# Telecommunications Reclaimed: A Hands-On Guide to Networking Communities

Melanie Dulong de Rosnay, Félix Tréguer, Panayotis Antoniadis, Ileana Apostol, Virginie Aubrée, Adam Burns, Maria Michalis, Jürgen Neumann, Ramon Roca I Tió

► To cite this version:

Melanie Dulong de Rosnay, Félix Tréguer, Panayotis Antoniadis, Ileana Apostol, Virginie Aubrée, et al. (Dir.). Telecommunications Reclaimed: A Hands-On Guide to Networking Communities. ISOC, 2019, 978-92-95113-15-2. halshs-02414439

HAL Id: halshs-02414439

https://shs.hal.science/halshs-02414439

Submitted on 16 Dec 2019

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
RECLAIMED: A HANDS-ON
GUIDE TO NETWORKING
COMMUNITIES

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>
TELECOMMUNICATIONS RECLAIMED:
A HANDS-ON GUIDE TO NETWORKING COMMUNITIES

MÉLANIE DULONG DE ROSNAY & FÉLIX TRÉGUER (EDS.)
## Acknowledgements

The research presented in this book, the writing residency and the editing process were funded by the Horizon 2020 programme of the European Union (Grant Number 688768), project netCommons Network Infrastructure as Commons (netcommons.eu).

The production of this book was co-funded by the European project netCommons (see above) and published with the additional support of the Internet Society (Jane Coffin) and the Association for Progressive Communications (Flavia Fascendini and Carlos Rey-Moreno).

## ISBN

978-92-95113-15-2

Published by Internet Society
Printed in the USA
2019

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this book are not necessarily the views of the Internet Society.

This book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 available at International license www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

You can download this book at www.netcommons.eu/telecommunications-reclaimed
**Editors**

Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay, CNRS
Félix Tréguer, CNRS

**Authors**

Panayotis Antoniadis, NetHood
Ileana Apostol, NetHood
Virginie Aubrée, University of Trento,
University of Paris Nanterre
Adam Burns, free2air
Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay, CNRS
Maria Michalis, University of
Westminster
Jürgen Neumann, Freifunk.net
Ramon Roca, guifi.net
Félix Tréguer, CNRS

**Contributors of stories**

Benjamin Bayart, FFDN
Bruno Spiquel, SCANI
Pierre Crémault, Franciliens.net
Leonardo Maccari, University of
Venice
Arthur Messaud, La Quadrature
du Net
Mireia Roura, eReuse.org
Oriane Piquer-Louis, FFDN

**Illustrations and layout**

Sarah Viguer

**Booksprint facilitator**

Andreas Wichmann

**Peer review**

Christian Fuchs, University of
Westminster
Renato Lo Cigno, University of Trento,
University of Brescia
Bruno Spiquel, SCANI

**Copy editing**

Lori Nordstrom, APC

**Publication production support**

Cathy Chen, APC
## Panayotis Antoniadis, NetHood

Panayotis Antoniadis is co-founder of NetHood Zurich. He has a transdisciplinary profile combining computer science, distributed systems, economics, urban studies, and the politics of the internet. He contributes to various research and action projects like Langstrasse200.ch (L200), INURA.org, 5im5i.ch, NeNa1.ch, Openki.net and CNSIG.info.

## Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay

Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay, PhD in law, is associate research professor at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) since 2010 and director of the CNRS Centre for Internet and Society (CIS CNRS) which she co-founded in 2019.

## Virginie Aubrée

Virginie Aubrée is a PhD candidate in law at the Centre of Research on Public Law, at the University of Paris Nanterre since 2018. Her research focuses on the digital commons. She is volunteer and a member of Franciliens.net, a French community network, and of the digital rights advocacy group La Quadrature du Net.

## Ileana Apostol, NetHood

Ileana Apostol (PhD in Urban Planning, University of Southern California) is a researcher of contemporary spatial production, proposing a dialectical take of urban research and design pedagogy, and co-founder of NetHood Zurich. To provide citizens the right to the hybrid city she bridges transdisciplinary research with neighbourhood action. Ileana has taught urban planning and design in Los Angeles at California Polytechnic University and at the University of Southern California, and in Bucharest at the University of Architecture and Urbanism.

## Ramon Roca

Ramon Roca is co-founder and the president of Fundació Privada per a la Xarxa Oberta, Lliure i Neutral guifi.net (The Foundation for the Open, Free and Neutral Network - guifi.net). He has always been involved in IT social projects. In 2003 he set up the first link of what a few months later became the guifi.net community network.
## Juergen Neumann, Freifunk.net

Juergen Neumann started working with information technology in 1984 and since then has been looking for ways to deploy ICT in useful ways for organisations and society. As a consultant for ICT strategy and implementation, he has worked for major German and international companies and many non-profit projects. In 2002 he cofounded www.freifunk.net, a campaign for spreading knowledge and social networking about free and open networks. Freifunk is globally regarded as one of the most successful community projects in this field.

## Maria Michalis

Maria Michalis (Ph.D. in Communication Policy) is Associate Professor in Communication Policy at the University of Westminster, London. She is an expert on European Union media policy, and author of "Governing European Communications" (Lexington, 2007) and numerous book chapters and academic journal articles.

## Adam Burns

Adam Burns is an internet and community network pioneer with a passion for disintermediated, peer-to-peer, human-centric communications. He founded free2air, Europe's first open public community wireless network and has contributed to many other local network initiatives in Africa, the Middle East and Australia. He is currently the Chief Information Security Officer for Media in Cooperation and Transition (MiCT), where he trains information security best practices to journalists and media practitioners and develops emergency broadcast radio systems.

## Félix Tréguer

Félix Tréguer is an associate researcher at the CNRS Centre for Internet and Society (CIS CNRS), a postdoctoral fellow at the Centre for international studies (CERI Sciences Po) and a founding member of the association La Quadrature du Net (LQDN).
List of authors 6

Foreword 15

List of acronyms 22

## Part I. WHAT ARE COMMUNITY NETWORKS? 24

1. Introduction 27

Story # 1: FAQ or community networks in a nutshell 29

2. Meet some great community networks! 33

2.1. consume.net London, United Kingdom 33

2.2. Freifunk Germany 34

2.3. guifi.net Spain 39

2.4. Fédération FDN France 40

2.5. Sarantaporo.gr Greece 43

2.6. ninux.org Italy 45

3. The ‘Network’ in Community Networks 49

3.1. Nodes 49

3.1.1. Routers 49

3.1.2. Clients and servers 51

Story # 2: The trend toward (de)centralisation and how community networks can help decentralise, with the help of Free Software 53

3.2. Links, Backbone, Gateway 54

3.2.1. Links and backbones 54

3.2.2. A gateway to the internet 55

3.3. Similarities and differences with other main resources 56

4. The ‘Community’ in community networks 59

4.1. What community? 59

4.2. Community and the notion of space 61

Story # 3: L200 a hybrid neighbourhood node in central Zurich (Ileana Apostol) 62

## Part II. WHY ARE COMMUNITY NETWORKS IMPORTANT? 64

5. Introduction to community networks philosophy 67

5.1. Direct, decentralised ownership and self-governance 67

Story # 4: Appropriating the PicoPeering Agreement (by Jürgen Neumann) 69

5.2. Direct interconnection and local interaction 70
<table><tbody><tr><td><strong>6. Learning and experimenting</strong></td><td>71</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 5: Learning together leads to further philosophical &amp; political views (by Adam Burns)</td><td>72</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 6: From computer research to Community Networks (Leonardo Maccari)</td><td>73</td></tr><tr><td><strong>7. Community networks and Human Rights</strong></td><td>75</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.1. Censorship</td><td>75</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.2. Net Neutrality</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.3. Privacy and surveillance</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;7.4. Enabling digital rights</td><td>78</td></tr><tr><td><strong>8. Solidarity and the right to the city</strong></td><td>81</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 7: Sarantaporo: bringing mountainous communities closer together (by Ileana Apostol)</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Part III. WHAT DO I NEED TO START A COMMUNITY NETWORK?</strong></td><td><strong>86</strong></td></tr><tr><td><strong>9. Things you should consider when starting a community network</strong></td><td>89</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 8: Bootstrapping a community network</td><td>89</td></tr><tr><td><strong>10. Keep in mind various aspects of sustainability</strong></td><td>93</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 9: A few hints from guifi.net on making a good start (by Ramon Roca)</td><td>96</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Organisation: making the community sustainable</td><td>96</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Economic sustainability: funding community networks</td><td>96</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Political sustainability: agreeing on a basic set of values</td><td>97</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 10: Minimising the ecological cost of community networks (by Mireira Roura)</td><td>98</td></tr><tr><td><strong>11. Finding support</strong></td><td>101</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 11: Joining forces in hybrid spaces: the Battlemesh encounter (by Panayotis Antoniadis)</td><td>103</td></tr><tr><td><strong>12. Self-teaching resources: a short collection</strong></td><td>111</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Part IV. HOW TO START A COMMUNITY NETWORK?</strong></td><td><strong>114</strong></td></tr><tr><td><strong>13. Seeding nodes in a community network</strong></td><td>117</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Story # 12: The story of groundzero (by vortex)</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The host</td><td>118</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td>The wireless card</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>Connectors, cabling & antenna</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>Client connections</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 13: Seeding the first Freifunk nodes (by Jürgen Neumann)</td><td>121</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 14: Kickstarting guifi.net (by Ramon Roca)</td><td>122</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td><strong>14. Explore your technical options</strong></td><td>125</td></tr><tr><td>14.1. Gateway to the internet</td><td>125</td></tr><tr><td>14.2. Nodes and links</td><td>126</td></tr><tr><td>14.3. Wireless</td><td>126</td></tr><tr><td>14.4. Fibre</td><td>127</td></tr><tr><td>14.5. Servers</td><td>129</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td><strong>15. Start organising your community</strong></td><td>131</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td><strong>16. Decide on your legal status</strong></td><td>133</td></tr><tr><td>16.1. Why should you consider incorporating your community network?</td><td>133</td></tr><tr><td>16.2. What are the different legal statuses that you may consider?</td><td>134</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 15: Guifi.net becoming a foundation (by Ramon Roca)</td><td>135</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 16: When a community networks becomes a cooperative (by Spyou)</td><td>137</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 17: Freifunk getting a legal status (by Jürgen Neumann)</td><td>139</td></tr><tr><td>16.3. Should I formally register as an internet access provider?</td><td>140</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 18: Registering to telecom authorities: an easy way to become a legitimate stakeholder (by Pierre)</td><td>141</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td><strong>17. Consider your revenue models</strong></td><td>143</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 19: An example of small scale ad hoc economic model for community networking: free2air (by Adam Burns)</td><td>145</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 20: The cost structure of Freifunk (by Jürgen Neumann)</td><td>146</td></tr></table>

## Part V. HOW TO GET A COMMUNITY NETWORK REALLY RUNNING? 148

<table><tr><td><strong>18. Monitoring and managing your network</strong></td><td>151</td></tr><tr><td>18.1. Why monitor?</td><td>151</td></tr><tr><td>Troubleshooting</td><td>152</td></tr><tr><td>Network Planning</td><td>158</td></tr><tr><td>18.2. What to Monitor?</td><td>158</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 21: Tools, knowledge & self-management: with great powers come great responsibility (by Adam Burns)</td><td>160</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td><strong>19. Respect the law, protect privacy</strong></td><td>163</td></tr><tr><td>19.1. Are all data equal?</td><td>163</td></tr><tr><td>Personal data v. anonymous data</td><td>164</td></tr><tr><td>Metadata v. content</td><td>164</td></tr><tr><td>19.2. Inform your community about data processing</td><td>166</td></tr><tr><td>19.3. Do you have to log your community's communication?</td><td>167</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 22: La Quadrature du Net stops obeying French data retention laws (by Arthur Messaud from La Quadrature du Net)</td><td>169</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td><strong>20. Balance your accounting sheet</strong></td><td>171</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 23: guifi.net's large-scale compensation system: How can volunteers and professionals work together to build a network commons (by Ramon Roca)</td><td>173</td></tr></table>

