[Battlemesh] Proposal for battlemesh v10 "testbed"

[willi uebelherr]

On 15/12/2016 08:45, Henning Rogge wrote:
> ...
> it would allow us to focus work on configuration and management
> issues... we learned a lot about "how to make things difficult to use"
> and "how to shoot ourselves in the foot" in the last years.
> Henning

Dear Henning and all,

i love this very much. Can we follow KISS?
Keep it Simple, Stupid

In the last days i found an old text from David Isenberg:

The Dawn of the Stupid Network
http://www.isen.com/papers/Dawnstupid.html

The original version
Rise of the Stupid Network
http://www.rageboy.com/stupidnet.html

The core is: Bit in ... Bit out. Inside is the routing of the packets. 
And this have to be simple. The problem is the nature of the IP address. 
It is a virtual identifier and if you want to decide in the router, what 
door you should open for this packet, you don't know.

We have a clear base of needs. Every device, connected to this network, 
have to be able to exchange data with any other connected device, if 
both want to do it.

The terms of "layers" is not helpful. It makes it only difficult for us. 
You can easy operate with two layers: Transport and Application.

We act in the transport sphere. The data are not important. Only the 
header. In the application sphere, the transport information are not 
important. Only the data.

The most task in the transport is the routing. The packet have to find 
his way. They goes from router to router. The information for navigation 
should be the destination address. But if the IP address is virtual, you 
have no information for your decision, what door you should open for the 
packet.

If we self travel from one point to another, we use a very different 
mechanism. We have the orientation in the geografical space. This is our 
base for navigation.

The people from CISCO know that. But also they know, that in the 
telecommunication we have no net-structures. Only bus and star. But 
then, we have to go up and down.

I know, without "a thing, that you can take it in your hand", the most 
people are not able to think about. This is the problem in the ISOC 
(Internet Society) with IETF (Internet Engenieer Task Force) and IRTF 
(Internet Research Task Force). But this spaces are the center of 
theoretical proposals today.

I ask me, why the community networks are not the strongest and most 
visionary group? They have no problem to make the rationality to her 
base. They have no business interests. The telecommunication can stay in 
the foreground.

The community networks groups can be the most active motor in move to 
the "Next Generation Internet". This was a survival action from the EU. 
And many different interpretations we find there. Mostly for fibre 
technology.

But, i say clear, the "Next Generation Internet" is the routing based on 
geografical address. Because then we can make the network stupid. And 
simple.

But we have to separate the global address from the local address. In 
the local network the people decide, what routing mechanism they use. In 
the global inter-connections, we have to use the same address mechanism.

This means, we can also start in the local sphere to find the easiest 
and simplest routing mechanism, the base for the transport.

many greetings, willi
Asuncion, Paraguay