mesh

mesh@sudoroom.org

1409 discussions

Re: [Mesh] [sudo-discuss] Can someone, please, donate $ to buy Acoustic Caulk to repair the Ballroom south wall? (Picts)

by danarauz＠gmail.com

I never seen/used it myself, but it looks like as described by Joe. Joe is out of town for a week. Not sure if he is checking email. I texted Rob asking to check his email and confirm. Thanks, Charley! daniel On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Charley Sheets <rcsheets(a)acm.org> wrote: > On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 22:43:58 -0700 > "danarauz(a)gmail.com" <danarauz(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > You don't have to buy it yourself, but if you prefer, according to > > our more experienced Omni member sheet rock installer (Joe), the > > acoustic caulk that we should get is the one made by OSI. It costs > > about $8 each. > > Is this the right stuff? > > http://is.gd/zpRjgi > > -- > Charley Sheets > -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Help open a people-powered common space in Oakland, California! https://omnicommons.org/donate - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

10 years

Fwd: Re: [internet-freedom] openWRT vs. FCC - forced firmware lockdown?

by Mitar

Hi! Some more activity on this topic. The deadline for comments was extended until October 9. BTW, have you seen this article more or less in favor of FCC rule: https://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20150831/07164532118/no-fcc… Also, there is a mailing list for people interested in this topic: http://lists.prplfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fcc Mitar -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Andrew McConachie <amcconachie(a)berkeley.edu> Subject: Re: [internet-freedom] openWRT vs. FCC - forced firmware lockdown? Hey Internet Freedomers, I wanted to provide an update on this as things have changed. The original language from the FCC that we discussed is no longer in the proposed rule change. The specific reference to DD-WRT has been removed, and it now looks like the below language is what governs this. "(i) For devices including modular transmitters which are software defined radios and use software to control the radio or other parameters subject to the Commission's rules, the description must include details of the equipment's capabilities for software modification and upgradeability, including all frequency bands, power levels, modulation types, or other modes of operation for which the device is designed to operate, whether or not the device will be initially marketed with all modes enabled. The description must state which parties will be authorized to make software changes (e.g., the grantee, wireless service providers, other authorized parties) and the software controls that are provided to prevent unauthorized parties from enabling different modes of operation. Manufacturers must describe the methods used in the device to secure the software in their application for equipment authorization and must include a high level operational description or flow diagram of the software that controls the radio frequency operating parameters. The applicant must provide an attestation that only permissible modes of operation may be selected by a user."[0] In my opinion the FCC has rightly limited their concern of software update to anything which relates to software controlled radios. The requirement for device manufacturers will be limited to showing that a software update cannot reprogram a software controlled radio to cause interference. In practice, this will most likely mean that binary drivers will be required to run OS's like OpenWRT, and manufacturers like Marvel/Avago will continue to obfuscate their hardware APIs. This is a compromise I think we're going to have to live with. Below is the comment I made to the FCC(tracking number 1jz-8kvr-4z96). " Please do not do anything to interfere with the development of OpenWRT, DD-WRT or similar alternative firmware. It is important that consumers maintain the right to change the OS of any devices they own. For the purposes of preventing spectrum interference it is necessary that software controlled radios not be easily reprogrammable. However, this requirement should in no way interfere with the legitimate right of consumers to change the general purpose OS's of their legally purchased devices. Sincerely, Andrew McConachie " Comments close on Sep 8, only 7 more days to go. Speak now or forever hold your bits. Also, if anyone knows someone at the LibrePlanet SaveWiFi wiki their page has the wrong comment deadline.[1] Their page says October 9, but the FCC deadline is September 8. Thanks, Andrew [0] https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/08/06/2015-18402/equipment-au… [1] https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Save_WiFi/Individual_Comments On 7/25/15 10:41 PM, Andrew McConachie wrote: > There is no real way to do this short of getting Linux to relicense. > Even then, home router manufacturers can always use a BSD Unix. Most > home routers are nothing but a 4-5 year old UNIX with a buggy > proprietary web interface anyways. I give money to the FSF and have been > a member for over 10 years, but sadly there was never a way to fix this > with the GPLv3. > > Two doubts I have: > 1) Chipmakers like Avago/Marvel are doing more and more in their > proprietary binary drivers. Given this, they might just lock them down > such that frequencies cannot be changed regardless of the OS ontop. Some > chips already do this. Or they'll produce chips which cannot physically > change their frequencies. > > 2) Home router manufacturers are notoriously terribly at locking down > their devices. They sell cheap devices with terribly low margins. They > don't want to spend any developer time or extra HW on this requirement. > > On the other hand the FCC states that home router manufacturers must > answer this question: > "What prevents third parties from loading non-US versions of the > software/firmware on the device? > Describe in detail how the device is protected from “flashing” and the > installation of third-party firmware such as DD-WRT."[1] > > This really does suck. Because it looks like if Netgear were to ship a > device that could be flashed with DD-Wrt/OpenWrt the FCC might penalize > them. > > --Andrew > > [1] > https://apps.fcc.gov/kdb/GetAttachment.html?id=1UiSJRK869RsyQddPi5hpw%3D%3D… > > On 7/25/15 8:04 PM, Jethro Beekman wrote: >> Too late now, but you should have developed GPL3-licensed software and forced it >> upon AP manufacturers/pressured widely used software on AP's (e.g. Linux, >> BusyBox) to relicense GPL3. >> >> -- >> Jethro Beekman >> Graduate student researcher >> 719 Soda Hall >> Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences >> University of California at Berkeley >> jbeekman(a)eecs.berkeley.edu >> >> >> On 25-07-15 17:44, Mitar wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> Have you seen this, from Battlemesh V8 agenda >>> (http://battlemesh.org/BattleMeshV8/Agenda). Doesn't look good. >>> >>> The new FCC rules are in effect in the United States from June 2nd 2015 >>> [1] for WiFi devices such as Access Points. They require to have the >>> firmware locked down so End-Users can't operate with non-compliant >>> parameters (channels/frequencies, transmit power, DFS, ...). In >>> response, WiFi access point vendors start to lock down firmwares to >>> prevent custom firmwares (such as OpenWRT) to be installed, using code >>> signing, etc. Since the same type of devices are often sold world wide, >>> this change does not only affect routers in the US, but also Europe, and >>> this will also effect wireless communities. >>> We would like to discuss: >>> * What are your experiences with recently certified WiFi Hardware >>> * How can we still keep OpenWRT on these devices >>> * What can we suggest to Hardware vendors so that they keep their >>> firmware open for community projects while still compliant with the FCC? >>> >>> [1] >>> https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=39498&switc… >>> >>> >>> Mitar >>> >> -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m

