network topology and stuff

[Toni W. <to...@ik...>]

On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 11:29, riki wrote:
> hello
ehlo

> i saw many offers from various people here on the list or on 
> silc/silcnet for $SUBJ. There is still only one, making one of most 
> interesting feature of silc completely unusable.
> 
> i think we should start building serious silc network which will not be 
> dependent on single machine. i see really no reason why this couldn`t be 
> done. if i am wrong, correct me.
> 

I agree. 

In my opinion we should start to create large SilcNET at some point.
When the time is ready, I don't know. Pekka perhaps enlights us with
technical stuff about backup routing.

IMHO it's much better to have one large network with nice admins you
already know, than let unknown people set up multiple little networks
and later try to merge them with no success.

There have been offers for new servers from many people around the world
already, some of them will propably want to run a router or backup
router already.

As Pekka and perhaps some others have said in chat earlier the topology
of one cell should not be based on political/geographical borders, like
countries. Instead one cell should contain servers from multiple
locations, countries and continents. Correct me if I've understood the
idea wrong way (which would not be very suprising).


Also some kind of SilcNET organization should be set up to think and
discuss about network topology, linking policies, admin behaviour
policies and so on. Those things have to be decided before the network
grows too large or otherwise the game is over before it even starts.

There is already silcopers' mailinglist, could that be used as
discussion forum for further topology and organizational stuff?
If so, the address of the list could be published for interested
parties, currently it's not public.

> riki

- Toni