Jump to content
  • Advertisement

chroud

Member
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

100 Neutral

About chroud

  • Rank
    Member
  1. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    @frob - thanks for looking into it, I appreciate it. The website may appear to be selling some kind of idea, but I'm not claiming ownership or originality and am certainly not selling anything or presenting information on the order of getting investors. The website is primarily made to attract open-source developers to get together and examine alternative networking models. "ChroudNet" is basically an example design to begin the community, and get people asking questions and looking for answers. The claims made are very general, but they are intended to be goals of the project - of course without a working model, none of them are verified and are merely theoretical, and this is pointed out on the website. I'll be documenting my prototyping results on the website, and just hope that others will get interested in the idea that there could be, or will be, better ways of networking. [color="#CCCCCC"]You say a consolidated network for data and voice. How is this different than the real world today?[/quote] Consolidated as in, there aren't multiple companies acting as providers that all run on different networks. There are no service providers, so all users are strapped into the same network and devices are universal. [color="#CCCCCC"]You comment about all devices receiving all data streams[/quote] What I mean, is that data is preprocessed - because all processing is done server-side (cloud computing) devices can run high-end games, high-end software, and anything else a server can do while still having the same hardware - whether that's a cell phone or a desktop. This is just generally one of the perks of cloud computing. [color="#CCCCCC"]You talk about no regulation. How will you find anything?[/quote] Unique and verified identification is a problem to be solved by software standards, not necessarily regulation. By no regulation, I mean no service provider deciding to threaten the neutrality of the network's content or monitor your usage. No government deciding they can pull the plug on the network, or monitor your usage. [color="#CCCCCC"] You say "Fast", but WiMAX isn't that great in the Grand Scheme of Things.[/quote] That is left to be determined. I have a hard time finding hard numbers on distributed relay over WiMAX and I am confident that you would have just as hard a time. That's still a question to be answered, and this project will hopefully answer it. [color="#CCCCCC"]You say optimized for cloud, but how?[/quote] By cloud services, I mean streaming on-demand applications. This means deploying large amounts of data from servers as fast as possible. The presented model allows this data to be deployed from any number of local transceivers so that the information can immediately leave a server distributed. Who is paying for cloud computing devices? The servers that run the applications. Of course commercial applications won't be free, but the point of ChroudNet is for free access to the network - not free commercial content. [color="#CCCCCC"] You mention self healing in terms of rerouting for damage. Exactly what are you proposing that isn't available with the current infrastructure?[/quote] No "down-time". If a node is recognized failing to relay packets, its responsibilities can be delegated. With a cable service provider, if the service is down in your area, you're out of luck. In a mesh network, all local nodes would have to be compromised for the service to screech to a halt.
  2. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    I agree. The idea behind this project is to be a huge ad-hoc network, and this would only be realistic over land - not water. I don't think that it loses its purpose however. Free voice, video, and texting nationwide would be worth it. Free streaming services, gaming, and websites nationwide would be worth it. All in all I would agree that a direct replacement for the internet, without service providers, is unlikely. However, an alternative network for unregulated file transfer, free communications, and nation-wide services is certainly worth the effort. Wouldn't you agree?
  3. chroud

    Clean energy technology .... ftw?

    I think we have to look at much more than just Egypt - there is a lot of civil unrest in that entire area, from Tunisia up into Western Europe and over to the Middle-East. I really don't have the expertise to determine how this stuff affects the market, but we have a lot of countries in conflict these days. I can't imagine that's any good for oil-markets or markets in general.
  4. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    I don't think we need an alternative, but I think it's a good exercise to look at alternatives. I list all the advantages on the website. It in no way is meant to be anti-government (unless anti-government means not wanting government to regulate our networks) or anti-capitalist (is wanting things better and cheaper anti-capitalist?) My reasons for this model? - Non-regulated. Neutral networking should be a given in a free society. - My high priced bills for both internet and phone make me angry. I would love to see a system that doesn't need providers. - No wires and full mobility. The network would be a giant "hotspot" where access is widely available. - Green. Without a physical infrastructure, there are no repairs, data centers, or service trucks - no cities being torn up to accommodate the network. - Progressive with technology: an infrastructure upgrade is as simple as releasing new devices.
  5. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    What I'm talking about are security features inherent to the infrastructure, not implemented. Yes it is easier to patch into a single channel, than setup the hardware to intercept many wireless channels over a multiple miles-wide radius. Obviously you can't just cut open into a wired network and get away with it, but that has everything to do with the security features, not the infrastructure, and security features can be implemented into any network model. [color="#CCCCCC"]For large amounts of data, contained transmission methods (Cable/directed open air like Microwave Transmission) will always be superior or undirected/loosely directed transmission.[/quote] That is true. The overhead of a mesh topology usually resides in multi-directional transmission and the "hops" "skips" or "jumps" to traverse the network. The question though, is whether or not the advancement of wireless technology, paired with a distributed model, would overcome this overhead and potentially surpass it.
  6. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    Thanks for the critiques! That is the point of the project. To think about if we could make something better than the decades old networking models. In response to routing, since we would be starting from scratch, don't we have some alternative technologies we can consider today for routing packets? GPS? We don't exactly have to conform to IP-style routing if we aren't abiding by an internet protocol to begin with. I do agree that routing would be difficult though - it would require research and expansion of existing mesh network algorithms - but that's the fun of an open-source project right? [color="#CCCCCC"]What is stopping someone from simply snooping all traffic. It's just a matter of hardware resources. Apply some network analysis and determine narrowest points. Again, attacking weakest link.[/quote] Well then we're talking about someone who is willing to create an entire hardware infrastructure that is capable of reliably intercepting, channeling, processing, and decoding collections of packets within a miles-wide radius. I would think it would be much easier to patch in to the current single-channel network than it would be to set up the extremely involved aforementioned process. [color="#CCCCCC"]The problem comes when you look at the legal system in single pipeline vs air. If you mess with the pipeline, you are in legal trouble.[/quote] Legally, I would think the only requirement would be owning the operation frequency. The network is completely detached from current pipelines - all it uses is frequency space [color="#CCCCCC"]Since with your data transmission rate is proportional to the time between subsequent wave peaks, fiber will always have better data transmission speeds than WiFI.[/quote] First of all, we're not talking about WiFi - we're talking about the newer technologies that use higher frequencies, such as WiMAX. Also, certainly a single channel wireless transmission will be slower than single channel fibre, but what about data transmitting over 100 devices in parallel? Each channel is transmitting 1/100th of the original data, with local transmission speeds. Let's say we resend half of the packets, and lose half of the theoretical peak to interference... we're still talking about 500 mb/s relay per jump for the collection of data. Won't we eventually reach a point in wireless technology where the distance and speed we can do wirelessly, will out perform the overhead of the jumps?
  7. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    [color="#CCCCCC"]this?[/quote] Well, not really. Like that but a distributed model, using modern technology (not WiFi), parallel transfer, and optimized for remote processing (cloud computing). Also, not connected to the "internet". ChroudNet services will be much different in software, so they won't be in touch with the internet. Data has to be packed differently for distributed relay, and use an exclusively streaming model. It would in all senses of the term be a new internet. But obviously referred to currently as an alternative to the internet - a replacement won't come to fruition for decades.
  8. chroud

