3 ms·

Mesh networking + crypto seems to be an incredibly disruptive technology that I'm surprised hasn't seen wide market adoption. The technology obviously exists an

by TOMDM 11y ago

Mesh networking + crypto seems to be an incredibly disruptive technology that I'm surprised hasn't seen wide market adoption. The technology obviously exists and works, as it has been shown being used by protesters or in disaster relief areas. Why has this not been proliferated world over, from developing countries to cheap internet providers? (Not calling anyone lazy or stupid, I'm legitimately curious as to what social, technical or legal roadblocks must be holding this tech back)

grizzles 11y ago
I ran a mesh networking startup about 2 years ago. A few details about it are here: tricorder.org/eric/uplink.html. From my perspective, there are two main barriers: 1) It's hard to explain to customers who are used to the current ISP internet access paradigm. This barrier can be overcome. 2) Not only do you need to win customers, you need to win a critical mass of customers within a focused geographic area. #2 is very, very hard imo.
- contingencies 11y ago
  First up, good job writing up your idea in hindsight. I think it differs slightly from mesh networking on mobiles with high latency transfer expectations / custom apps fairly significantly. You were trying to provide the internet as a service for free in real time, I think the killer app is actually embracing store and forward again. For problem #1, if it works at the consumer level then I think people don't really care about how it works. For #2, I think the current model of 'use free wifi from coffee shops, hotels, bars, restaurants' that seems globally dominant would work fine.
superuser2 11y ago
1) Some participant in the mesh still has to buy transit from a real ISP at location that has good RF connectivity to some part of the mesh (preferably the geographical center). Unless they are operating out of altruism, they will need to charge money, inject ads, steal data, or some combination of the above. 2) If the usage pattern is primarily about internet connectivity, rather than local communication, then the nodes nearest the ISP would quickly become saturated with traffic. 3) If people can modify the software on their radios (and mesh networking is a very popular idea with the Free Software community) then they are Free not to waste their own resources altruistically forwarding traffic for others. You would need to design the incentive structure carefully. Probably some combinations of micro-payments, surge pricing/auction, and bitcoin. Otherwise a simple reputation system (bad "seed ratio"-type metric, no connectivity). 4) The big one. Mesh networking bridges the gap when you have A->B and B->C but not A->C. But if you are in a challenging enough RF environment that you don't have A->C then you probably don't have A->B and B->C either. RF is barely usable (if at all) without line of sight, and putting a repeater in the sky is a rock-solid method of getting line of sight. Hence it is the basis for all wide-area RF communications systems. Mesh improves upon certain arrangements of $35 Motorola FRS handhelds, but not all of them (whereas "repeater in the sky" architectures are unfazed). Peer-to-peer RF is cool when you are in RF-friendly environments doing mostly peer-to-peer traffic (not access to an ISP). It works in the places where it has always worked, where handheld radios without repeaters have always been useful. Protests and disaster recovery efforts are two such examples. Internet connectivity for the masses is a different beast.
- contingencies 11y ago
  It's not so much 'A-B and B-C' but rather 'A-B this week' and 'B-C next week'.

by TOMDM 11y ago

grizzles 11y ago

I ran a mesh networking startup about 2 years ago. A few details about it are here: tricorder.org/eric/uplink.html. From my perspective, there are two main barriers: 1) It's hard to explain to customers who are used to the current ISP internet access paradigm. This barrier can be overcome. 2) Not only do you need to win customers, you need to win a critical mass of customers within a focused geographic area. #2 is very, very hard imo.

contingencies 11y ago
First up, good job writing up your idea in hindsight. I think it differs slightly from mesh networking on mobiles with high latency transfer expectations / custom apps fairly significantly. You were trying to provide the internet as a service for free in real time, I think the killer app is actually embracing store and forward again. For problem #1, if it works at the consumer level then I think people don't really care about how it works. For #2, I think the current model of 'use free wifi from coffee shops, hotels, bars, restaurants' that seems globally dominant would work fine.

superuser2 11y ago

1) Some participant in the mesh still has to buy transit from a real ISP at location that has good RF connectivity to some part of the mesh (preferably the geographical center). Unless they are operating out of altruism, they will need to charge money, inject ads, steal data, or some combination of the above. 2) If the usage pattern is primarily about internet connectivity, rather than local communication, then the nodes nearest the ISP would quickly become saturated with traffic. 3) If people can modify the software on their radios (and mesh networking is a very popular idea with the Free Software community) then they are Free not to waste their own resources altruistically forwarding traffic for others. You would need to design the incentive structure carefully. Probably some combinations of micro-payments, surge pricing/auction, and bitcoin. Otherwise a simple reputation system (bad "seed ratio"-type metric, no connectivity). 4) The big one. Mesh networking bridges the gap when you have A->B and B->C but not A->C. But if you are in a challenging enough RF environment that you don't have A->C then you probably don't have A->B and B->C either. RF is barely usable (if at all) without line of sight, and putting a repeater in the sky is a rock-solid method of getting line of sight. Hence it is the basis for all wide-area RF communications systems. Mesh improves upon certain arrangements of $35 Motorola FRS handhelds, but not all of them (whereas "repeater in the sky" architectures are unfazed). Peer-to-peer RF is cool when you are in RF-friendly environments doing mostly peer-to-peer traffic (not access to an ISP). It works in the places where it has always worked, where handheld radios without repeaters have always been useful. Protests and disaster recovery efforts are two such examples. Internet connectivity for the masses is a different beast.

contingencies 11y ago
It's not so much 'A-B and B-C' but rather 'A-B this week' and 'B-C next week'.