* steve ulrich <sulrich at botwerks.org> [020509 22:39]: > i would concur with this - there are a few different mechanisms for the > routing of traffic to the nearest (and best) internet gw in the overlay I'm somewhat convinced we shouldn't get into the business of providing internet bandwidth and leave that up to people that want to either vpn into their home networks or make arrangements with individual gateways on the overlay network. Perhaps it would be a nice future goal on the overlay network, but I don't think it should be a driving force. Overlays, IMO, are to free myself from copper and another monthly fee for a long transport pipe, and not necessarily for a internet connection. I'm not sure how may people can provide connectivity for free without liability or cost. On another note, I wonder how hard it would be to use IPSEC/AH to provide QoS over saturated links to 'contributing members'. IE: let anyone use the links, but the people who ponied up money for equipment and time and stuff get some priority. Not to be elite, but to be rewarding and as an incentive if we ever come to the problem of having that much usage. I think both of these problems are problems we hope to have, someday, too. :) -- Scott Dier <dieman at ringworld.org> http://www.ringworld.org/