    Will we always need service providers?

    Most of these issues are addressed with the model on the website : http://www.chroud.com/chroudnet/ Speed: The model is based on distributed transfer, similar to how .torrents work. Small amounts of information are passed over many devices, multiplying the speed by the number of users in the network. (In a peak theoretical model) 50 devices relaying a distributed request, with a conservative local up and down of 20 mb/s, would be passing information at 1 gb/s per jump. If half of those packets fail and have to be resent, you're still looking at 500 mb/s. The future of WiMAX is looking at over 100 mb/s over many miles distance. Security: Because each device is only responsible for relaying a fraction of the original data, no single device will be operating with anything meaningful. And with encryption that could rely on the collection of data, the actual request couldn't be understood unless all the fractional pieces were met in collection on a single device. To me this seems more secure than the current model where everything runs through a single pipeline. All in all, the project isn't intended to replace anything. Just an alternative, fun, open-source networking model that might some day in the future prove to be better.
  9. Just launched new project. Open-source initiative for building a new network: http://www.chroud.com
  10. I was thinking about posting this in the networking forum, but it doesn't really have to do with games. Anyway, I just started a project for the discussion and development of a new, open-source networking infrastructure and interface. One of its main goals is to eliminate the need for service providers by sharing the relay of data over devices, wirelessly, instead of a physical infrastructure like Comcast. Please look at the model to see what I'm talking about: [color=#CCCCCC][size=2]http://www.chroud.com/chroudnet/ I feel eventually, wireless technologies like WiMAX and the like will be able to provide fast wireless transfer over miles-wide radii - won't we get to a point where we can be our own infrastructure? So that's my question - will we always need service providers? Other questions this project brings up: 1.) Can we design a networking infrastructure that utilizes parallel relay - similar to a multi-core processor? 2.) Can we design a better network for future technologies like full-blown cloud computing? Also, if you're interested in joining the project - it just started today! Head over to http://www.chroud.com
  11. That is typically how I view structs. The difference between the two is more of a mental thing for me. Though they both are capable of doing the same things, I see structs as performing different tasks than classes and, to me at least, this helps code clarity. I've noticed this in others' code as well. For instance I would never use a struct for a large complex object, but as edd said: for dumb objects. In my code, I do kind of use structs as a sort of "dunce hat".
  12. chroud

    What do you see?

    Thanks a lot for the input guys - especially isometrixk, thanks for the very constructive reply! dublindan - Thanks for the rendition. I'm working more in that direction now, using more solid shapes so it isn't so busy. I've decided to keep working on this as part of the project's identity, but I'm leaving it out of the logo.
  13. chroud

    What do you see?

    @DonCarnage - hehe, yes that was the unintended outcome that I was hoping no one would see.
  14. chroud

    What do you see?

    "broken shadow volume" - hah, you're right... just had a quick flashback to those days Anyway I scrapped it. Here's what I saw: 1.) Firstly (intended) - A guy with an alien shaped head running to the right, looking back over his shoulder, and waving his hand in the air in a "follow me" way. 2.) Secondly (unintended) - Same alien head guy, bowing up and giving the finger to.. something over to the left
  15. chroud

    What do you see?

    [font=arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=2]Luckily, my website is about Ninja Hummingbird Porn... so... looks like it's not too abstract after all.[/font]
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!