## Part VI. HOW TO MAKE A COMMUNITY NETWORK SUSTAINABLE? 176

<table><tr><td><strong>21. Organise your governance</strong></td><td>179</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 24: How to foster inclusive participation for all?</td><td>180</td></tr><tr><td>Example from a Community Garden</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Story # 25: How to take decisions about funding and independence? Example from a community radio station</td><td>181</td></tr><tr><td>21.1. An architecture of the governance</td><td>182</td></tr><tr><td>21.2. Design principles for commons</td><td>183</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 26: Freifunk Memorandum of Understanding (by Jürgen Neumann)</td><td>186</td></tr><tr><td>Freifunk Memorandum of Understanding</td><td>187</td></tr><tr><td>Preamble</td><td>187</td></tr><tr><td>Goals of Freifunk</td><td>188</td></tr><tr><td>Our vision</td><td>188</td></tr><tr><td>Principles of Freifunk</td><td>188</td></tr><tr><td>Technical principles</td><td>188</td></tr><tr><td>Social principles</td><td>190</td></tr><tr><td>Proper handling of information and knowledge</td><td>190</td></tr><tr><td>Forms of organisation</td><td>191</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td><strong>22. Fund your upgrades</strong></td><td>193</td></tr><tr><td>Story # 27: Good practices for funding and upgrades at a large scale implemented at guifi.net (by Ramon Roca)</td><td>195</td></tr></table>
**23. Know the law regarding access to infrastructures** 197

23.1. Free WiFi hotspots: do I have to password-protect our connection? 197

Story # 28: Freifunk's dealings with the police: don't password protect (unless required by a judge) (Jürgen Neumann) 199

23.2. How can the community access other infrastructures? 200

Story # 29: Guifi.net denounces the non-application of the European telecommunication and competition regulation (October 2018) 202

Story # 30: FFDN's open letter to incumbent operator Orange and Arcep, the national telecommunication authority in France (October 2018) 204

**24. Engage in political advocacy** 207

Story # 31: Guifi's tractor protest (by Ramon Roca) 212

Story # 32: "Freifunk not fear" campaign on secondary liability in Germany (by Jürgen Neumann) 213

**25. Assess your sustainability** 215

25.1. Economy 215

25.2. Nature & environment 217

25.3. Politics & organisation 218

25.4. Culture 218

**Part VII. APPENDICES** 220

**A. The Pico-Peering Agreement v1.0** 221

Preamble 221

Agreement 221

Definition of terms 222

The PPA in practice 222

**B. Terms of Use for Community Networks (netCommons template)** 223

B.1. Introduction 223

B.2. Creating a trust-based relationship 224

Article 1: Description of the service & quality 224

Article 2: How to join the community? 225

Article 3: Modification of terms of use 225

Article 4: Price of the service [optional] 225

Article 5: Duration and termination 225
<table><tbody><tr><td>B.3. Ensuring access to our Infrastructure</td><td>225</td></tr><tr><td>Article 6: What the Community is accountable for</td><td>225</td></tr><tr><td>Article 7: Open Communication and Net Neutrality</td><td>226</td></tr><tr><td>B.4. Protecting your privacy</td><td>226</td></tr><tr><td>Article 8: What data do we collect?</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>Article 9: How do we process collected data?</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>Article 10: Retention of data</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>Article 11: Your rights</td><td>228</td></tr><tr><td><strong>C. Guidelines to policy-makers</strong></td><td>230</td></tr><tr><td>C.1. Inviting community networks to the policy table</td><td>231</td></tr><tr><td>C.2. Lifting unnecessary regulatory and financial burdens</td><td>232</td></tr><tr><td>C.3. Limiting civil and criminal liability for people sharing internet access</td><td>233</td></tr><tr><td>C.4. Expanding the spectrum commons</td><td>234</td></tr><tr><td>C.5. Updating open-access rules on private and public telecom infrastructures</td><td>235</td></tr><tr><td>C.6. Protecting free software and user freedom in radio equipment</td><td>236</td></tr><tr><td>C.7. Exploring other measures supporting the development of community networks</td><td>238</td></tr><tr><td><strong>D. Glossary of legal and technical terms</strong></td><td>239</td></tr><tr><td><strong>E. Suggested readings</strong></td><td>250</td></tr><tr><td>E.1. Legal, policy, history</td><td>250</td></tr><tr><td>E.2. Ethics, social, economic</td><td>251</td></tr><tr><td>E.3. Technical</td><td>253</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>
This book is a guide on how to build a community network, a shared local telecommunications infrastructure, managed as a commons, to access the internet and other digital communications services. It was written collectively by a group of community network pioneers in Europe, activists and researchers during a writing residency week held in Vic, Catalonia in October 2018. It was a time of hard work and fast writing, but also of discussions in a friendly environment.

Meant for a wide audience, the book includes practical knowledge illustrated by several hands-on experiences - a set of 32 real-life stories - as well as legal, technical, governance, economic and policy material extracted from netCommons, a three-year-long research project supported by the European Commission. Its goal is to guide the reader through a set of actions aimed at setting up and fostering the growth of a community network, but also, for policy makers, local administrations and the general public, to create the right conditions to let community networks bloom and flourish.

Starting with presentations of successful community networks, and an introduction to the importance and the role of community networks, it provides step-by-step guidelines and concrete information on the resources needed to start a community network, get it running, and keep it sustainable in the long term. From technical options to economic models, governance choices, legal requirements, and the various skills
involved, this lively resource proposes ways to engage
with a local community at every stage of a community
network.

The book is organised in six parts that comprise 25
short chapters. The first parts address different topics,
starting with general definitions of what community
networks are, and why they are important in society and
in the global communications ecosystem. Next come
more technical parts that address different dimensions
(engineering, social, legal, political) on how to kickstart
a community network, how to let it grow properly, and
how to make it sustainable.

After three years of work and research, we are
convinced that there is no single recipe for the
success of a community network. To reflect this,
the book takes an "exemplify and experiment"
approach. The exemplification starts with success
stories which are framed within a more general and
methodological process to highlight positive patterns.
As for experimentation, it takes the form of questions
and reasoning around them to help the readers and
practitioners elaborate the right strategy for their
own context: social, cultural, economic, political and
geographic.

The significant emphasis on personal stories highlights
the fact that the book represents the perspective of a
specific group of people, gathered in a specific place in
a specific moment in time. The book takes a European
perspective, since all experiences documented have
taken place in various European countries. Some
technical details presented in the book might be
outdated today, and others will probably become
outdated in a few years. But since they are presented as
stories of key actors in the field of community networks,
we believe that they can remain a source of inspiration
to new community network pioneers around the world.

The book is completed by a seventh part with five
appendices. They include the Pico Peering Agreement,
a document formalising the interactions between
volunteers and owners of individual network nodes; a
template for terms of use (based on European law) that
will make community networks who use it legally safe
and robust; and guidelines for policy makers on how
to foster community networks (again, they are based
on the European legal environment). These appendices
are completed by a glossary to navigate the complexity
of technical terms that are needed to understand a
community network, and finally, a list of suggested
readings to strengthen knowledge on specific themes
and find appropriate resources to help increase know-
how and technical skills.
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

1

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

2
FOREWORD

3

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

4

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

1-2-3-4. In October 2018, hard work and lots of writing, but also great discussions
5

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

6

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>5. Guifi antenna on top of the Vic Seminary tower</figcaption></figure>

<caption>6. Vic Seminari in Catalonia</caption>
FOREWORD

7

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

8

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>7-8. Research on the illustrations</figcaption></figure>
**ADSL** Asymmetric digital subscriber line

**AP** Access point

**APC** Association for Progressive Communications

**ARCEP** Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes

**AS** Autonomous system

**AWMN** Athens Wireless Metropolitan Network

**B4RN** Broadband for the Rural North

**BSS** Basic service set

**CCC** Chaos Computer Club

**CJEU** Court of Justice of the European Union

**CN** Community network

**CPCE** Code of the Post and Electronic Communications

**DC3** Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity

**DIY** Do-it-yourself

**DPA** Data Protection Authority

**DSL** Digital subscriber line

**ECS** Electronic communication service

**ETX** Expected transmission count

**FFDN** Fédération FDN

**FDN** French Data Network

**FLOSS** Free/libre and open source software

**GDPR** General Data Protection Regulation
**GMO** Genetically modified organism

**ICT** Information and communication technology

**IEEE** International Electrical and Electronic Engineering

**IGF** Internet Governance Forum

**IP** Internet protocol

**ISOC** Internet Society

**ISP** Internet service provider

**ISS** Information society service

**ITU** International Telecommunication Union

**IT** Information technology

**LAN** Local area network

**NGO** Non-governmental organisation

**NRA** National regulatory authority

**OLSR** Optimised link state routing protocol

**P2P** Peer-to-peer

**PIN** Public Initiative Network

**PPA** Pico Peering Agreement

**SNR** Signal-to-noise ratio

**UNESCO** United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

**VPN** Virtual private network

**WLAN** Wireless local area network
# PART 1:
## WHAT ARE
## COMMUNITY
## NETWORKS?
Community networks are local telecommunications infrastructures set up by groups of people (a community) to connect to the internet and provide digital communications services.

They are built and managed as a commons, that is, a resource produced and maintained collectively, rather than held privately, as alternatives to large commercial or state networks and internet service providers.

Under this general description, we find different coordination and organisation models, from a legal entity, such as an association, to an informal group, and many different technical, economic and legal solutions respecting certain ethical values.

In this part of the guide, you will learn more about community networks in Europe, what they are, their goals and some key organisational features.
# 1. Introduction

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

Thank you so much for picking up this book about community networking. As you will see, it is meant to be a step-by-step guide on how to build a local telecommunications network that you will then be able to connect to the internet to serve the needs of your neighbourhood, of your village, of your city, maybe of an entire region.

But while doing so, and as the book will make clear, you will also improve the life of those around you, make your community stronger and more resilient, promote self-empowerment and knowledge-sharing.

You will have fun, and get to know and collaborate with people from very different backgrounds!

Community networks (CNs) started appearing in the 1990s, as the internet was growing in popularity. They have been called by many names: free networks, alternative telecom providers, do-it-yourself internet service providers (ISPs), etc., but basically, it is about managing telecommunications as a commons, that is, a resource produced and maintained collectively, rather than held privately.
Community networks build on a long history of people coming together to serve their own needs with regards to communication and media infrastructure. At the end of the 19th century already, local residents in the United States or in Sweden, for instance, grew tired of waiting for large companies to serve their regions, and decided to create their own telephone networks. In the 1960s and 1970s, at a time when radio and television were still under a monopoly regime in many parts of the world, activists started to build free radios and other community media to broadcast their own voice, and foster a more democratic communication environment.

Community networks providing internet connectivity and other communications services have been developed since the 1990s. By building a community network, you will become part of this long history. In this early phase of the 21st century, many might think that we already have too much communication and connectivity, or even that the internet is a dangerous space. It is true that it is dominated by large corporations that make a lot of money by keeping us always connected, always engaged on "apps" that are designed to turn us into digital addicts, and which collaborate with both despotic and liberal governments to implement their surveillance policies.

But as the stories gathered in this book illustrate, another internet is possible, one where people and their rights are put first, where they are able to reappropriate the digital infrastructure and challenge the power structures that are turning us into digital serfs, where modern-day communication tools that are all around us come to serve trans-local communities and become tools of emancipation.

With this guide, written collectively by a group of community network pioneers in Europe, activists and academic researchers, we intend to provide a mix of practical knowledge and explanations illustrated by hands-on experiences and real-life stories. Starting with presentations of successful community networks, and an introduction to the importance and the role of community networks, we will present step-by-step guidelines and concrete information on the resources needed to start a community network, get it running, and keeping it sustainable in the long term.

From technical options to economic models, governance choices, legal requirements, and the various skills involved, we hope to provide you with a useful and lively resource to engage with your local community at every stage of a community network.
# Story #1: FAQ or community networks in a nutshell

Imagine you arrive at an event organised by practitioners of community networks to learn more about them. In the hallway, you meet Rita. She is an energetic member of a community network who is eager to share her experience. Your discussion could look like this:

**You:** Hi Rita. Could you please explain to me what community networks are?

Rita: They are telecommunication networks designed, built, owned and maintained by a community of people.

**You:** They must be new. I've never heard of them.

Rita: They've been around since the 1990s.

**You:** So they are relatively recent.

Rita: Yes, although they built on earlier community media initiatives, such as community radio. Actually, community initiatives in relation to telecommunications have a longer history: think of community telephone networks in the USA and Sweden in the late 19th and early 20th centuries; community antenna television in the 1950s, which was designed to boost the reception of

TV signals in remote and hilly areas; free radio movements of the 1960s and 1970s. All these movements and other so-called community media are part of this history.