10 years

Re: [Mesh] [omni-discuss] Box of PoE adapters missing

by Jenny Ryan

We have a lock on the closet under the stairs and should def move any expensive gear there. On Sep 4, 2015 7:37 PM, "max b" <maxb.personal(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hmmmm yeah I didn't see a box of ethernet cables when I was looking > through mesh stuff last night. I wasn't looking for PoE adapters though, so > who knows about those. > > Luckily for us, neither of those are super critical - I have a handful of > adapters here and any new gear we buy that will require PoE will come with > their own adapters. It *might* be a problem with the remaining stash of > picostations though... > > Neither of those boxes would net someone any money, though, so I'm > skeptical that someone stole them for profit. Especially considering that a > variety of the other gear on that rack would be worth a lot more money. > > All that being said, perhaps we should re-evaluate our gear and do a > better job securing anything that is expensive/hard to replace... I don't > have any answers to that problem though, short of some really fancy server > cage or something.... > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Marc Juul <juul(a)labitat.dk> wrote: > >> sudo mesh is missing two boxes: >> >> * One box of PoE (Power over Ethernet) adapters >> * One box of ethernet cables >> >> If anyone has any idea where these may be please let us know. >> >> -- >> marc/juul >> >> _______________________________________________ >> discuss mailing list >> discuss(a)lists.omnicommons.org >> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list > discuss(a)lists.omnicommons.org > https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss > >

