From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 13f05b5ebb21f27b925eb801ca27ebf6fad3ef7f84a5151a86c12641d709ab60
Message ID: <199601041732.SAA20749@utopia.hacktic.nl>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-01-04 18:46:40 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 02:46:40 +0800
From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 02:46:40 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Guerilla Internet Service Providers
Message-ID: <199601041732.SAA20749@utopia.hacktic.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2 Jan 96 at 16:32, Jeff Simmons wrote:
> Jim Bell writes:
>
> >At some point, individual urban and suburban blocks could
> >easily be "guerilla re-wired" for ISP access without serious
> >trenching, etc. The phoneco would still be involved, but in
> >a far lower-profit mode, as the supplier of a single T1 to a
> >multi-block area.
>
> That's assuming the phoneco cooperates.
Why shouldn't they?
What does a hotel do, if not act as a local communication
concentrator for guests? What about multi-company PBX
installations? Most PBX's have for years supported the
facility to handle entirely separate groups of trunks, often
called "tenants." This facility is used in shared-receptionist,
shared-PBX scenarios. Each incoming trunk call identifies the
"tenant" or company to which the call is addressed, so the
receptionist may answer appropriately. I even seem to vaguely
remember hearing of apartments or co-ops that use a PBX
instead of having direct subscriber lines to each apartment.
Aggregation of communication facilities within the boundaries
of public rights of way seems to be a long-standing practice,
at least in the voice field. Voice and data are increasingly
indistinguishable, the latest move in that direction being the
practice of supporting a PBX with all-ISDN trunks.
> Punknet is a 'Guerilla ISP'. Twenty of us share a 128k ISDN
> line, distributed via high-speed modems. It's been running
> fine for over a year now, but Pacific Bell has evidently
> decided to get rid of us.
I have to think there is something in the way you have gone
about it that leaves you with a defect in the kinds of
recourse any of the above examples would have and would not
hesitate to use.
Maybe you should organize the effort in some formal manner.
Some states allow legal standing for unincorporated
associations. Maybe a cooperative? Maybe (shudder) a
corporation?
> We've been told that what they're doing is probably illegal,
> but it's the old problem: Where does an 800 lb. gorilla
> sleep?
Far enough off the ground to make it interesting. 800 lbs
makes a satisfying crunch when it hits the ground. Maybe if
you poke around you can find a few dozen other groups in
similar situations, and make it far more expensive for the
telco to harrass you than to deliver service as it is supposed
to do.
We Jurgar Din
(that will have to suffice: I do not yet live in a free country)
+"The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone. It is to the+
+vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no +
+election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now +
+too late to retire from the contest." -Patrick Henry 1775 +
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBMOuHBkjw99YhtpnhAQFG1gH5AQ+b/TXmddMcd/GzoqACnhLGW1Bv6v3Q
wW+WnIVPWCL/qZpV6mLcACG9TSQtDJ0Sy1bk4Y9J22bL4/E7aogoNQ==
=KjPD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Return to January 1996
Return to “nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)”
1996-01-04 (Fri, 5 Jan 1996 02:46:40 +0800) - Re: Guerilla Internet Service Providers - nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)