earxtacy a écrit 857 commentaires

dés qu'on a fondé wireless-fr.org avec cedric on avait eu cette idée aussi (ipv6+Wlan)
mais malheureusement on a pas eu les moyens encore de le faire.
D'ailleus depuis la 1er semaine de creation de wireless-fr.org un gars de la section R&D de france telecom suit nos mailings lists.
C'est aussi une idée que tous le monde peut avoir tant elle est logique sans fil et mobilité forcement on pense a ipv6.
Petite anecdote ( si quelqu'un peut confimer ou pas!)si vous regardez nos stats du mois de janvier,
http://wireless.planet-service.fr/statistiques/(...)
ils semblent que les deux IP en deuxieme et troisieme position viennent de FT.
Bon week end.
Marc
PS: cedric t'as disparu ?

je vote pour toi :)

pour le 802.11b (11mbs)
voila ce que dis cet article
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/sohocablefree/3.(...)

"In effect, the wireless NetBlaster cards are transferring files at a rate about 3.6 times slower then a 100Mbps Ethernet card. "
ce qui n'est pas mal!

j'oubliais je remercie aussi la FING de nous inviter et linuxfr pour avoir permis la creation
du projet.
Pour ce qui est des couts cela devient tres abordable ( un AP=1600fr, une carte 800fr )et pour la porté 10 miles avec des boites de pringles c'est plutot pas mal :)
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/448(...)
ou encore chez nos amis de louvain
http://bombolong.aisbl.org/index.php?BoiteDeConserve1(...)
et pour la tres longue distance:
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wireless/2001/05/03/longshot.html(...)
voila !

si vous voulez nous aider
http://www.wireless-fr.org(...)

l'article de libé il y a quelques jours:
http://www.liberation.fr/quotidien/semaine/020102-040018019ECON.htm(...)

merci, marc.

"Peut-être faudra-t-il nous pencher sur le Wireless ? Je
doute que les débits soient suffisants pour les fanatiques
de jeux en réseau ;-)"

les debits vont bien merci,
demande a fabien qui downloadait a plusieurs centaines de kilos par seconde a la hal2001
avec ma carte wireless.
La derniere fois que je downloadais j'etais a 460 ko/s
mais je pense que le hub a la source limitait un peu !
mais je pense que tu voulais surtout parler de ping..la je ne me rappelle plus trop des chiffres qui etaient tres bons mais sur une longue distance je ne sais pas!
si cela t'interesse rejoins nous
http://wireless-fr.org(...)
nous serons a autrans pour des demos
http://www.autrans2002.org(...)
la loi semble bouger dans le bon sens et nous
sommes bien content !
marc de wireless-fr.org

oui merci (marc)

voici la reponse de theo sur une liste
"vkd" <vkd79@nospam.yahoo.com> writes:

> I really hope that a few angry words aren't going to be the deciding factor
> when it comes to such a good product.

Darren says so, however "angry words" are not what are at issue. What
is happening is this:

All the various licenses on ipf (there are a couple now) make it clear
that it is not Open Source (www.opensource.org) or Free Software (ask
the FSF). Go read the rules for yourself.

If source code does not permit _modification_ and _distribution_ by
any and all parties for any and all purposes, it is not completely
free.

Come on, go to www.opensource.org and read the rules!

And, if it not completely free, then it does not belong in any project
that claims to only include free code.

That includes all the BSD projects and also many Linux projects.

This isn't something new; it is just a mistake that was made. Other
things with similar licenses are being resolved now, for instance: tcp
wrappers (from Wietse), yacc test stuff, cron's popen.c file,
login_fbtab (from Wietse's logdaemon code), and md5 from RSA. All of
these have already been fixed now either by replacing the code or by
the authors changing the license. Others have to be fixed too: the
multicast daemon toolsets (Xerox, Stanford, USD), rpc.pcnfsd (Sun),
slstats and pppstats (LBL), pppd and ppp code (various copyright
holders), and parts of tcpdump and lex. It's going to be a lot of work.

