[Freedombox-discuss] Diaspora becoming a community project

Dan Ballance tzewang.dorje at gmail.com
Thu Aug 30 16:45:06 UTC 2012

Would it be possible for "power" FBX users to provide a PageKite-equivalent
service for other users on dynamic IPs? Could these services be advertised
within the FBX network maybe?
 On Aug 30, 2012 5:39 PM, "Michael Rogers" <michael at briarproject.org> wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> On 30/08/12 15:38, Nick Daly wrote:
> > This is also what makes it really difficult for a FBX to receive
> > email. :\
> >
> > I think some folks were talking about buying records, of some sort,
> > a while ago.  Don't recall what came of it, though.  Anybody with
> > a better memory want to pipe up?
> I believe this is the single biggest obstacle the FreedomBox has to
> overcome, and I'm surprised it hasn't received more attention.
> To put it bluntly, an unskilled user can't run a server on a typical
> home broadband connection. There are several reasons:
> * Most home broadband connections have dynamic IP addresses
> * Forwarding a port through a home router requires skills that many
> people don't have; the process can't be automated or reduced to simple
> instructions because home routers have non-standard password-protected
> web interfaces
> * UPnP and NAT-PMP are unavailable, disabled or broken on many home
> routers
> * Even if you get past the home router, some ISPs have a second layer
> of NAT, or a firewall that blocks incoming connections
> Dynamic DNS solves the first problem, but the other three aren't so
> easy. Based on data collected from millions of LimeWire peers, only
> 25% of home computers can receive incoming TCP connections even if
> they use UPnP and NAT-PMP.
> As far as I can see, the only solution is to use a service like
> PageKite, so any box that's unable to receive incoming TCP connections
> can instead make an outgoing connection to a reverse proxy that
> receives incoming connections on its behalf.
> Tor hidden services are fine for box-to-box connections, but they
> don't allow people to run web, email and chat servers that their
> non-box-owning friends can connect to, which I thought was the whole
> point of the project.
> If that analysis is correct, we should look at the reverse proxy issue
> in more depth. Questions to ask include:
> * Are the protocols open standards?
> * Are the implementations free software?
> * Are there any limitations on what services can be run (email, XMPP)?
> * How much trust must the user place in the provider (MITM, logging)?
> * Are there any providers other than PageKite?
> * Can we expect other providers to emerge?
> * Will users be able to switch providers?
> * Should the service be bundled with the box?
> Cheers,
> Michael
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> y/5iyKHA1X7Ln6iXgHQv/G7zDGgO9ZOUGsIc2dKBLqyejsQPu9OdC0hUaUy6K0SJ
> lJBJchXETAaz97b1mtOWPYgjvOwwDOlsMZis8AdivpphKY6RvHuwvSnOXojxDYnp
> kysoSReuCIa/HGUFM1JyzBzg8uphpLI26LHEiBY6pJaJxrNavzkXkeNXeQEReBDl
> x1PH6lGXGOk4WfJERqC5J2gfYYDipesbxuYAn6h12CoylgoxXK+mkBzCisKhof4I
> K3C0fI620nuJtFhPP0h4hqTMfpO5FMJjWZsOM3uR7yfHJWEgV/Z59DN9+xxa/lE=
> =3PpL
> _______________________________________________
> Freedombox-discuss mailing list
> Freedombox-discuss at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20120830/ce31023c/attachment.html>

More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list