Re: ad-hoc wifi news transport

Toaster <news@dne3.net> wrote:

On 4/4/2025 7:54 PM, bp@www.zefox.net wrote:
snip

I don't think it required unique hostnames, though they were preferred,
since the bang paths generally were different for different hosts even
if the had the same name. In a sense the bang path was the identity of
any given host.
 
UUCP died out because DNS and ICANN made TCP/IP much easier to administer
and was incomparably faster. With with some thought it might be useful
again.
 
Thanks for reading,
 
bob prohaska
 

I'd like to experiment around with uucp and nncp. looking at nncp
protocol currently.

Are you thinking of using WiFi LANs as the transport layer?

My router can see about a dozen WAPs, each of them can likely see
more than a dozen each. If I could peer with just a few of them and
we all agreed to share some fraction of our bandwidth back to our
ISP and other peers it would make for a rather dense mesh.

bob prohaska