**You:** Where can I find community networks?

Rita: Many countries have them, and the number is growing. You can find them both in countries of the global South, for instance in South Africa, Indonesia and Mexico, and in developed countries like Canada, and many in Europe.

**You:** Can you give me some examples in Europe?

Rita: Sure. Examples in Europe include Freifunk in Germany, a wireless meta-community with over 400 local communities; B4RN in Lancashire, United Kingdom, a fibre-to-the-home network; guifi.net in Catalonia, one of the largest community networks; Sarantaporo in central Greece, another example; FFDN in France, an umbrella organisation bringing together various community networks; and Ninux.org, a collection of wireless community networks in Italy.

**You:** I see you mentioned different technologies. Other than that, are all community networks the same?

Rita: No, no two community networks are the same. But although they come in different shapes and sizes, they share some common characteristics. They typically offer an alternative network
architecture, with independent
ownership and alternative business
models, and share certain values.
Alternative means that these
features differentiate community
networks from commercial internet
networks. These characteristics
stem from the fact that they are
networks conceived, built and
operated by and for the people. In
addition, differences depend on the
characteristics of their geographical
location and the social and
economic conditions in the territory.
Among the above examples there
are community networks in urban
settings, some that operate across
a region and others in a remote
valley, some that extend throughout
large territories the size of an entire
country, etc.

**You: Why would people decide to build their own network?**

Rita: There are many reasons. The most obvious one is because they have no real connectivity. It might be a community that lives in a remote, rural or in other ways hard-to-reach area, where the population might be dispersed. Commercial providers think that demand for connectivity in such areas is not high enough to justify the cost to service them. But community networks have proven that it can be done and often at a fraction of the cost for better quality.

**You: So community networks are just for the unconnected?**

Rita: No. For sure community
networks have contributed to
expanding internet access in many

rural and underserved areas, as well
as informal settlements of refugees
and migrants, but while the need for
connectivity is a key driver, one can
encounter community networks in
different socioeconomic contexts,
including, for instance, urban areas
in developed countries (like guifi.net
in Barcelona or Ninux in Rome and
Florence).

**You: What are the other reasons than connectivity?**

Rita: Beyond connectivity, the people
involved might also be driven by
political, philosophical, economic,
community and personal motives
and values. For example:

* The desire to have a network that differs from – that is an alternative to, as explained earlier – state-run and corporate internet networks.

* A preference for autonomy and self-organisation.

* The wish to have open and affordable networks.

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>
* The desire for better privacy and closer control of personal data.

* Wanting to experiment and play with technology.

* The desire to educate and transfer knowledge to others, thereby empowering them.

* Helping their community to grow economically and become more cohesive.

* Gaining personal satisfaction from the above.

One can see that the benefits of community networks go beyond filling in the "gaps" (those left by large telecom providers) by providing connectivity to underserved or unserved areas. Without discounting their significant contribution through the provision of connectivity, community networks offer substantial economic and non-economic benefits as well. They typically offer more affordable and inclusive internet access; they bring competition, diversity and innovation into the market; they support open technological solutions; and they tighten community ties.

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

**You: You mention economic aspects. Can you tell me more?**

Rita: Community networks can help keep local businesses running and growing, and contribute to a thriving local economy. This in turn means that young people can find jobs and stay there rather than go to cities in search of a better future. In other words, community networks promote a circular economy (many resources stay within the community) as opposed to an extractive economy (many resources are extracted from the community and go elsewhere, often depriving the community of the means to sustain itself).
## 2. Meet some great community networks!

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /></figure>

In this short chapter, we want to give you a sense of the diversity of community networks that exist across Europe. So, we will jump from one to another and give you the feel of the experience of each.

### 2.1. consume.net, United Kingdom

In late summer 1999, two British artist-designers - James Stevens and Julian Priest, each in their early 30s - came up with their own "crazy idea" for a citizen network.

The pair had met at Backspace, a gathering place for artists, designers and entrepreneurs that would likely be branded today as a hackerspace. Backspace had been founded in 1996 and for the three years of its existence acted as a cultural hub on Clink Street, on the banks of the Thames next to the London Bridge. Its protagonists were not trained as engineers, nor did they identify as "techies". But they had an understanding of the internet's potential for alternativeness. As James Stevens recalls, at Backspace "the spirit of free networking and collaboration spawned by its passing lives on in the flow of activity and passion for [self-publishing platform] IndyMedia and peer-oriented exchange."

At first, the project was about sharing a connection and laying out a fibre optic cable between a higher floor of Backspace and the building across the street. But they realised that old planning laws forbade the deployment of a telecom
cable in a public space to entities that were not registered as "public telecom operators" under the Telecommunications Act of 1984.

Thankfully, around the same time, a new networking technology appeared: the Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) and International Electrical and Electronic Engineering (IEEE) protocol 802.11b – the first technology to be included by the Wi-Fi Alliance under the Wi-Fi interoperability umbrella. According to consume's founders, Wi-Fi "could be thought of as the networking equivalent of CB radio." It allowed for the building of an autonomous network where individuals, groups or organisations would relay internet traffic to one another through their antennas.

Functioning as a free, open local network, consume could relay traffic to the global internet through its members who had their own connection at mainstream ISPs and were willing to share them with others. In that way, the network would "re-distribute access" while "promoting common ownership" of the network. Armin Medosch, a hacktivist and thinker involved in these early efforts, puts it in this way:

> "Node owners would set up wireless network nodes on rooftops, balconies and window sills. Each node would be owned and maintained by its owner, who would also define the rules of engagement with other nodes. The network would grow as a result of the combination of social and urban topologies."

Active between 1999 and 2003, consume.net pioneered a model for wireless community networking that was taken up by Freifunk and others a few years later.

## 2.2. Freifunk, Germany

This text from an email written by Jurgen Neumann, co-founder of Freifunk, explains how Freifunk took inspiration from consume.net's free Wi-Fi sharing and turned it into one of the most successful community networks in Europe.

Jürgen says: "The early initial work that me and my colleagues took [up] in the year 2002 was to set up a website and to find simple mechanisms to gather all the people out there who wanted to do the very
<figure><img src="image_18.png" /><figcaption>1</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /><figcaption>2</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. Breezecom AP10, a wireless router used by consume.net</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. consume.net birthplace: the alternative scene of Clink Street in London (July 2000)</footnote>
same things. Freifunk.net was very much inspired
by the British consume.net. I got to know all these
people from Britain in early 2002 and one of my first
plans was to simply call the German community
de.consume.net. But the more we thought about it, the
more we understood that this really wouldn't make
much sense. This is because local activities need a
localised branding. Also the German term "freifunk"
means free radio, a very strong name which speaks a
lot from itself in the German-speaking community."

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>
There are a few rules that we have adopted for Freifunk.net that make it so strong:

1. It is totally non-commercial (no ads, no paid labour, no legal body, it's just a movement of equals!).

2. The technical infrastructure is based on the Pico Peering Agreement (common values allowing for the free exchange of internet traffic between Freifunk participants).

3. It is as decentralised as possible.

4. It is meant to connect and support all people who are willing to build and use the free wireless infrastructures (no exclusion).

5. It is part of an international movement for "Free Information Infrastructure".

6. It has a good design and a strong brand which works like a community franchise model. That means everyone can adopt the design and will find style-sheets and logos and presentations that they can use themselves.

7. It doesn't serve the community - it is the community. It's based on the strong idea of DIY motivation (If you want to build a boat, tell the people about the beauty of the sea!).

8. We have our own free software to be installed on small Wi-Fi routers, which can be customised to different looks and designs, extended with individual plug-ins and which is used by many other communities on the globe with different brandings.

9. Freifunk.net is also a domain name service, which delegates sub-domains for cities, regions or organisations to the local communities and their websites, for example, http://augsburg.freifunk.net, http://berlin.freifunk.net, http://leipzig.freifunk.net, etc.

10. There are several websites, blogs and services which are of relevance for all communities. These are, for example, http://global.freifunk.net, http://blogs.freifunk.net, http://freifunk.net, http://firmware.freifunk.net, etc.

11. People with different skills, social and technical engineers, web designers, coders, text writers, marketing experts, artists, lawyers, can all help to push the movement - and everyone will profit from a truly free local wireless infrastructure, to share files, contents, VoIP, and share the costs for internet access.
But as I have learned over the years, this process needs one or more
individuals to push and to protect the points I have addressed earlier. The
initiative needs to be protected from being overtaken by some egotistic
personalities or commercial entities. And it needs people to initialise and push
this process. I am very happy to see that there are a growing number of people
in the world who are understanding the strength of a true non-commercial
community approach. I am also very much aware of the fact that the meaning
of "non-commercial" and the ability of user contribution vary a lot. But even
under different conditions I think that there is a good chance to try to build a
network together with the local community.

"I also want to tell you, that when we started this
project, many people told us that a user-contributed
network would not work at all, because someone
would have to be the leader responsible for the
whole network. But now, five years later, there are
Freifunk.net initiatives in very many different parts of
Germany and also a growing number of Freifunk-like
projects out there in the world. In Berlin, we have over
a thousand nodes today and in many other cities and
rural areas all over Germany people have adopted our
model. It truly worked and works and grows from day
to day!"
## 2.3. guifi.net, Catalonia

guifi.net was born in the spring of 2004 in Catalonia. Several people interested in the subject gathered to share ideas and plan the first test, also getting some help from Freifunk people. The results of the tests done on 15 May were established as the first permanent and stable wireless links between the municipalities of Calldetenes, Gurb, Vic and Santa Eugenia de Berga, in the Osona county.

Since then, guifi.net has grown into what is probably the largest community network in Europe. It spans over several regions of Spain, connecting tens of thousands of people through wireless Wi-Fi links and fibre optic networks. It has created a very interesting model where volunteers, non-profit groups, local public administrations as well as small and medium-sized businesses can collaborate to grow the "commons" - in this case, the telecom infrastructure. You will learn much more about guifi.net in later chapters.

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /></figure>
## 2.4. Fédération FDN, France

Fédération FDN (FFDN) was founded in 2011. At the time, the most visible community network in France was French Data Network (FDN), which was founded in 1992 when most internet access providers were non-profit entities. But around 2010, as the debate on net neutrality was raging in France, FDN's president Benjamin Bayart and other active FDN volunteers motivated people across France to join and start building their own community networks. Rather than growing a single organisation, or even the handful of other community networks already existing across France at the time, the choice was made to "swarm" in a decentralised way by creating many local non-profit organisations, all under the 1901 French law on the freedom of association.

To coordinate these developments, share expertise and organise the legal and political representation of the movement, an umbrella non-profit organisation was also created: the Fédération FDN. It now comprises 29 member organisations operating in both rural and urban areas and using both wireless and leased landline networks, whose (physical) members are automatically members of FFDN. This makes for a very diverse community of CNs in geographical, technical as well as socio-political terms - as a participant put it, "Some of us work in suits, other don't work at all."

FFDN's principles are laid out in three important texts that provide a framework for corresponding practices: its bylaws, its internal rules ("réglement intérieur") and its "Charter of Good Practices and Common Commitments". According to this document:

> FDN CNs "shall not use commercial methods, such as for instance the purchase of advertising space." People sitting on the boards of FFDN's CNs must be unpaid volunteers and income must be "systematically kept on the books or reinvested."

The Charter also requires members to commit to "protecting and/or promoting the internet" and net neutrality.
To give you an even better sense of the diversity within the FFDN, here are some of the CNs who have joined the federation:

**FDN (French Data Network)** is the historical French CN, founded in 1992, providing ADSL connectivity at a national scale on last-mile landline infrastructures leased from incumbent operators (the network itself is private, but the connectivity is managed by the community, so it is still a community network). FDN has 502 members, about 330 of which are also subscribers.

**Scani** was founded in 1998, first as an association called PC Light that did not provide internet access but promoted digital literacy. In 2012, it became a full-fledged ISP. Scani is particularly interesting: not only is it the first FFDN member to include paid professionals (rather than active volunteers); it is also one of the very first FFDN members to foray into the deployment of last-mile fibre optic connectivity.

**Faimaison** was created in Nantes in 2011 with the help of FDN. It provides ADSL connections and is now moving to expanding its network with Wi-Fi links. Still small (about 80 members, of which 15 are subscribers), it is very active on the advocacy front, organising social events around digital rights campaigns led by French or European non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

**Tetaneutral.net** is a wireless community network founded in 2011. Its starting goal was to provide internet access rivalling commercial ADSL offers that, in certain parts of the city, were limited to 512K. Its coverage soon expanded to half a dozen rural areas in the surroundings of Toulouse that previously did not have access to a decent broadband connection. Tetaneutral.net now has almost 500 members, including 400 subscribers.

