Re: Guerilla Internet Service Providers (fwd)

[jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>]

At 08:09 PM 1/2/96 -0600, you wrote:

>> For the "last mile" to the ISP user, wireless could be a better bet.
>> Have antenna, will surf.
>
>I can easily visualize mobile and portable systems linking to an ISP, 
>downloading email via encrypted POP/UUCP/whatever, using itinerant 2m or 
>450 MHz frequencies.  A mobile system connects to any ISP, gets a login: 
>prompt, enters "xyz@host.domain", gets thrown into a POP session on 
>host.domain, uploads/downloads, then disconnects.  All it would really 
>require is implementing "exec rlogin -l xyz host.domain" into getty (a 
>very simple patch) and suitable crypto protocols...
>- --
>Ed Carp, N7EKG    			Ed.Carp@linux.org, ecarp@netcom.com

As a ham, too (N7IJS) I recognize your implicit selection of 2m or 450 MHz.
But I gently object to this, for reasons that I think will be obvious.
First, technology has been marching on in the last 10-20 years, and
communications frequencies of 2 GHz and more are technically do-able and
comparatively empty.  (and with modern IC  technology, even easy)
Secondly,  ham gear tends to be used for long-range communication (miles and
watts) and generally has little or no ability to frequency hop/time hop or
to automatically turn down transmitter power to be able to share frequencies
over short distances (low milliwatts or even microwatts).  Those high
gigahertz frequencies would be ideal for communication over a few blocks
distance.  (Sure, packet has been done for years but it is a still-born
development;  they still think 9600 bps is a "fast" modem speed.)

I forsee  locally-owned boxes that are the equivalent of a wireless phone
switch implementing re-used freuqency microcells; the cost SHOULD be far
lower than the current copperline phone systems, once the telephones are
paid for.  And they shouldn't cost much more than current 900 MHz cordless
telephones, too.