[discuss] Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works
willi.uebelherr at gmail.com
Fri May 16 02:41:17 UTC 2014
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
More information about the discuss