**Rezine** is based in Grenoble and was founded in early 2012. Although it is smaller, it is similar to Tetaneutral.net. It provides a mix of ADSL and Wi-Fi internet connectivity in Grenoble. It is also interested in accessing a public radio network developed by local authorities in the district of Isère, but is still looking for interested potential subscribers to make the operation financially viable. It currently has 57 members, of which 43 are also subscribers.
<figure><img src="image_22.png" /></figure>

1

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /></figure>

2

<footnote n="1">1. A scene from the building of Sarantaporo.gr community network</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. A scene from the planning of Sarantaporo.gr community network</footnote>
## 2.5. Sarantaporo.gr, Greece

At the foot of Mount Olympus in Greece, there is a relatively isolated valley where internet connectivity had not reached until recently. There are 14 villages scattered throughout this valley, belonging to the municipality of Elassona, which in total comprises 50 villages. Farming is the main occupation and economic activity, in particular almond trees and dairy products. The remaining population is ageing, as most of the youth have left for the city, in search of better jobs and more developed social infrastructure.

Regarding access to the internet, although in some of the villages the former national company (OTE) provides ADSL connections, the available lines are not enough to cover the demand of existing users. And because of low potential return on investment, cellular network providers have not invested in the area.

> In the absence of internet connectivity, grandchildren began to shorten their vacations in their ancestors' villages, farmers could not get informed about new products that could ease or improve their farming activities, nor coordinate their work by means of specific software applications, etc. By and large, the future of the region appeared to be uncertain, as there was little hope for any significant change; the residents felt disempowered, missing their grandchildren and being unable to attract youth to the region.

After the 2010 crisis in Greece, a group of enthusiasts, some of them born in these villages or having relatives in the region, started to organise to address some of these complex regional (spatial) problems in a sustainable manner. One way out was to build a community network.

So in 2013, this group founded a non-profit organisation by the name Sarantaporo.gr to design and deploy wireless community networks in the area. More than 10 villages are currently interconnected under the same backbone network. The network operation is supported by the Sarantaporo.gr non-profit organisation in collaboration with local support groups of around 60 people involved on a voluntary basis.
The CN could potentially serve around 5,000 residents of the valley, as the infrastructure is openly accessible by all. Thus, children and grandchildren are returning to the villages during their vacation time, as they can stay in touch with their friends in the city. Farmers have begun to use apps that can provide them with information about how to improve their crops. Winters do not seem that long any more, now that internet access brings news and information to any remote village, such as new ideas on crafts, like various knitting models that spread through the valley thanks to grandmothers watching relevant YouTube videos. The villages' inhabitants can now trade their produce or handcrafts in distant locations without the need for intermediaries, and so forth. On many roofs of private houses or of local restaurants, as tavernas are among the main village nodes, one might notice the CN antennas reaching out to the world. Sarantaporo.gr has been visited several times by the netCommons project partners. The pictures in Figure 1 and 2 were taken during these visits, when planning and expansion of the network took place.

Sarantaporo.gr is so far a success story of the provision of public infrastructure by a grassroots organisation. It also generated structures for self-management in keeping the network operation sustainable. This was critical for the reinvigoration of the social fabric of this region, and for restoring a greater sense of togetherness. This initiative demonstrates how information and communication technologies (ICTs) in general are capable of transforming perceptions and influencing social behaviour, and also have a significant impact on the spatial development and economy of a territory.

<figure><img src="image_24.png" /></figure>
## 2.6. nuxux.org, Italy

The following text is taken from the 2018 edition of Global Information Society Watch (GISWatch), a yearly publication by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) that in 2018 was focused on community networks, released with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. One of the chapters was dedicated to nuxux and written by Leonardo Maccari and Claudio Pisa (an activist of nuxux).

Nuxux.org was started in Rome in the early 2000s and was the initiative of a computer science engineering student, Nino Ciurleo. Nino had grown technically in the ham (amateur) radio community as well as the Italian hacker scene and was influenced by the punk do-it-yourself attitude.

> One day he read about the Seattle Wireless community network in a magazine, liked the idea, and decided to use his personal web page - http://nuxux.org (a pun on "Nino" and "Linux") - which was hosted on a server in his room, to search for other enthusiasts to help him build a wireless community network in Rome. To help spread the word, stickers were printed and placed around the city. After a couple of years, the nuxux network was bootstrapped, and the core of the network, composed of three nodes, was up and running.

Many people with different (but still technical) backgrounds were then joining the nuxux mailing list and meetings. The motivations for joining the community ranged from socio-political reasons, helping to bridge the digital divide, a desire to learn by doing, down to pure curiosity.

Since then, many things have changed. Nuxux is now a community with about 350 nodes scattered around Italy. It is an integral part of the European community network movement: it hosts services, it has participated in European research projects, it has its own "autonomous system", and it is well known among Italian hackers and geeks.

One of the key characteristics of nuxux is its hacker nature. In the period 2013-2015 (when Italian legal limitations on Wi-Fi in public areas were no longer in place and Snowden's revelations were under the spotlight) nuxux almost
doubled the number of its nodes and hit the news in many mainstream newspapers and websites. Mesh networks were depicted as a remedy not only for the digital divide, but also for surveillance. Besides a certain degree of journalistic hype, the truth was that around 2010, both the technical and ethical propositions of community networks were extremely advanced. The idea that a mesh network, being technically distributed, could enable the creation of a communication platform with a governance structure inspired innovation and advancements in many directions.

Today nuxux has expanded into rural areas with poor connectivity. On some islands, its primary purpose is actually utilitarian: to overcome the digital divide. But the original spirit still persists.

The nuxux community does not have well defined decision-making bodies or procedures, and its participants come from heterogeneous backgrounds. Until now, nuxux has not had the willingness to try to become a formal community ISP, even if successful models point in this direction.
<figure><img src="image_25.png" /><figcaption>1</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_26.png" /><figcaption>2</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. Installation of an ubiquity antenna</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. An installation of an antenna by Ninux CN</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_27.png" /></figure>

1

<footnote n="1">1. Parabolic grid and directional antenna</footnote>
# 3. The "network" in community networks

<figure><img src="image_28.png" /></figure>

After these quick introductions to various community networks in Europe, you may still be unclear about what the network part really is. So, in this chapter, we would like to introduce basic technical notions and vocabulary that are crucial to understand these bottom-up infrastructures.

## 3.1. Nodes

The first structural components of your community network are its nodes. In telecommunications, a node is either a point of redistribution of communication, or its point of delivery. Going beyond the traditional network and computer science definition, a node or a peer can also designate the location where the devices comprising the network are installed, or even the person operating or hosting them.

### 3.1.1. Routers

A redistribution node can be a group of directional antennas on a roof establishing directional links with another node on a different roof. It can also be a single antenna expanding connectivity across a building or a given area. It can be a computer interconnecting two or more fibre optic lines. It can also be a wireless access point offering public access in a park or meeting place. In all these cases, the node can be said to be a router (its role is to redistribute and route traffic within the network).
<figure><img src="image_29.png" /></figure>

Nodes can have various characteristics. For instance, there are optical fibre nodes (they are called "splitters") that can collect and distribute the internet traffic directly within the optical fibre without requiring electronics, or even electricity! These are called passive nodes. A splitter does not require energy and can be placed anywhere that is safe and cheap. Active nodes, on the other hand, might require rooms with some special characteristics, such as cooling during the summer. Splitters have the advantage of robustness and zero maintenance, but they also have a limited capacity, as the number of optical fibre links that can be handled by a splitter is limited, e.g. 32 or 128 or similar numbers depending on the technology. Furthermore, this number is fixed at installation and cannot be upgraded: you have to change the entire splitter and this can be complex and expensive.

An active node, instead, can scale more easily as it is possible to add "ports" terminating optical fibres to the active node as they are needed, and also the capacity can scale with the number of ports. Upgrading an active node can be easier and cheaper than changing a splitter. The two technologies can also be mixed. An active node can collect traffic from many fibres, each one of them being "splitted" to reach 32 or 128 houses, for example.
### 3.1.2. Clients and servers

The principal role of a communications network is to bring information and data from one endpoint to another. Endpoint nodes are where communications and data are delivered, and they can be clients or servers. To connect to the internet, retrieve emails, browse the web, we typically use a desktop computer, a laptop, or a smartphone. These machines are usually referred to as the "clients" of another device or a special-purpose computer, a server, which can offer a range of applications that we wish to use: a website, a simple storage of files, an online forum, or more sophisticated ones like tools for collaborative editing or platforms for online deliberation, and multi-player games. Even when two people communicate with each other "directly" this communication needs to be mediated by a server responsible for setting up the connection.

An end-device that is mostly used as a client can act also as a server. For example, in the peer-to-peer BitTorrent system, software allows end-user devices to directly download and upload content between each other (for example, large movie files). In this case, however, the communication still often depends on the existence of other servers dedicated to coordinate the peer-to-peer interactions.

Indeed, the client/server terminology refers to functions and software, rather than devices: a software process that "asks" for a communication is a client, while a software process that "answers" this request is a server. "Cloud" services are communication applications that run on distributed servers hosted by large telecom companies often known as "content delivery networks".

All internet services that we use daily involve a server somewhere storing, indexing and filtering data received from clients and the devices owned by the "users".

**In principle, a good server needs:**

1. to have a "permanent" address,

2. to have sufficient computing power and upload bandwidth for serving the requests of its clients, and

3. to be always available, up and running.

Although it does not have to be that way, such features might require the replication of functionality in multiple computers, cooling, dedicated personnel, and other expensive measures (similar to those adopted in data centres), which may be harder to replicate in a "home" environment. Due to
this, there are today numerous "web hosting" providers like Amazon that
offer online "space" for organisations, companies and individuals to host
their servers, from personal blogs to sophisticated platforms. And this is
increasingly so as people increasingly rely on small devices like smartphones
to connect to the internet.

<figure><img src="image_30.png" /></figure>
# Story #2: The trend towards (de)centralisation & how community networks can help (by Panayotis Antoniadis)

Reflecting this tendency towards centralisation, today we see more and more services moving to big data centres, often referred to as the "cloud", reducing the burden of computation and storage from the end-user devices. Even software traditionally installed on one's computer like Microsoft Office is increasingly accessed remotely through one's web browser (e.g., Google Docs).

On the one hand, this relieves people from the burden of maintaining and updating their own infrastructure, even from the need to keep backups of their files. But on the other hand, the computing and environmental costs of remote communication increase significantly. In addition, there is a loss of ownership and control of one's data, which become controlled by large, often US-based cloud firms.

## Decentralise, with the help of free software

To help reverse some of these trends, and in addition to offering

connectivity to the internet, a community network can offer additional services, such as hosting its own services in dedicated servers located in more or less central nodes of the network. Some of these servers are necessary for the functioning of the network itself, like monitoring, solving technical issues, etc.

Others can provide community-owned alternatives to services of global platforms like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc.

In this context, the role of free/libre and open-source software (or FLOSS) can be instrumental, since it allows scaling to be achieved through replication, allowing for different groups or even individuals to run their own services, like a WordPress blog or an Etherpad server for group projects.

For more sophisticated services such as video calls or streaming, however, additional investments in infrastructure might be required, as well as the appropriate institutional and governance structure for deciding on important design details, data management, and more.
## 3.2. Links, backbone, gateway

### 3.2.1. Links and backbones

Nodes, whether routers, servers or clients, are interconnected through links. Links can either be wireless, using radio signals like Wi-Fi, or wired (also called landline), when they are formed by a copper line or a fibre optic cable. These links may connect nearby elements (for instance, two routers each installed on roofs in a neighbourhood), or travel long distances. Long-distance links form a part of the network that is called the backbone. The backbone is a collection of links with a significant amount of bandwidth capacity interconnected through powerful routers. In some sense, the backbone creates a network of networks, connecting different local networks to one another, expanding their reach and finally connecting them all to the internet, typically in one (or more) of the large facilities where all internet operators exchange their traffic (these are called internet exchange points or IXPs).