10 years

New server colo suggestion, + SF node offer

by Pete Forsyth

Hello Meshers, I'd like to introduce Jon, a former colleague at Wikimedia (he ran the office network), my generous web host, and an all around good free culture guy. After talking with Marc, I asked Jon about options for server colocation. This is not my realm,so I offer you his suggestion verbatim...hope this is useful. Also, should we set him up with a node in SF? Jon has the chops to troubleshoot stuff on his own, and it would be cool to have a node on that side of the bay...perhaps a baby step toward that elusive transbay link? Regardless, I would suggest Jon add his home to the node map -- except it seems to be offline?? http://map.sudomesh.org/ If responding, please keep in mind Jon is not on the email list, and CC as appropriate. -Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]] on the wiki On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Jon Davis <jon(a)snowulf.com> wrote: <snip> > #3 - I have not. I looked up the website, interesting stuff. Need a node > in SF? ;-p. My colo of choice for most things is Hurricane Electric > http://www.he.net/colocation.html . Their standard rate for a full 42U > cabinet (with 100meg connection and 15amp power) is $600/mo but I guess > it's on sale right now. You can even bump that to 1gig connect for that > same cab which I think is about $500 more or $1100 total/mo. They also > offer smaller "Getting started" options like a 1/3 rack (with 100meg and > 2amp) for $200/mo. The main DC is their FMT2 facility in Fremont. It's not > one of those DCs where you get palm scanners and fancy shit like that, but > if you want DC space on the cheap, I can't think of any options in the area > that would beat it. > >> >> 1. >> >> <snip> > >> 1. Are you familiar with Sudo Mesh? It's a cool mesh networking >> project that's picking up speed in Oakland. (I'm running the first node!) >> The setup (which has been largely built by local geeks) involves every >> participant running through a VPN. They are looking for a new/better colo >> for the server that manages it all, ideally in Oakland or East Bay and with >> pretty easy physical access. Any suggestions? >> >> <snip>

10 years

Mesh meeting tonight 7:30 pm at sudo room!

by Marc Juul

It's September and everyone is coming back from vacation so let's figure out where we're at and where we're going. -- marc/juul

10 years

Fwd: Re: [wlan-si dev] Re: TDMA for OpenWrt devices

by Mitar

Hi! Forwarding. Mitar -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Musti <musti(a)wlan-si.net> Subject: Re: [Mesh] [wlan-si dev] Re: TDMA for OpenWrt devices To: development(a)wlan-si.net Hi, I am happy to volunteer a 10km or 20km link in Slovenia in PTMP config, but we need to get all working with wlan slovenija firmware. Kind regards, Musti On 1.9.2015 18:29, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hi, > > Yup. I have plenty of 5ghz hardware but no long distance hop with > which to try it with. :( > > > > -adrian > > > On 1 September 2015 at 03:03, Valent <valent(a)otvorenamreza.org> wrote: >> On 1 September 2015 at 11:18, Valent <valent(a)otvorenamreza.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 1 September 2015 at 01:39, Adrian Chadd <adrian(a)freebsd.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> I could do with all the help testing the freebsd tdma code on 5ghz 11n >>>> APs. :P >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -adrian >>> >>> >>> >>> I'll be glad to do testing, just give us some guidelines what kind of >>> tests you had in mind. >>> >> >> >> Adrian are devices listed on right side of wiki ones you recommend for >> testing? >> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-wifi-build/wiki >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mesh mailing list >> mesh(a)lists.sudoroom.org >> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/mesh >> -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m

10 years

Re: [Mesh] [wlan-si dev] Re: TDMA for OpenWrt devices

by max b

Adrian Chadd, who is on the sudomesh mailing list, is the one who I believe implemented TDMA in FreeBSD. We've been pestering him about if for a little while now, but if you want to add to the chorus I'm sure it couldn't hurt... After Defcon, of course ;) On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Mitar <mitar(a)tnode.com> wrote: > Hi! > > Have you made a ticket for this TDMA support? > > But I think it would be better if this could get into an OpenWrt itself. > It would be easier for us to use it then. > > > Mitar > > > After some more research I found that FreeBSD recently added TDMA > > support to their ath driver [1]. > > Friend of mine just tried to use it on some cheap TP-Link device but > > currently TDMA support is broken but it will be fixed in next few > > days. > > > > [1] https://wiki.freebsd.org/dev/ath%284%29 > > > > -- > http://mitar.tnode.com/ > https://twitter.com/mitar_m > > Settings and unsubscription: > https://wlan-si.net/lists/info/development > > Public archive: > https://wlan-si.net/lists/arc/development >

10 years

Can someone, please, donate $ to buy Acoustic Caulk to repair the Ballroom south wall? (Picts)

by danarauz＠gmail.com

Hello All, Could someone, please, donate money to buy 10 large tubes of acoustic caulk? We need $80. You don't have to buy it yourself, but if you prefer, according to our more experienced Omni member sheet rock installer (Joe), the acoustic caulk that we should get is the one made by OSI. It costs about $8 each. WHAT FOR? To complete the the sheet rock installation at the Ballroom south wall. WHEN DO YOU NEED IT FOR? We need it by this Saturday, so we can continue working on it during our next work party. HAVE PHOTOS? Ballroom south wall current state: http://www.arauz.com/activism/omni/images/IMG_20150831_182312.jpg http://www.arauz.com/activism/omni/images/IMG_20150831_182351.jpg http://www.arauz.com/activism/omni/images/IMG_20150831_220838.jpg http://www.arauz.com/activism/omni/images/IMG_20150831_220904.jpg http://www.arauz.com/activism/omni/images/IMG_20150831_220922.jpg http://www.arauz.com/activism/omni/images/IMG_20150831_220955.jpg Many thanks in advance and please let me know if you have any more questions. Daniel -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Help open a people-powered common space in Oakland, California! https://omnicommons.org/donate - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