But we make a promise that we try to release free code. I am sure
that most of the authors of the above packages had no idea that
modification has to be explicity granted for stuff to really be free
software; and like Wietse once they become aware they will react with
"Oh, of course I wanted it to be free, here is a new license that permits
modification".

Darren has chosen not to change his license to permit modification.
That is OK; it is HIS decision for a license on HIS work.

We are not forcing him at all. There's no point in talking to him
about this (and why would I want to, since he's all over various chat
forums doing character assasination of me and the OpenBSD project,
suggesting that we tried to "force" him).

> the reasons I even use BSD. But this is my opinion. Where do the project
> leaders see this issue going? Is Darren's license so unreasonable?

No, his license is completely reasonable. It's his software. He can
set his license to anything he wants. However, it conflicts with the
license on software that is included in OpenBSD. Hence, out of
respect for his wishes as written in his license, we are not permitted
by our Open Source/Free Software rules from including ipf in the
future.

> Is it
> different from the copyright held by Theo on the layout of the cd?

Outside of what copyright law says, this is very different. The
copyright on the CD is on layout and paid-for artwork. The intent of
using copyright law to retain ownership varies from work to work: In
our case, this is to discourage other vendors from simply taking our
layout efforts which we go through every 6 months, and distributing
CDs using that layout; our project needs to see money from our
product. We need that money. It ensures that we keep doing that. We
make stuff available on the FTP sites. (What do YOU give me for free?)

> Can't
> this thing just be resolved amicably so both parties are happy? I am sure
> IPFilter is a very popular package and not everyone would be happy to see it
> go!

It cannot be resolved. It is not our right to bother Darren with
pleas or other comments as to his license. I suppose you people can,
since it bothers you. It doesn't bother us: we had no option, since
the rules are clear.

We either had to remove ipf, or we had to remove comments on our web
pages which say that we "try to provide an operating system that
anyone can use for any and all purposes".

Which would you rather we remove?

If you don't understand why the level of freedom that we are striving
for is important, perhaps ask yourself why 99.9% of our source tree
has licenses that permit anyone to do anything; and only 0.1% doesn't,
and these are now either being repaired or replaced. This isn't just
me -- our entire development community believes in the importance of
this. This freedom came out of the University of California CSRG, and
it is the foundation that permitted us to take the original code from
4.4BSD and start working on it; It is also the foundation which
permits companies like NFR to take OpenBSD and build it into a product
without having to hire a cadre of laywers "asking for permission"
component by component. If you don't understand that, then fine --
this fanatical level of freedom is something that we (CSRG, and now
the *BSD projects) been striving for for almost 15 years. Accept it.

Recently Darren has said this in mail:

> The licence is intended to mean that people can use (which includes modify
> or patch or tune, as seen fit) IPFilter as found within FreeBSD/NetBSD for
> whatever purpose they desire - so long as the conditions (due credit and the
> notice) are met.

I want to reiterate that this is not an Open Source or Free Software
compatible license. It specifically says who the software is free
for; it does not say that it is free for anyone and everyone.

Have you gone to www.opensource.org yet and carefully read the rules
for Open Source?

Don't believe me? Ask Eric Raymond, or Richard Stallman.

I don't think I will comment on this again; because it is pretty
boring and taken care of. I have other stuff to do that is far more
interesting.