<figure><img src="image_31.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. Data visualisation of internet backbone</footnote>
### 3.2.2. A gateway to the internet

You might be happy to operate just at the local level unconnected to the internet, following the model of an isolated island like ninux groups do in Italy (but ninux islands are urban community networks, where most, if not all, the participants already have an internet connection). A lot can already be done just by establishing such a local network, in terms of building a community, setting up local online services and learning about the technology. But chances are your community will also want to be able to access the global internet and its vast resources.

As a matter of fact, community-run telecommunication networks have been around for a long time, and growing beyond local connectivity has always been key to their survival. For the local and community-run telephone networks of the late 19th century in the US or in Sweden, interconnecting with national telephone networks was already an essential feature for success.

> **But in some cases, scaling up can also harm the community, by making its network dependent on large, corporate actors that will eventually seek to impose their own technological and economic terms.**

To put it in a nutshell: interconnecting with national and global networks often has trade-offs. But many thriving community networks have learned to negotiate this issue successfully. You will learn more about internet interconnection later in this book.
### 3.3. Similarities with and differences from other infrastructure resources

The internet has interesting similarities with, and differences from, other resources like water, energy, food, and transport networks. Understanding these similarities and differences will help you better conceptualise the potential role(s) of a community network in relation to the internet.

The internet can be seen as a network that interconnects any two nodes in a city, a country, a continent, the world. This is achieved through a series of links, wireless or wired. Seen from this perspective, transportation networks represent a comparable infrastructure.

**But internet nodes not only enable the interconnection process, like, for instance, a transportation network facilitates faster transfer of travellers or goods from one point to another. They can host "services", software programs that offer a wide variety of applications that could be seen as the main "resource" made available through the network – they are the "destination". The internet could in that sense be considered as a distribution network, like the water and energy networks.**

So, the internet gives us access to Facebook, Netflix, Google and the like, but also to a local website hosted by a small provider in our city. Taking into account the variety of the "sources", and the quality of the resource or service offered, food is perhaps a closer analogy, since there are a wide variety of food "sources", both local and globally distributed, organically grown, or produced at an industrial scale. In the case of water and energy, the difference is that the variety of "sources" is rather limited and can get exhausted.

All these analogies share the concepts of a (re)source, a node and a link. In most cases, the connectivity of nodes to the resources is almost straightforward, as they give you access to all you need: water to wash and drink, energy to power your home, appliances, devices and servers, a path to any destination in the global transportation network. It is only in the case of food that specific distribution nodes, from a supermarket chain to a local store, offer access only to a subset of the food "sources" in the world. And these can differ significantly in terms of the type and quality of the source.
In the case of the internet, nodes offer access to the whole network, as in the case of water and energy, but the different information sources are of varying types and quality, as in the case of food. These sources are the servers that host different types of content or facilitate various interactions, from a simple phone call to a sophisticated collective editing process.

The properties of the links also have different characteristics. For water, energy and food distribution, which actually depends on the transportation means and networks, "links" may be diversified, yet without users' awareness. In the case of transportation networks, one may experience very different speeds and comfort levels, and the same holds for the internet links which can offer different performance levels in terms of speed, latency and resiliency.

Access to the nodes can be also private or public. Moving between different places in the world, one can find huge differences on how "close" to one's location one can have access to different resources. In some parts of the world, access to water and energy is available at home, and limited in public spaces, for example, water from public fountains or energy sources in public facilities like airports, etc. In others, water is collected directly from the natural source that is publicly accessible. In the case of the internet, there are similar disparities. There are places where internet connectivity is accessible directly at home and with cellular networks it is essentially "in your hands" (almost) anywhere you are; and there are other places where there is no or very limited internet access.

**In this context, a community network is a simple term to describe a wide variety of efforts by local communities, rather than private companies or the state, to build and manage all or parts of the infrastructure required to enjoy and co-create the internet and other communication services.**

Sticking to our analogies, in some cases the focus has been placed on building links to a close-by internet node or gateway, as in the case of the Sarantaporo. gr CN. In other cases, the focus has been on developing local servers accessible through a local distribution network like ninux.org or the Athens Wireless Metropolitan Network (AWMN). Others like guifi.net have successfully built a high-capacity and widely distributed infrastructure made up of both fibre and wireless links to connect to the internet. Freifunk.net gives particular importance to the public access network, making it easy for individuals to share their internet connection through their Wi-Fi router.
In the case of water, energy, food and transport, there is also a wide variety of combinations of actors responsible for different parts of the infrastructure. However, there is not always "consensus" about the appropriate mix. There are actually numerous ongoing struggles around the world against the privatisation of water and railways, or against coal or fracking for gas and oil extraction, or genetically modified organisms (GMOs) or pesticides for food.

> The comparison with organic agriculture and food sovereignty is also particularly interesting and relevant. Global solutions to food security promoted by large corporations (companies like Monsanto) can appear as the most efficient and secure. But many local communities refuse to become passive consumers of food technology and claim their right to grow their own food, using traditional techniques which they own and can master, even if they may not look as "efficient".

Finally, not many people realise that creating a local network infrastructure today could be no more work than building a community garden, not so easy maybe, but very empowering and liberating. In the past, it was mostly an activity carried out by experts and technology enthusiasts. These efforts led to remarkable success stories despite the legal, social, political and economic barriers. Today, growing your own network needs fewer technical skills, as technical resources are widely available (see the educational material in Chapter 12) and easy to use, even without a specific technical education. This has empowered diverse communities around the world to get access to the internet by building their own networks and to share their knowledge. But it makes sense also for those who are already connected to a commercial or state provider.

> In the same way it makes sense to also grow vegetables in your garden even if there is a lot of food in the supermarket next door ready to be put in the microwave and consumed in a few minutes.
## 4. The "community" in community networks

Now you know more about the technical infrastructure underlying a community network. But in addition to network infrastructures, community networks should be about a group of people, that is, the community. The community might pre-exist the creation of a self-owned and managed telecom network, and it will be strengthened by the creation of its own local telecom network. In other cases, the group will gradually become a community in the process of building that network.

The point is that community networks require people to come together, create and nurture human and social bonds, establish and negotiate forms of knowledge sharing and decision making, and while doing so, improve the lives of people affected by the network. In the same way that the complexity and challenges of building communications networks grow as they become bigger and more diverse, the same holds for communities.

### 4.1. What community?

The term "community" itself can be a source of confusion, because it can mean different things: from a local reading club or a group of friends, to a global community of hackers or of Wikipedians. Let's make things simpler: a community is built around at least one common interest, goal, attribute.
The term "community" in community networks could then refer to different
communities and levels of participation:

* The community of inhabitants able to use a community network in a specific location, urban or rural, like the Sarantaporo community, enjoying the community network independently of their involvement in its maintenance.

* The community of individuals building and maintaining a specific network in a specific territory, like the Athens Wireless Metropolitan Network.

* The community of people supporting a specific community network concept, which can be replicated in different locations, like the wider Freifunk community.

* The community of experts around the world, exchanging knowledge and supporting each other in developing various CN models, like the Battlemesh community.

* The community of initiatives (local and/or global) fighting for the same cause, like sustainability, democracy, self-determination, the commons, privacy and network neutrality, for which community networks can play a key role.

Go find yours !

<figure><img src="image_32.png" /></figure>
## 4.2. Community and the notion of space

By construction, community networks are located in a certain territory, though very often the very same network structure and organisational models are replicated over and over again, as in Freifunk and ninux. Their existence and characteristics are thus an integral part of the social, political and economic environment of a space. But like community, "space" is a complex term that includes many dimensions in addition to the "physical" space.

As you consider the creation of your own community network, it is very important that you also understand space in its social dimension. Today, information and communication technologies also act as mediators for interactions between people, and thus contemporary space is inherently hybrid, mixing spaces of digital and physical nature. Because they are built by a community of people grounded in a specific territory, community networks can be a great tool for the formation of a hybrid space, one with both physical and digital layers, in both urban and rural areas.

But community networks can do more than that. They turn into a metaphor for the practical and symbolic junction not only of the physical space (what is material and tangible around us) and of our social or lived space (space transformed through our emotions, filtered through our memories, the space of artistic creation), but also of our mental space (the space of reason, logic, intuition and imagination). The importance of linking these various spatial layers with one another was first suggested by French philosopher Henri Lefebvre in the 1960s. Across their short history, community networks have proved to be a very effective way of interlinking these various spatial dimensions.

The following story highlights the importance of space, of the community and of networking. It shows how strictly local community networks, meaning that they are not connected to the global internet, can serve local needs and provide applications that would be otherwise difficult to provide locally in a bottom-up fashion.
## Story #3: L200, a hybrid neighbourhood node in central Zurich (by Ileana Apostol)

Currently throughout Switzerland, affordable high-speed landline and 4G internet access is available. Due to an overwhelming offer from commercial providers, it is more difficult to engage people through Wi-Fi networks. Yet community networks could contribute, nevertheless, to what might be the particular needs of locality, for instance, through customisable options of local networks.

In a central district of Zurich, Kreis 5, in recent years rental prices have been increasing dramatically, making it impossible for small businesses, art studios or other non-commercial activities to afford a central location. For instance, some of the small shops had to move out of the locations where they have been operating for decades. Powerful players at the national or global level, having a stake in this central neighbourhood, dominate the rental market and have a strong influence on urban policies and neighbourhood development.

Given this disproportionate distribution of power within

the political spectrum of the neighbourhood, several grassroots initiatives and citizen associations have been active in fighting its homogenisation by preserving some of the small local shops, and a vibrant scene of alternative organisations that are active in promoting a sustainable urban life. They include initiatives on food, housing, social infrastructure, digital technology, and so forth.

All these small neighbourhood players needed a central and visible location for a shared space, where gatherings of neighbours could take place, or during earlier hours of the day, a co-working space could be run as a collective. Such a place could provide neighbourhood entrepreneurs with a space for encounters, where they could network and over time create a coalition to support their continuous presence in the neighbourhood. Moreover, they required communication and networking options suited to their specific collective activities in the neighbourhood, which could be fulfilled with software applications on a local network.

At the beginning of 2018, the association L200 was created and successfully applied to be the tenant of a ground floor space on one of the busiest streets in the centre of Zurich. The space called L200 has been conceived from the beginning as being hybrid, equipped with digital technology. At the L200 space the aim is to intensify its use. At the same time,
it is a way to provide access to the city as specific places within a political economy of cooperation, of solidarity, and of mutual benefit. From the participatory discussions and meetings with neighbourhood actors, it was clear that the location will be shaped at the convergence between individual needs (e.g. co-working space, meeting space, networking of small shops) and collective needs (e.g. place of encounters and networking in the city, of collective learning, of exposure of ideas and neighbourhood initiatives). In this complex situation, digital technology had the potential to contribute to organising the associations and coordinating the use of time and space.

The L200 hybrid neighbourhood node represents direct democracy exercised in Switzerland, a manifestation of the ongoing struggle for the right to difference, by providing the necessary openness to imagine and act for new possible spatialities. Through its spatial and temporal flexibility, due also to the local network deployed, the L200 space is likely to shape a new culture of neighbourhood conviviality. In this complex situation, digital technology helps to organise the association, and to coordinate the use of time and space at L200. But it has been a goal since the beginning to transform L200 into a genuinely hybrid space, including a local-only digital platform accessible only to those present in the space. A website that you can literally "visit" walking into the space.

Since 2018, the local network named L200.digital is hosting a photo exhibition of the year's events, advertising the member organisations on the on-site displays, and is used also for file sharing, as a digital whiteboard, or for editing collective notes.

<figure><img src="image_33.png" /><figcaption>1</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. L200's storefront windows enable a wide variety of playful hybrid interactions with passers by, like an anonymous digital whiteboard using a screen that projects an Etherpad instance hosted on the local WiFi network</footnote>
# PART 2 :
WHY ARE
COMMUNITY
NETWORKS
IMPORTANT?
Community networks are an increasingly important piece of the global communications puzzle. As individual entities seen from a distance, they might seem too small to be relevant. But as this part will show, they are one of the most important assets to keep global communications, or the internet, as we normally call them today, a space of freedom and knowledge sharing.

Community networks bring diversity in the internet: they help sustain local cultures and know-hows, they reduce the digital divide, they foster economic and social welfare, they advocate for human rights, freedom of communication and privacy.

