News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules. Parent comment

Re:F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules by ethagnawl on Thursday December 14, 2017 @04:03PM (#15927019)
Building a mesh network* is a much cheaper, more realistic alternative.

Also, with regard to your point about "starting an ISP", I don't know the legalities and IANAL, but NYC Mesh goes out of their way to state that they _are not_ an ISP - there's probably a reason for that.

- https://nycmesh.net

- https://www.alliedmedia.org/dctp

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules by notyourday on Thursday December 14, 2017 @06:05PM (#15928141)
Mesh networks do not work at scale.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules by ethagnawl on Friday December 15, 2017 @12:14AM (#15929803)
How not? I'm not disagreeing, but genuinely curious.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules by notyourday on Friday December 15, 2017 @08:06AM (#15931468)
Fundamentally, mesh network is a shared medium. Think of it as ethernet over hubs. As long as there are not lots of talkers it works just fine. The more talkers you get the worse it becomes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules by ethagnawl on Friday December 15, 2017 @12:24PM (#15933349)
If those "talkers" all had hubs which were participants in the mesh, would that help the network "scale"?

Also, _what is_ the "scale" issue? Network congestion? Latency introduced by the need to relay a message from node A1 to node Zn? Something else entirely?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules by notyourday on Monday December 18, 2017 @07:57AM (#15951283)
Network congested which is going to cause latency.
[ Parent | on HN ]