outline the reality. But the determining factor is the
> reality itself and not the idea of reality.
>
> I can only hope that something more consciousness arises in this circle
> about the reality. But based on my experience in so many threads in this
> list I have big doubts. At least until the more passive reader
> interfere. Then could also Luis Pouzin participate in the discussion.
>
> The geo-routing come today through the backdoor in again. In dynamic
> meshnets of mobile devices without local access points, the geo-routing
> has proven to be advantageous. Also a military line of research.
>
> Even if that is not the issue here. We should think about, how we can
> disolve all kinds of military worldwide. Then we have a lot less
> problems in our lives. And not only in the internet.
>
> Many greetings in solidarity, willi uebelherr
> Jinotepe, Nicaragua
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20150309/586de5d8/attachment.htm>