Now that we have a basic understanding of what community networks are, let's dive deeper into the underlying philosophy, values and needs of these initiatives. Here we focus on the values which are probably the most important, and to some extent, also key for other community-based initiatives: direct, decentralised ownership and self-governance; a potential to reconfigure our social relationships and foster solidarity within our local communities; the joys of learning-by-doing, exchanging knowledge and experimenting with communications technologies; and lastly, the ability to better protect human rights on the internet.
# 5. Introduction to the philosophy of community networks

<figure><img src="image_34.png" /></figure>

## 5.1. Direct, decentralised ownership and self-governance

A good place to start exploring these questions is London, in 1999. At the time, consume.net - which we already introduced in Part I - was experimenting on what it means to be a wireless community network.

One of its main contributions to the history of community networks was to stress the political potential of local networks against the global gigantism of the internet.
Through some of its members sharing their traditional internet connections, consume.net was connected to the internet. But its participants insisted that it could also exist and be useful without these connections to the global network. Rather than interconnecting with a traditional network operator, local networks could grow in a different way, expanding organically by recruiting new neighbours and eventually, providing an alternative public network of interconnected individuals and communities. After a point, these local communities would interconnect with one another, so as to bridge local boundaries, and exchange their members' data based on ad hoc agreements and shared values.

That vision would soon materialise in a set of basic principles which came to be known as the Pico Peering Agreement, first presented in 2003. The Pico Peering Agreement aimed at interconnecting these "network islands" by providing a template document regulating the various aspects of these interconnections.

> The idea was that, according to the document, the "owners of network nodes assert their right of ownership by declaring their willingness to donate the free exchange of data across their networks."
Story # 4:
Appropriating
the Pico Peering
Agreement (by
Jürgen Neumann)

Back in October 2002, I was seeking a solution to solve my disconnectivity problem that arose from the fact that I had moved into the far east of Berlin. I wanted to fight my personal digital divide, a result of the German Telekom's OPAL (Optical Access Lines) experiment.

The district where I moved to had no DSL available. So, I wanted to learn how to build a wireless link to a local internet service provider at a distance of two kilometres, which was in line of sight from our house's rooftop. Around that time, some people had organised a little open space style conference about free Wi-Fi experiments, with network activists from Berlin and London, the Berlon (Berlin, London) meeting at the Bootlab, a former Berlin hackspace.

By chance I dropped into a group of Londoners, including Adam Burns, Julian Priest, James Stevens, Saul Albert, Armin Medosch and Simon Worthington. They were intensively discussing a set of rules and a guideline for community networks.

I joined their intense conversation about the relations between the

<figure><img src="image_35.png" /></figure>

network peers. After about two hours I had a flashing and life-changing realisation: for the first time, I grasped the huge political dimension of the whole topic. It was the starting point of my engagement with wireless community networks. We had follow-up meetings in Copenhagen and Berlin, where we included the feedback from many other network activists.

In Djursland, at the "Fresh Air Free Networks" event, we then finally published The Pico Peering Agreement (see Appendix A). Since the early 2000s, Freifunk has used the Pico Peering Agreement as a baseline to interconnect its participants and local chapters. In an exciting experiment from 2012, FunkFeuer (Austria), NEDWireless (Croatia) and Wlan Slovenija (Slovenia) also established a wireless backbone radio link spanning across national borders.
## 5.2. Direct interconnection and local interaction

These examples illustrate one of the core convictions underlying community networks: that local and even transnational connectivity does not always have to be mediated through large internet service providers. We can interconnect our houses, neighbours or localities, and even span out telecom networks across borders, without having to rely on these companies.

Through the community networks you build, you will also set up a basic organisational structure where it will be for the community itself to decide how the network should effectively be designed and managed, who will be able to access it and on what conditions, in other words, the governance rules. It is not like just subscribing to a commercial internet access provider, where you may choose from a range of different commercial offerings, and depend on pre-established tariffs and conditions imposed in their contracts. At the core of a network commons, there is typically a form of peer-to-peer approach to decision making, based on deliberation and consensus.

We will return to how to achieve this, as it is not always as easy as it first sounds. But a good start is to provide basic channels of communication for all community members, like mailing lists or an online forum, or to hold weekly or monthly meetings, where all willing participants and the most active volunteers can get together to socialise and debate important issues. As one guifi.net participant told us:

> "Day-to-day decisions are often proposed and debated on mailing lists and social networks, while the most important decisions are usually presented and discussed in meetings."

Yet, as is often the case in internet governance and other advocacy forums, community networks tend to favour the most active members. Some define themselves as a "do-ocracy": "We are organised in a non-hierarchical community where common decisions are made consensually through constructive debate and arguments, but where in the case of equivalent arguments, we favour arguments of those who are more actively participating in the network" writes Mitar, a member of the Slovenian network Wlan Slovenija.
## 6. Learning and experimenting

<figure><img src="image_36.png" /></figure>

For community networks, users' lack of technical skills is sometimes one of the most challenging problems. Educating users and encouraging knowledge sharing through workshops and other educational activities that can help participants understand the functioning of a network, how to install new nodes, fix a broken radio link, or use network management tools can therefore become crucial for the sustainability of the initiative.

But as illustrated by the following stories, community networks do more than just offer basic digital literacy skills. Because they are fuelled by the pleasures of learning by doing together, they foster scientific and engineering experiments, and can also act as a proxy for forms of political education.
## Story #5: Learning together leads to further philosophical and political views (by Adam Burns)

<figure><img src="image_37.png" /></figure>

free2air, established in 2001 in East London, chose to establish a CN to discover how to directly connect local people and groups to a locally run shared network: hopping from one neighbour to another neighbour. The process of meeting, planning and installing direct communication links creates a common learning and understanding not only of how the technology works, but also an understanding of the human consequences of its use.

A shared understanding leads to strengthening common community bonds beyond the technicalities of computers and networks.

After holding knowledge sharing workshops on how each of us could deploy our own part of this local network, the core group of local technologists, artists and activists continued to hold social meetings discussing the ways we were all utilising the network, inviting each other to collaborate and promote each other's projects.
# Story #6: From computer research to community networks (by Leonardo Maccari)

What we call "the internet" is a mixture of components in continuous evolution. It is disorganised but follows some trends. Those that build the internet can interfere with such trends.

When I started my PhD in computer science, in 2007, mesh networks were the next frontier to expand the internet. We constantly squeezed our PCs out to simulate networks made of tens of nodes, to design and test new protocols. In 2012, I came into contact with the people from nuxin.org and I remember one of my first conversations. I asked them, "How big is your network?" and they answered, "About 100 nodes, but there are larger ones." I jumped on my chair; these rookies were building real networks way larger than those that we, "computer scientists", could just simulate.

From that moment I started to look at community networks with great respect and interest. I understood that in a community network there is a unique mix of competencies, enthusiasm and ethical values that is a fundamental complement to the scientific research needed in the technical field.

<figure><img src="image_38.png" /></figure>

As researchers we have the ambition to help to build a better internet: more accessible, more transparent, and more respectful of people's rights. This goal can't be reached without the participation of communities.

Communities will enjoy accessibility, transparency and respect, and therefore we can't build a better internet for them, we must do it with them. Communities reinforce the social ties through which technical innovation from researchers can percolate into the roots of society. They do so while building the internet. They produce the image of a bottom-up, community-led internet which is a powerful metaphor that people understand.
Here comes the uniqueness of a
CN: it grows only if the community
grows. For this reason, CNs organise
activities to motivate more and
more people to build their small
share of the internet.

The nuxnuo community organised
several courses, skill-sharing
sessions and small schools in many
of the nuxnuo islands, with the goal of
making people independent when
they build their part of the network,
but also in general to make people
understand all the problems that
the internet has and that CNs can
alleviate.

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /></figure>

In Florence, in Rome, in Cosenza
(just to name a few), I have
seen such events organised by
CNs in cooperation with local
organisations. They attract people
because they are organised by
groups rooted into society, which
makes it easier to reach those
who are normally not interested in
technical concepts. This process

tackles the "relevance" leg of the
digital divide problem: we know that
the digital divide is not only about
being reached by the internet, it is
also about being able to understand
its importance. People who do not
value internet access are left out of
the internet, or they passively use
it as consumers, without exploiting
the creative potential it offers. CNs
disseminate the value of networks,
and help transform internet users
into internet citizens.

For a researcher, a community
network is an incredible playground,
it enables us to experiment, discover
and replicate at scale the dynamics
of the internet. It forces us to think
outside of the box, to find new
solutions to old problems with a
special attention to sustainability. It
teaches us that a technical solution
alone is not sufficient if it is not
acceptable for the community.
## 7. Community networks and human rights

<figure><img src="image_40.png" /></figure>

When you decide to build a community network, you will also establish an infrastructure that protects human rights. Actually, if you read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, you will encounter several provisions which can positively be impacted by community networks, such as freedom of opinion and expression (article 19), freedom of thought (article 18), the right to privacy (article 12), the right to equal access to public services (which can include communication services) (article 21.3) and the right to equal participation in the cultural life of the community (article 27).

Here, we focus on just a few of these rights. As you will see, community networks can achieve a great deal in protecting rights and freedoms online where they are increasingly threatened.

### 7.1. Censorship

As governments enter into alliances with telecom providers and large online platforms to monitor and censor online communications and people's habits, community networks can act as a shield against these new systems of control that are being put in place, often with no regard for the rule of law.
In a number of countries, community networks are usually not affected by censorship orders issued by courts against illegal online content. In France, for instance, the state has to compensate ISPs financially for the cost incurred for blocking websites. As a result, prosecutors make the choice of focusing on the few large commercial ISPs with the biggest market share.

Because they can function autonomously from traditional communication networks, some models of community network can also act as a last-resort resource to allow citizens to organise (politically or otherwise), should governments activate the "kill-switch" and shut down all public communications networks, as has occurred for instance in Egypt and Libya during the 2011 Arab Spring. In those instances, European community networks acted alongside other activists to provide people in these countries with ingenious schemes to circumvent such censorship.

## 7.2. Net neutrality

Besides facilitating government censorship, commercial internet access providers also have a history of blocking or slowing down certain websites or content for business reasons. When they do so, they infringe on a crucial principle known as net neutrality.

> Conversely, community networks pledge to really treat all traffic equally, without any form of discrimination. In practice, in terms of traffic management, net neutrality entails several principles that community networks can explicitly refer to in their charters, value statements or terms of use.

In order to respect this principle while transmitting data over your network:

* You should not inspect the content of the transmitted data.

* You should treat data equally (no throttling, no blocking, no prioritisation), irrespective of the source, destination or protocol.

* You should not alter the data (adding or deleting content).

Net neutrality was one of the major factors leading to the flourishing of the early internet, and the ability of small non-commercial or commercial actors to develop and find their audience. Net neutrality supports innovation, because it prevents internet access providers from blocking services, applications or protocols just because they don't know them or because they compete with
these firms' own services; it guarantees fair competition as it ensures that all actors on the network are treated equally at the technical level.

### 7.3. Privacy and surveillance

For privacy, too, community networks bring important protections. For one thing, you might feel more comfortable communicating through a community network operated by people you trust rather than giving away your traffic data to commercial providers. Also, the more online services are hosted on the local community network, the less users are exposed to the various forms of online commercial surveillance. In some more serious cases, especially in cases of authoritarian practices by state authorities, if a member of the community is exposed to repression, the community network can act as a proxy and even refuse to comply with illegal requirements issued by the police. They act as a proxy for human rights.

That being said, using a community network does not mean perfect protection from surveillance. As a member of Freifunk told us in an interview: "Devices operating in any wireless network - including mesh networks - use a radio transmitter that can always be located by triangulation."

Commenting on the choice not to put passwords on the shared Wi-Fi networks of the community, he also stressed that this might give a false sense of anonymity:

> "We are teaching people that even though they do not have to give their identity to log into our mesh network, they are not anonymous toward the authorities or other entities due to the hardware and software profiles of their devices and other metadata which may be used to identify them."

<figure><img src="image_41.png" /></figure>
James Stevens, co-founder of consume.net, also explains that users were warned:

> "We run an open wireless network. So, no passwords for access but encrypted tunnels between network nodes and internet gateways. If this is a concern or messages need security then it's the responsibility of each individual to guard against intrusion and practise effective methods. Those who wish to communicate in secret will always find a way of achieving this goal. Once through the gateway we have no control anyway."

### 7.4. Enabling digital rights

Thus, in spite of their benefits, in no way can local community networks replace proper encryption techniques. But what is also great with community networks is that they are communities of people who are passionate about the relationship between computer networks and human rights. They seek to raise awareness and call on users to adopt a more proactive approach to securing their online communications. They promote the use of free software, decentralised online services and end-to-end encryption techniques, which all help build a digital environment that is more friendly to human rights. As a guifi.net participant sums up:

> "We are educating users how they can protect themselves on our and any other network."

