From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp81.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (smtp81.iad3a.emailsrvr.com [173.203.187.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAE8B3CB3D for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp19.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp19.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 46CF852D1; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) X-SMTPDoctor-Processed: csmtpprox beta Received: from smtp19.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp19.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4380259C6; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from app60.wa-webapps.iad3a (relay-webapps.rsapps.net [172.27.255.140]) by smtp19.relay.iad3a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 27A2252D1; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender-Id: dpreed@deepplum.com Received: from app60.wa-webapps.iad3a (relay-webapps.rsapps.net [172.27.255.140]) by 0.0.0.0:25 (trex/5.7.12); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 Received: from deepplum.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by app60.wa-webapps.iad3a (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17045A0047; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: by apps.rackspace.com (Authenticated sender: dpreed@deepplum.com, from: dpreed@deepplum.com) with HTTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Auth-ID: dpreed@deepplum.com Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) From: "dpreed@deepplum.com" To: "Dave Taht" Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_20180312122559000000_99787" Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Type: html In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1520871959.09216206@apps.rackspace.com> X-Mailer: webmail/12.13.2-RC Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] spacebee X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 16:25:59 -0000 ------=_20180312122559000000_99787 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0A =0AThis is fascinating. Could it be that the idea of "open networks of = satellites" are going to start to play the role of WiFi or UWB? Scalable sh= aring of orbital space, using a simple cooperative protocol? In other words= , the first step toward what Vint Cerf championed as the "Interplanetary In= ternet?=0A =0A =0A =0AIf so, that explains why the FCC id doing the bidding= of its masters. Sure, we need a few rules of the road to manage space orbi= ts, etc. That's in *everyone's* public interest.=0A =0A =0A =0ABut do we ne= ed the rules to be set by a fully captured regulatory mechanism in the pock= ets of monopoly capital?=0A =0A =0A =0AI wrote this comment to another mail= ing list. Thought you might find it interesing here as well. (This reflects= very deep personal experience with building scalable decentralized systems= for most of my life, plus encounters with the FCC around getting UWB autho= rized - it was defenestrated in the form that they authorized it - and my e= xperiences with the "be very afraid" camp that informs the FCC's idea that = SDR is not to be allowed, ever, in products certified for sale in the US to= consumers). It's remarkable how the idea that "we need rules of the road" = gets perverted into "the US and its corporate owners must have power over",= esp. in the FCC.=0A =0A-----------------------=0A =0AOne should ask, why h= asn't NASA stepped in to facilitate discussion of orbital rules of the road= ? Preferably the minimum necessary rules, allowing the most flexibility to = innovate and create value.=0A =0A =0A =0AAnd one should also ask, one whose= behalf is FCC making these choices?=0A =0A =0A =0ASpace, in theory, belong= s to all of us. Not governments defined by national boundaries, not the UN,= ... it *belongs* to us, just as the Sea does.=0A =0A =0A =0AIt's helpful t= o have rules (for example, the WiFi rules which extend Part 15's "accept al= l interference and don't deliberately interfere" to a concrete - listen for= energy before you transmit, and transmit using a power and modulation that= has the least impact on others. Bran Ferren called this the "Golden Rule".= The law of the sea is similar.=0A =0A =0A =0AOne can ask whether the FCC h= as any legitimate constitutional mandate over space at all. Maybe that shou= ld be taken to the (sadly plutocratic) Supreme Court, or even better, a tru= e judicial court that incorporates the interests and fairness to all of the= planet?=0A =0A =0A =0AWe should remember that if Swarm launched and operat= ed its network of satellites from the middle of the ocean (remember Pirate = Radio Stations in the UK beyond the coastal zone), the US FCC could not tou= ch them. Arguably, there's no one who could legally touch them.=0A =0A =0A = =0AThat said, we need rules of the road, like we do for drones. But they sh= ould not be written by those who stand to lose their privileges.=0A =0A =0A= ------=_20180312122559000000_99787 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

=0A

This is fascinating. Could it be that t= he idea of "open networks of satellites" are going to start to play the rol= e of WiFi or UWB? Scalable sharing of orbital space, using a simple coopera= tive protocol? In other words, the first step toward what Vint Cerf champio= ned as the "Interplanetary Internet?

=0A

 

= =0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

If so, that = explains why the FCC id doing the bidding of its masters. Sure, we need a f= ew rules of the road to manage space orbits, etc. That's in *everyone's* pu= blic interest.

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

But do we need the rules to be set = by a fully captured regulatory mechanism in the pockets of monopoly capital= ?

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

I wrote this comment to another mailing list. Th= ought you might find it interesing here as well. (This reflects very deep p= ersonal experience with building scalable decentralized systems for most of= my life, plus encounters with the FCC around getting UWB authorized - it w= as defenestrated in the form that they authorized it - and my experiences w= ith the "be very afraid" camp that informs the FCC's idea that SDR is not t= o be allowed, ever, in products certified for sale in the US to consumers).= It's remarkable how the idea that "we need rules of the road" gets pervert= ed into "the US and its corporate owners must have power over", esp. in the= FCC.

=0A

 

=0A

-----------------------

=0A

 

=0A

One should ask, why hasn't NASA stepped in to facilitate= discussion of orbital rules of the road? Preferably the minimum necessary = rules, allowing the most flexibility to innovate and create value.

=0A 

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

And one should also ask, one whose behalf is FCC making th= ese choices?

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

Space, in theory, belongs to all of u= s. Not governments defined by national boundaries, not the UN, ... it *belo= ngs* to us, just as the Sea does.

=0A

 

=0A<= p style=3D"margin:0;padding:0;margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: arial; fo= nt-size: 10pt; overflow-wrap: break-word;"> 

=0A

It's helpful to = have rules (for example, the WiFi rules which extend Part 15's "accept all = interference and don't deliberately interfere" to a concrete - listen for e= nergy before you transmit, and transmit using a power and modulation that h= as the least impact on others. Bran Ferren called this the "Golden Rule". T= he law of the sea is similar.

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

&n= bsp;

=0A

One can ask whether = the FCC has any legitimate constitutional mandate over space at all. Maybe = that should be taken to the (sadly plutocratic) Supreme Court, or even bett= er, a true judicial court that incorporates the interests and fairness to a= ll of the planet?

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A<= p style=3D"margin:0;padding:0;margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: arial; fo= nt-size: 10pt; overflow-wrap: break-word;">We should remember that if Swarm= launched and operated its network of satellites from the middle of the oce= an (remember Pirate Radio Stations in the UK beyond the coastal zone), the = US FCC could not touch them. Arguably, there's no one who could legally tou= ch them.

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

That said, we need rules of the road, l= ike we do for drones. But they should not be written by those who stand to = lose their privileges.

=0A

 

=0A

 

=0A

  ------=_20180312122559000000_99787--