Skip to main content

View Post [edit]

Poster: steffenyount Date: Nov 12, 2004 5:48am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

I'm not an expert on the actual implementation, but I was under the impression that the internal routing was happening on the ethernet level and not the IP level. I could be wrong.

Can someone clarify this?

Also there seems to be some kind of filtering/traffic throttling/firewall/switch located between sflan.org and the Internet.

You can do some research for yourself and figure out the network topology with tracert (on windows).

try:
tracert sflanXX.sflan.org
where XX = the node number you want to reach.

E.g:
tracert sflan7.sflan.org
tracert sflan39.sflan.org

-S

Reply [edit]

Poster: Joshua Marker Date: Nov 14, 2004 6:31am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

What he said - can *someone* comment on this?

I'm beginning to suspect the same (re: routing) and I fear that'll cause serious issues (besides being kind of wasteful of IPs) and lack of flexibility. . . . but no one actually answers these questions, so how can I know?

I'm beginning to suspect - and again, I mean no disrespect to the great efforts made by the SFLAN folks, and I know they're busy -- but this lack of motion, lack of response, lack of evident planning is costing SF its chances at developing a wireless community network. Enough of the really smart people are bound up in SFLAN doing good but intermittent work that -- well, has anyone seriously looked at Seattles' site? It's fantastic. Tons of information, plans, activity. . . . and there's no reason SF shouldn't do as well.

Instead, this area is moribund. There is no real technical info (the 'priesthood' model rather than the 'community' model) out there, and SFLAN hosts boast 2-3 clients a day. There's no means of discussion, and the great folks who put this together seem to have vanished from the face of the planet.

It would be nice if SFLAN either started answering these posts, or opened up their infrastructure enough to allow others to continue this work.

Reply [edit]

Poster: Joshua Marker Date: Nov 14, 2004 6:36am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

PS, you spelled 'traceroute' wrong in your post.

Reply [edit]

Poster: steffenyount Date: Nov 15, 2004 1:10am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

tracert on windows
traceroute on Linux/Unix/Mac?

happy?

Reply [edit]

Poster: Joshua Marker Date: Nov 15, 2004 1:39am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

I won't be happy until everyone is free of the tyranny of eight-character misspellings and creeping DLLs!

(I was only teasing.)

Reply [edit]

Poster: Joshua Marker Date: Nov 15, 2004 1:40am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

To think, when I got an email notifying me of a new post on this thread (why doesn't it include the post?), I was optimistic that it was someone commenting about the network infrastructure.

Reply [edit]

Poster: Drew @ alamedawireless.org Date: Nov 15, 2004 8:01am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

If you can't get a reply from SFLan in order to work with them, you can always go it alone, and choose whatever standards you want. There is enough room for multiple networks in SF, and they can work together as well, just look at BARWN.

Reply [edit]

Poster: Joshua Marker Date: Nov 15, 2004 8:19am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

I investigated it. But I don't think community groups splinter well. Look at the open source community. And they have a huge installed base; tens of thousands of dollars of hardware; decent uptime. . . it would be terribly sad to ignore the whole thing just because they never respond.

no, if I were going to invest the effort, I'd start by contacting SFLAN nodes and detailing my struggle to get SFLAN involved and see if they could maybe encourage them to start being active again.

Community projects are touch-and-go anyway. The amount of energy spoiler gone to a moribund but undead project could be a killer. We _are_ pressing ahead with another community group, one based on open standards and public info, but I'd rather we were all one big, happy, well-routed, family.

Reply [edit]

Poster: Joshua Marker Date: Nov 15, 2004 8:23am
Forum: sflan Subject: Re: SFLAN IP Schema

And it looks to me like BARWN is a good example of a contradiction of your statement, much as I hate to say it. Great standards, well organized, but also kind of moribund, at least in terms of community (though this is maybe changing). SFLAN hooks up with them in several places, not terribly gracefully. And there's already a fair amount of friction between the groups over broken promises and catty behavior. All in all, not a model of multiple groups working together.

Compare, again, with Seattle. Or alameda, from what I can tell!