<div dir="ltr">My general rule of thumb for whether a feature is a good idea is this: What common, well-defined problem does it solve? Is this the only solution which solves that problem? What is the cost of this feature? Are we willing to bear that cost?</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Rob Salsgiver <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rob@quailsoftltd.net" target="_blank">rob@quailsoftltd.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I think you're likely to find this a moving target.... As you mentioned,<br>
most ISPs do this in some fashion already. Conversely, you can also opt to<br>
buy your own cable or DSL modem, etc - but the onus is on you to deal with<br>
any "incompatibilities" identified by the carrier.<br>
<br>
For the most part, I would be perfectly fine with HamWAN doing the same<br>
function - provided it doesn't hamper my ability to do what "I want". Some<br>
examples of this would be port forwarding, traffic prioritization settings<br>
(from my internal stuff to the network, not network node to network node -<br>
that's "the carrier's" responsibility). Routing settings COULD be an issue,<br>
if I wanted to setup my own preferred alternate routes vs letting the<br>
backbone handle it (this is one of those "grey" areas).<br>
<br>
For the most part, I look for the following basic list of features:<br>
<br>
1) My normal path through the network to other HamWAN hosts and the Internet<br>
is fast, short, and reliable<br>
2) If anything in that path fails, my traffic re-routes without my knowing<br>
it and all continues to work well.<br>
3) Any inbound defined services, such as port forwarding (for Echolink, etc)<br>
work under both #1 and #2.<br>
<br>
There is one situation I can think of that may run into problems with HamWAN<br>
managing remote endpoints.... that is the scenario where someone is<br>
developing RF-link based functionality that may be affected by an<br>
"auto-overwrite" by the network.... i.e. - someone is working on new<br>
antennas or testing traffic management possibilities. As an example - if I<br>
decide to replace my antenna with something "home brew" and want to modify<br>
the transmit or receive parameters for specific testing, there may be some<br>
conflicts here. Using other vendor radios or developing your own may be an<br>
issue as well. These can probably be handled using very few exceptions, and<br>
likely is not worth making major "policy" changes to accommodate, other than<br>
the potential for a few select devices to be excluded.<br>
<br>
Part of the excitement of developing this beast is simply not knowing<br>
everywhere it might take us. We may find more potential conflicts down the<br>
road that will have to be considered if/when they come up.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Rob Salsgiver - NR3O<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: PSDR [mailto:<a href="mailto:psdr-bounces@hamwan.org">psdr-bounces@hamwan.org</a>] On Behalf Of Bart Kus<br>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:17 PM<br>
To: Puget Sound Data Ring<br>
Subject: [HamWAN PSDR] POLL: How do you feel about HamWAN network having<br>
shared control of the microwave modem @ your location?<br>
<br>
Hello,<br>
<br>
Keeping the network and all client devices correctly configured is no easy<br>
feat. These are complicated devices with 100s of settings, which will need<br>
to change in coordinated ways over time. To ensure correct operation, it<br>
would make sense for the HamWAN network to push updates and change settings<br>
on end-user modems. Almost all ISPs run this way already. The difference<br>
is you can still login + control your device, but any setting changes you<br>
make which make the device non-compliant in ways HamWAN cares about would be<br>
automatically overridden with a config update from the network. If the<br>
network can't control and repair your device settings, you would lose<br>
authorization onto the network until the settings are fixed.<br>
<br>
I see this shared administration model as the only one that's feasible in<br>
keeping a reliable network running.<br>
<br>
Please let me know if you are OK with it, if you object to it, or if you<br>
have a better idea.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
--Bart<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PSDR mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:PSDR@hamwan.org">PSDR@hamwan.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org" target="_blank">http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PSDR mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:PSDR@hamwan.org">PSDR@hamwan.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org" target="_blank">http://mail.hamwan.org/mailman/listinfo/psdr_hamwan.org</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr">Benjamin<br></div>
</div>