[Freedombox-discuss] FreedomBox/Unhosted/PageKite for Access Innovation Prize 2012

[Ian Sullivan]

On 07/06/2012 12:45 PM, Michiel de Jong wrote:
>> I'm a little leery of asking users to sign up for a service on a device
>> > that's designed to let them host their own services.  It seems
>> > internally inconsistent.  I don't think I have anything against offering
>> > it as an option, but it shouldn't be the only one.
>
> i see your point, but what alternative do you see? if you want to
> offer any form of web presence, you need an IP address with a DNS
> domain pointing to it. the box needs to dial up to some sort of name
> service to announce where it is today. this can be either a DNS server
> or a (network of) reverse proxy(s) if you're on a dynamically assigned
> own IP. If you're behind NAT, then only a (network of) reverse
> proxy(s) can help you. The proposed DHT which resolves names to onion
> addresses is effectively a network of revers proxies too, and is not
> something we currently have working in production even on normal
> laptops afaik.
> 

I don't see anything wrong with setting up such a service as long as we
work towards making it possible for others to set them up too. I have a
publicly virtual machine with a v4 address that I would love to use as a
dynamicDNS provider for my freedombox trapped behind cable company NAT.
Others may be able to more easily buy a static address from their ISP
directly and use their freedombox itself as a dynamicDNS server for
friends with their own freedomboxes. If everyone with a route-able
address can run such a service for the people in their lives who trust
them to run it then it actually seems pretty natural to me that
community non-profits like the freedombox foundation or Debian itself
would start running such services for their communities.

-Ian