--
This space not left unintentionally unblank. deraadt@openbsd.org
Open Source means some restrictions apply, limits are placed, often quite
severe. Free Software has _no_ serious restrictions. OpenBSD is Free Software.

pourquoi on dis salope alors !
j'aime pas c 'est pas logique..

non c'est pas vrai je l'ai vu qu'une seul fois enervé..et pourtant j'en lis pas mal!
il est svt tres explicatifs, patient est soucieux!
et tres droit..
c'est cela que j'aprecie le mec est entier et impartial à l'image de son systême!

moi je l'attends dans ma boite aux lettres...
j'espere surtout le bon support des cartes wireless..
celles ci :
wireless Ethernet Adapters

Aironet 802.11DS PCMCIA and PCI (an)
RayLink Aviator2.4/Pro 802.11FH PCMCIA (ray)
WaveLAN 802.11DS PCMCIA (wi)
Addtron AWP-100 802.11DS PCMCIA (wi)

Pendant que j'y suis un pti coup de pub :
http://www.wireless-fr.org(...)

comme il est demmandé + haut
si l'ancienne version a une licence
+ souple ,ils peuvent reprendres les sources!
a moins qu'il y est une notion de possesion!!

Jamais theo ne repoussera la sortie du 3.0
viabilité economique
et finira les modifs ds le 3.1!!

Apres le l'initiative d'un internet haut debit ,ss fil et gratuit, une bibliotheque partagé !!!
c un bon week end ;-)))

inscrivez vous a la mailing list cela mange pas de pain!
;-)

je donne un coup de main !
pr le debut apres on verra ;-)
voici donc la page:
http://www.multimania.com/wirelessfr/(...)

et le mail est celui ci dessus
!

je trouve ce concept vraiment genial!
j'avais entendu parler de ce groupe!
c la seule vrai idée genial, autonome , independante , rebelle et libre (ds ts les sens du termes ) depuis des lustres..
malheureusement en france c verrouillé, comme d'habitude nos législateurs pensent a tout,
surtout a leur monopole!!

si mes souvenirs sont bons ces "hackers" sont responsables de back orifice, le troyen le + efficace q je connaisse...!!

"Bon il reste encore Hewlett Packard, "
oui mais HP c hewlet packard!!

justement il m'a pas trop attendu!! :)
mais fallait qu'il aille a l'autre bout du departement!!

je suis tres insatisfait de hp..
j'ai recu le 11 octobre 2000,
15 station hp vectra 400vl,
depuis j'ai eu 4 carte meres grillées,et aujourdhui un disque dur..
ils viennent assez vite, mais ca prend vraiment la tete!!!
les techniciens ils sont justes formés a changer les pieces et la direction d'hp ne font aucun effort pr eux.

Niveau formation les mecs connaisent a peine linux (pas les bsd!!!), pas les reseaux.
Ces mecs sont cantonnés ds leurs postes et ils leur donnent pas la chance d'evoluer!!
ils courent ds toute la region,parfois ils bouffent meme pas a midi!
il y en a un l'autre fois qui a passé son repas a m'attendre!!
Ces mecs ont l'air trop desesperé la derniere fois, je vais pr lui demander de rentrer a HP et lui me demande comment faire pr avoir mon job!!
quelle tristesse...
une gde boite comme celle la!

"C'est toujours les meilleurs qui s'en vont les premiers :-(
"
je l'ai dis y a pas longtemps
et c une des phrases q j'utlise bien trop svt malheureusement..
en ts cas une interface comme celle de beos
c quelle chose d'enorme,
et si elle etait sous openbsd ou linux ca serait royal
kde et enlightnement commence a etre bien prtant.
mais l'interface de be a quelque chose de formidable= sa simplicité!!

avant de faire du smp il font un bon produit..
linus en est tjs a modifier des elements essentiels comme la pile tpc/ip , la memoire virtuelle (qu'il envie a freebsd d'ailleurs),
a noté aussi q le smp n'est pas au top sous linux...!!

c'est qu'il est bien le gars
d'accord av toi
ca pourris la santé et rend tout mou
et tu perds l'envie de te bouger le cul et bossé pas bon pas bon!!
alors essayes
"GNU/linux lets you more time for fucking "

ptain t'es nul je l'ai pris ds l'oeil..
arff...
elle est bonne qd meme ! ;-)
dis pr ta siganture tu veux pas prendre
"GNU/linux lets you smoke more gandja "?