Sometimes, defending the community's rights will also entail following the evolution of legislation surrounding internet regulation, and working with other organisations focused on defending human rights at the legislative and political levels, which will be studied in Parts V and VI. In practice, that will imply following good practices in terms of computer security and remaining up to date regarding potential vulnerabilities affecting the software and hardware the network is made of.
But despite these challenges, community networks are networks built by the people for the people. And for that reason alone, they are by design much better suited to respect human rights.

<figure><img src="image_42.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_43.png" /><figcaption>1</figcaption></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. Militant action against the move of Google offices into the heart of Berlin</footnote>
## 8. Solidarity and the right to the city

<figure><img src="image_44.png" /></figure>

The "right to the city" is a philosophical rather than a legal right that can be regulated and enforced by state power. It is strongly linked to the "right to difference" and its content is defined and redefined with every project and particular action to be taken.

But what does the "right to the city" really mean, and why is it relevant for community networks? The term the "right to the city" refers to a widespread and frequent citizen demand for the democratisation of the urbanisation process (or contemporary spatial production), which is one of the main domains of investment and productive activities of the post-industrial phase of capitalism.

By building a community network, you can start improving the lives of those who live around you, while working to alleviate the trend towards gentrification and commodification of urban spaces. It can have a huge impact on the territory, because in the last decades, the development of localities has been conceived as a top-down process, remote from the particular needs of local communities. Imagine an intimate place in a small town, like the square that gathers a diverse crowd in close proximity, where people can get easily
in touch, whether they are familiar with each other or not. Such places have been
shaped over time in a DIY (do-it-yourself) manner, similar to what community
networks do for digital technologies. But instead of that, the outcome of generic
urbanisation is abstract space that disregards local specificities.

Most of the new projects for places take the same shape,
looking and functioning the same way, just like global
social networking platforms do not offer customisable
solutions for communication and organisation in the
digital space. Why is that important? Because what
is conceived in the abstract cannot naturally produce
differences, which are essential for the liveability and
sustainability of any system.

So grassroots initiatives like community networks are very necessary to offer
alternative options that develop organically, incorporate and reflect local
differences, and generate specific solutions, in a political economy of cooperation,
solidarity and mutual benefit. This is actually a form of resistance, and an ongoing
struggle for the "right to difference".

For example, consume.net (Section 2.1) made an initial call for communities to
organise around local networks as an alternative to the global internet. More
recently, as Section 4.2 described, a hybrid urban node was built in a central
location in Zurich. This initiative is a statement that the "smart city" should be
created by citizens actively engaged in its civic life, who are connected both
digitally and through face-to-face encounters.

It is interesting that this hybrid node was initially created as a reaction to
gentrification, to the fact that in recent years rental prices have increased
dramatically, making it impossible for small businesses, art studios or other non-
commercial activities to afford a central location. Some of the small shops had
to move out of the locations where they had been operating for decades. Powerful
players at the national or global level, having a stake in this central neighbourhood,
now dominate the rental market and have a strong influence on urban policies and
neighbourhood development.

It became clear that the only chance for these smaller players to survive in the
neighbourhood was to network and organise themselves as an association, which
needed of course a central and visible location for a shared space. At the beginning
of 2018, the association applied successfully to become the tenant of a very central
location owned by the city of Zurich, previously used as a commercial space.
The application to the city of Zurich, the owner of the space, included in its argumentation the need for an alternative to the "smart city" narrative – a space that can become a hub for citizens, small shops and organisations to claim their right to the city and the right to the internet, at the same time.

However, the "right to the city" is not only relevant for city centres, but also for rural areas, like the wider area of the Sarantaporo.gr CN (see Section 2.5).

<figure><img src="image_45.png" /></figure>
## Story #7: Sarantaporo: bringing mountainous communities closer together (by Ileana Apostol)

In March 2017 we were in a toy store in Athens, buying "illustrative elements" that could explain to local farmers the main components of their community network, Sarantaporo.gr. Some chess pieces were to become the towers for antennas, thin ropes were to explain the cables between the backbone nodes, small wooden cubes were the individual houses that had colourful circles around them to show the range of their network nodes, etc.

The next day, the netCommons project co-organised a workshop in a taverna in the village of Pythio, where a map of the region was placed in the middle of a large table, on which these toys were being used to explain the network three-dimensionally.

Around the table the discussions were intense and animated, and a few decorations meant to make the model more vivid were highly appreciated: some cars, people, a group of chickens, a small lamb, and even a cow talking on a mobile

phone. And at the end of the day, all the participants seemed to have a clear idea of how the internet connection arrived at their home. In the following months the toy kit has been used in more workshops, some of them hands-on, on how to make the network on your own.

In a recent conversation with one of the CN founders, Achilleas Vaitsis, an urban planner working with the city of Larissa, he told me that an initial intention of the CN was to complement the structures and funding that were lacking at a time of austerity measures for rural spatial planning. In other words, in addition to information, communication and networking structures, coordination of activities that could engage residents in participatory practices.

One hope was also to strengthen the cooperative spirit that has atrophied over the last years. The 14 scattered villages that have been isolated from other locations, and whose inhabitants have had less and less opportunities for cooperation between them, have become more and more interconnected since the deployment of the Sarantaporo.gr CN. And somewhat more "central".

The installation and operation of the community network requires all sorts of knowledge sharing and mutual help, addressed through related workshops, ad hoc gatherings, etc. Residents of the valley are "shaping" together their social space that is now also digital. One may say that the rest of the
<figure><img src="image_46.png" /></figure>

world has come closer to them, not only online but also offline through visitors or researchers working on community networks.

Even more spectacular is that the valley is sort of "shrinking" as the distances between its villages are reduced through more frequent exchanges and intense social ties between the permanent residents.
# PART 3 : WHAT DO I NEED TO START A COMMUNITY NETWORK?
So far, we have explained what community networks are, and why they are important. In this part, moving to the preparatory phase of setting up a community network, we survey some of the fundamental resources that you will need to start one.

As you will see, a community network is mostly about people, and the skills, energy and support that they can bring to the initiative. It is also about successfully combining their know-how to start and grow the network.

You remember in the first chapter when we presented you with a fictional dialogue you were having with Rita, our community network practitioner, during an event focused on community networking? Well, imagine that you were to go back to a similar event a few months later. You've learned about community networks and their importance. And Rita is now getting into practical guidance, starting with the importance of gathering a group with diverse skills.
9. Things you should consider when starting a community network

Story #8: Kickstarting a community network

You: Hey Rita! Now I understood what a community network is and why it is great. So, I also want to start my own one. What would I need?

Rita: Well, being a community network, you will need a community! Do you already know some interested people? For example, among your friends could be some of the future network initiators, your neighbours could be interested to

form one, people whom you haven't met yet but they will show up once you'll announce your project, and, of course, people with a similar interest or values, some of them who are already engaged in related projects, etc. Go find the group with whom you will start your community!

You: We are just a few people, is that enough?

Rita: Of course. There are community networks that started with a small group of enthusiasts, even a single person. Later on, you will be able to choose to stay a small community or cover more people, even an entire region! For this, carefully deciding on the institutional structure that will be responsible for important
activities taking place in the name
of the network (e.g. a foundation,
a cooperative or an association),
and agreeing on a set of values
that will guide the expansion of the
network, are really important tasks
to consider in the early stages.

**You: It's encouraging to hear! But me and my friends know nothing about it, we have no specific knowledge... Can we still do it?**

Rita: Absolutely! Starting a
community network will be an
opportunity for all of you to gain
some skills, make something
together, and discover new areas
of knowledge as a team. At the
beginning, you will need at least
one person with an understanding
or experience in each of the crucial
topics. Later on, at your own pace,
you will be able to share knowledge
so that each member of the
community feels confident and
literate about participating in their
community network.

**You: OK! Nice! But what skills should we develop exactly? What do I have to do for that?**

Rita: First, since you will work as a
group, you will need organisational
skills. The initiative involves various
roles, either leadership or supportive
roles, and there is always a core
group that initiates the project.
These choices always depend on the
local culture and on the aspirations
of the group. Then making a plan
for the budget and setting up
costs is another important part
of the organisation. Access to a

physical location is very useful,
where you can meet and exchange
information, discuss goals, plan
network deployments, work together
and strengthen relationships in your
group.

Maintaining a functioning
communication flow within the
group is critical, and there are
simple ways to train for that, for
instance, by organising frequent
get-togethers in addition to online
communication channels, and most
importantly, actively listening to
each other. Of course, keep in mind
that disagreements are likely to
occur and you could learn about the
perspectives of the others or even
get support.

Anyway, no big deal, any community
is shaped through conflicts and
contradictions that are transformed
creatively. Your vision and goals will
be keeping the project going, mostly
if you believe that the organisation
should serve the community.
You could always consult other
supportive organisations, and attend
training sessions for starting small
collectives.

**You: Understood. Anything else I should know?**

Rita: Yes! You will also need to get
familiar with the technical features
of your network. It is important
to understand that you can start
simple, with what you know and
the resources you have at hand.
Start to familiarise yourself with
basic networking, including an
understanding of access network
<figure><img src="image_47.png" /></figure>

types such as Wi-Fi. Also start to get to know your environment, like climate conditions (temperature, humidity) but also the availability of physical features (a common space, roofs, towers or a playground, etc.), in order to have an idea of how to plan the deployment of your network. Does this all work? You might want to start with a simple experiment in a sandbox or on your kitchen table.

**You:** Very well. Is that all?

**Rita:** One last thing: you will need to be aware of some legal basics. But you don't have to be an academic or have actual experience in law, just like you don't have to be trained as an engineer. At first, you would only need an overall grasp of the legal system and some key concepts.
<figure><img src="image_48.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. Stock remains of hardware, computer equipment, furniture in donalo.org</footnote>
# 10. Keep in mind various aspects of sustainability

As the previous chapter suggests, it is never too early to start thinking about the sustainability of your community network. We will go into more details in Part VI.

For now, we would like to continue with a general overview of what this concept entails for a community network, and of the various aspects it encompasses and that need to be considered even at the early, planning stage of your project.

The concept of sustainability has expanded from its original environmental policy meaning to include various aspects. We see five key dimensions of sustainability that are relevant to community networks: natural/ environmental, economic, political/organisational, cultural and legal sustainability. This brief introduction covers key points of these dimensions as understood by key actors from seven community networks, based on our research.
**Environmental sustainability** is about the potential impact of community networks on the environment. This includes, for instance, energy consumption, e-waste, recycling of hardware, etc. This is very important as digital technologies are made up of highly hazardous substances, including rare metals extracted in unfair conditions in conflict and/or exploited zones, and represent around 10% of humans' total electricity consumption.

**Economic sustainability** relates primarily to the characteristics of the market and resources, in particular people and money. For some community networks, sustainability has to do with the alternative character of the network and the bypassing of commercial interests (big telecom providers). For other community networks, sustainability has to do with the provision of a good service, which might be more effectively realised with the help of (typically small) commercial partners. Beyond their own resources, community organisations can be supported by external stakeholders, private organisations, or public institutions (local, regional, national or European funds) interested in promoting their activities. The resources provided by external actors should be managed in coherence with a vision defined collectively, by means of horizontal negotiations among members, in order to avoid organisational disagreements. In fact, access to external sources of financing may create new constraints and/or open new opportunities for organisational growth, thus pushing for change in the specific objectives of the network or the nature of its general mission.

**Political and organisational sustainability** relates to empowerment, active ownership of resources and data, control of one's own communication needs, how to be ethical and respect the values you agreed upon, and the rights of the network's users (which can be expressed in terms of use - see the draft in Appendix B). Members can also try to influence policy makers towards more favourable laws (see Chapter 24), build partnerships to enhance the legitimacy and the scale of the community, and make physical spaces available for meetings and for other public initiatives. Organisational and governance aspects, and in particular the access of community members to decision-making processes, are central to this dimension of sustainability. They are examined in more detail elsewhere in this book (Ch. 15, 16 and 22).