10 years

Fwd: [FCC] Reddit thread

by Jenny Ryan

Upvote and comment on this thread re: the FCC decision to require restrictions on wireless router hacking! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Chip Rosenthal" <chip(a)unicom.com> Date: Aug 29, 2015 10:33 AM Subject: [FCC] Reddit thread To: <fcc(a)lists.prplfoundation.org> Cc: There is a BIG Reddit thread currently active on this issue. https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/3isbif/the_fcc_is_asking_for_c… -- Chip Rosenthal * 512-573-5174 * KE5VHV * http://www.unicom.com/ Austin #OpenGov and #CivicHacking events: http://www.open-austin.org/calendar _______________________________________________ FCC mailing list FCC(a)lists.prplfoundation.org http://lists.prplfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fcc

10 years

Re: [Mesh] [sudo-discuss] Can someone please donate Cat6 Shielded cable?

by max b

Hey Charley, You're more than welcome to donate money (or time) if that's more up your alley. Also, if you want to donate UTP cat6, we'll take that as well. We use a bunch of ethernet cable both at the omni and for other installations, so we can always use more. If you're feeling really generous, we can really use shielded outdoor cat5 and cat6 for installing antennas. Don't worry - no matter what kind of ethernet cabling you feel like donating, we can almost certainly find a use for it :) As for the questions you've outlined: First thing: shielded cable This isn't actually an ethernet run. It's dsl lines + phone lines running over cat copper wires. As such, it's my understanding that it's more sensitive to EMI disturbance. Additionally, it's much better to err on the safe side as we'll only want to string this once and the entire network communications infrastructure depends on the dsl signal that passes through this line. As for needing shielded mating jacks, we have plenty of grounded rj-45 connectors and with whatever other scenarios, it's pretty easy to ensure that they're grounded. We're not talking about our entire network infrastructure, we're just talking about this one cable run. Second thing: hand termination We're using an EZ RJ-45 crimper, which makes the process fairly straightforward. We have spools of other types of ethernet cables and have done runs throughout the building. Also - we'll be breaking out these pairs anyhow, so most of this is fairly non standard types of termination which are much easier than rj-45 disconnects. Daniel, let us know if I missed anything here? Max On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Charley Sheets <rcsheets(a)acm.org> wrote: > Hey Daniel, > > I am interested in helping out, but I have to admit I'm fairly > skeptical of two elements of this request, so I'd like to get some > clarification if possible. > > First thing: shielded cable. My understanding is that most of the noise > rejection comes from the twists, not the shielding, and that shielded > cable is only useful in high-EMI environments. Am I mistaken about the > application, or are we perhaps in a high-EMI environment? The standard > example of high EMI is something like a factory floor. Shielding also > only works as intended if the mating connectors (jacks and whatnot) are > also shielded. Does that apply here? My inclination is to donate > standard (UTP) cat6 cable. Please help me understand why I should > donate shielded cable instead. > > Here is some information (could be biased -- it's from a cable > supplier) about the differences as they apply to cat6a: > http://mirapath.com/blog/item/cat6a-shielded-or-unshielded > > Second thing: hand termination. You've stated a preference for a box of > several hundred feet of cable. To me that implies that you'd prefer to > hand terminate the cable rather than having pre-terminated cables. I > certainly won't make any claims about your personal ability to > terminate cables, but most people are not especially skilled at this, > and many hand terminated cables I've seen in the field are visibly not > well made. I've terminated cat5 and cat5e cable, and it's always been > very fiddly and challenging for me to minimize the untwisted distance, > and to ensure there are no open pins. Pre-terminated cable is > available with strain relief boots and is often certified to be > complaint with the relevant cabling standard. What do you see as the > advantage of spools of cable? Why not buy pre-terminated cable? > > I hope this doesn't come across as overly critical. Sorry if it does. I > really just want to make sure we get exactly what we need. > -- > Charley Sheets > > _______________________________________________ > sudo-discuss mailing list > sudo-discuss(a)lists.sudoroom.org > https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss > >

10 years

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

mesh