**Cultural sustainability** is understood as social cohesion and a common identity, or at least a spirit of sharing common resources. Communitarian practices and philosophical concerns for the commons in general have resulted in strong practical efforts to reflect the communities' values and culture, but also to re-use existing networking and other equipment as much as possible. This concern also contributes to environmental sustainability.
**Legal sustainability** means respecting the various legal obligations (Chapter 19), and deciding whether to incorporate and under which status (Chapter 16). To improve legal sustainability, you may try to influence the legal framework through advocacy (Chapter 24) to change rules that may threaten the network's activities or, to the contrary, to promote new measures that can facilitate its development.

<figure><img src="image_49.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_50.png" /></figure>
# Story #9: A few hints from guifi.net on making a good start (by Ramon Roca)

## Organisation: Making the community sustainable

Even if you're still at an early stage, you should remember that scaling up your community network will prove difficult.

Actually, the main weaknesses of the community network will be the community itself: the community leaders and principal volunteers are typically a small number of persons, and if these persons leave the community for whatever reason, that might put the continuity of the whole project at risk. In the long run, scaling up and ensuring sustainability may require:

1. The recruitment of professionals as a complement to the voluntary activity, and

2. The development of a set of tools to monitor and document the contributions, resource appropriation (such as instances of capacity over-consumption), and ensure the reinvestment of a fraction of the revenues obtained from professional or for-profit activity.

Without addressing those questions, it will usually prove difficult to sustain and later scale the network.

## Economic sustainability: Funding community networks

Having a good knowledge of the economic aspects of running a community network will reduce uncertainty of investments, expansion plans, and overall operations.

In terms of economic models, a sustainability framework should develop compensation settlements between all participants aimed at ensuring:

1. A fair distribution of the network operation costs based on use of the resources, and

2. The generation of the required resources to recover the investments made or to enable future ones.

Access to funding is crucial. Some communities have tried to access external funding at local, national or European level but found the process too complex, demanding and often not tailored to their needs. In addition, (heavy) dependence on external funding can lead to uncertainties. For example, what happens if the funding, for whatever reason, doesn't materialise, or comes to an end? Our research suggests that the funding of the network from the community's own resources is the most reliable. It
develops feelings of ownership and
promotes long-term sustainability.

Communities should value inclusiveness and fairness more than profitability. For instance, many have a strategy to provide connection to members who cannot afford it. Some community networks also have differential pricing schemes for different groups of users, such as households, small companies, larger companies, and public institutions such as schools and hospitals. Consider the values of your community in working out the best funding model for your initiative.

## Political sustainability: Agreeing on a basic set of values

While still at the volunteering stage, it might be the case that the community is still based on verbal agreements or a network of friendship relations.

When going further however, there will be a need for formalising agreements between all participants (see the Pico Peering Agreement and the Draft Terms of Use in Appendices A and B respectively) and developing a governance framework. A good start could be to develop the ecosystem based on the following principles:

1. Sharing network infrastructure increases the efficiency (i.e. better performance, efficient use of the spectrum or wider coverage for the same investment) of the network

infrastructure because it stimulates cooperation, prevents duplication of efforts and facilitates economies of scale. This is particularly true in the case of optical fibre because, once in place and operational, it becomes a non-rivalrous asset (zero marginal production costs) due to its virtually unlimited capacity.

2. The contribution of local economic activities is essential for the project's sustainability because it creates a positive dependency: it generates the required resources to maintain and expand it.

3. The professionals (i.e. individuals or enterprises that deliver services to the community in return for an economic remuneration) deserve a fair reward for their work, but speculation on the network infrastructure is not allowed.

4. Network participants have the right to satisfy their connectivity needs through their own efforts as well as through the procurement of professional services in a fair and competitive market. The network must remain open, free (as in freedom), and neutral.
## Story #10: Minimising the ecological cost of community networks (by Mireira Roura)

Although I live under capitalism, where "everything is possible" but nothing can change, I believe that the circular economy can act as a new paradigm. Actually, it is not a new concept - 2,500 years ago, Aristotle already pointed to this principle with this sentence: wealth is not in the ownership of things, but in their use. I think a lot about this concept. In this, and in taking care of my things as if it was my teddy bear. That's why I try to keep my environmental footprint as small as possible.

My brother's phone was mine, my laptop was donated by the innovation office of the city council (Barcelona Activa) and prepared by Miquel from Solidan, a local social enterprise.

Part of my internet access in the eReuse.org office comes from a second-hand router that used to be part of the guifi.net backbone in Barcelona - it became too slow for that but works wonderfully for our office. I try to reduce waste, reuse and recycle. I don't want to shred electronics if they can be

reused, it would be harmful for the environment that me and my daughter will be living in.

I don't think having the best and fastest computer or router makes me a better person, quite the contrary. In fact, I think this planet is overloaded with consumers. We have surpassed the limits of the planet, eating plastic, contaminated by heavy metals from everything we dump into the atmosphere, the land and the sea. Climate change is already very visible and that's very alarming. Our "digital world" needs a lot of hardware, cables, antennas, electricity, and these are made with exotic and toxic components so it has a huge social and environmental impact.

I work part time in donalo.org, a digital meeting point where companies donate their surpluses (stock remains, computer equipment, furniture...) in good condition and NGOs receive it free of charge. It is a project based on the circular economy: we turn waste into resources. **But we had a problem with the computers that we were giving to NGOs, because we couldn't certify or guarantee them. That's why I started to collaborate with eReuse.org, a federation which tries to extend the lifetime of electronic products through repair, refurbishing and reuse, ensuring traceability.**

Our challenge is to prevent products from being prematurely recycled. To do that, we trace the devices at the component level and each of them
has an identifier in our database. We have restored hundreds of computers for reuse in NGOs, fostering digital inclusion, avoiding the manufacture of new devices, ensuring recycling and creating jobs and contributing to the local economy. Now, we are working on a few routers donated by the Barcelona Council and trying to find them a second life.

I can see we are not only contributing to minimising the ecological impact of our own personal computing life, but also helping many other people to do so. We can tell the person who bought a computer long ago about the social impact of that particular device: how many people used it and for how many hours after they gave it to someone interested.

We can also show them the environmental impact of its usage: what parts and materials were used to build it, the savings from extended use, where and when it was recycled (and now the same can be done with routers).

What motivates me is that it's not just abstract statistics like tons of saved CO2 that I never see. It's personal: **when I visit, for example, Alencop, one social partner, I see migrants who used to pick up scrap in the streets and now work on the collection, preparation and sale of these electronic devices as their paid job,** and that makes me feel good as I am helping these particular guys in my community. I wish there were more girls in this field, by the way.
# 11. Finding support

Now that you have a general idea of what skills are needed to start and grow a community network, it is important to also know where to find support. That could be practical, hands-on support as well as related knowledge, either from complementary local initiatives or from other community networks.

As we have already pointed out, a big part of the success of community networks has been due to the collaborative spirit between the pioneers of that time.

Today there are still many venues where community network practitioners meet and exchange knowledge and experience like the Wireless Battle Mesh, the Radical Networks conference as well as various mailing lists you can freely subscribe to (the Dynamic Coalition of Community Connectivity - or DC3 - discussion spaces, including a mailing list; the Battlemesh mailing list, and many others) - more resources are covered in Chapter 12 and listed in Appendix E. You will probably want to engage in these various spaces to get feedback and advice on your project.
If your project becomes ambitious, it might require the engagement of network technologists to deploy and maintain the network, of designers to create a visual identity, of software developers to implement sophisticated local services, of managers to work toward the economic sustainability of the network, of legal and policy experts to ensure the legality, and of other facilitators, initiators and community leaders to develop or enhance different local initiatives that would benefit from being linked to a community network.

People with these skills may already be engaging in other local community initiatives, and they could prove to be interested in your community network project. An urban garden can offer a public access point to the network and a physical space for community gatherings or for organising network-related events. A community currency project can create links to other actors in the local economy towards a complementary market of resources and services. A local design firm could provide support in framing and passing on the concept through visual communication. A hack lab or fablab can contribute with technical expertise. An academic institution can engage students and potential interns for documenting and analysing the communications, social, legal, business and political dimension of the project.

Together, all of these actors form an entire ecosystem that you should engage with when planning for your project. You can, for instance, invite them to work jointly in educational activities on the politics of digital technology, or participatory practices in planning and decision-making processes, social and political activities at the neighbourhood level such as urban gardens, cooperative housing, community currency initiatives, etc.

<figure><img src="image_51.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_52.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. The Neighborhood Academy in Prinzessinnengarten is a self-organized open platform for urban and rural knowledge sharing, cultural practice and activism</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. Projects that take place in hackerspace.gr, a place for creativity, collaboration, research, development and education</footnote>
# Story #11: Joining forces in hybrid spaces: the Battlemesh encounter (by Panayotis Antoniadis)

On 13 May 2018 in Berlin, an encounter took place between digital and urban activists in the context of the "Battle of the Mesh", a major event in the community networks scene returning in 2018 to the famous C-base, one of the birthplaces of the community networks scene back in the early 2000s.

The Prinzessinnengarten is a 10-minute walk from C-base. It is a key location for the right to the city movement in Berlin and, in a very central location of the city, it hosts a wide variety of activities and organisations. Its wooden arcade structure "die Laube" is both a symbol and a visible functional space for hosting events and workshops on various topics related to the right to the city movement. Interestingly, many of the local actors in these two activist hubs have not visited the other one.

The encounter was introduced with two provocations, one for each side: **urban activists will not be able to defend our rights to the city if they**

don't include in their claims the right to the digital infrastructures, and the ability to communicate free of corporate or government controls.

Digital activists will end up offering just cheap labour for providing affordable access to the internet, and more specifically to Facebook, Google, and the like. A circle was formed in the centre of the room, which was joined only by a few of the "locals", the rest staying outside the circle observing the round of introductions (see Figure 3).

Many interesting urban initiatives were represented, like the neighbours academy Nachbarschafts Akademie, Stadt von Unten or the city from underneath, MetroZones, the rental union Mietschaeuser Syndikat, Tesserae, INURA Berlin, Bizim Kiez, Tempelhof Vision, and more.

In the beginning, it felt like a foreign body entered the C-base and started talking among themselves, including statements by all participants allowing them to get to know each other better (e.g. What is the Battle of the Mesh? What is the Prinzessinnengarten? What are the current challenges/tactics of urban and digital activists?).

After the end of the "inner" circle in which only a few digital networking projects were introduced, like Freifunk community network, the digital rights advocacy association La Quadrature du Net, and the hackerspace Athens, the debate
started quickly with many people questioning the dichotomy created by the description of the event, separating the digital space from the physical space, and indeed the digital activists from the urban activists.

Johannes from MetroZones gave as an example collaborations already from the 1990s. Botschaft, Bar + Disco and Katrin proposed that looking at past experiences would help to understand how the movement could be strengthened.

I defended this framing, stressing that the only reason for making a distinction between these inseparable contemporary spaces is that in reality, many people actually don't reflect upon their close interrelation, and most importantly, upon the many inspiring analogies and potential complementarities and synergies.

This clarifying intervention broke the ice and people out of the circle started participating and sharing their experiences and possible tactics to defend our rights to the hybrid city. For example, the rental union Mietshaeuser Syndikat is an interesting case study of using existing institutions and laws to create alternatives like various forms of non-speculative, affordable housing, and more specifically to take housing stock out of the "market". On the technology side, the important role of a "playing" attitude was highlighted by Adam Burns, a founder of Free2Air, netCommons Advisory Board member, and co-

author of this book. Adam also highlighted that community is a tricky word and thus it is critical to keep experimenting.

**From a policy perspective, Virginie Aubrée from the netCommons team and La Quadrature du Net (also a co-author of this book) highlighted the need to participate in policy and regulatory activities at the EU level but also at the national and global levels.**

There are many important constraints or openings that could be created by bad or good legislation, respectively. European programmes like URBACT and netCommons can also play a positive role bringing together different actors.

Then the project Genuino Clandestino in Bologna was given as an example of synergies between different forms of self-determination, including mesh networking, and also between content, organisation and communication within the movement. And the situation in Greece was discussed as an example of how the economic and other crises could also become drivers for resistance and offer opportunities, like the abundance of empty spaces in the city of Athens.

At this point the key role of infrastructure as an important common aspect of both domains of action (digital and urban) was identified. Interestingly, **the idea of the "infinite" digital or virtual space was contested as artificial,**
since the energy limitations are
an important constraint for the
digital space that shouldn't be
underestimated.

Actually, many of the urban activists have recently been involved in actions against the moving of Google offices into Berlin's Kreuzberg neighbourhood, consuming the neighbourhood "collective product" as someone noted. A very telling manifestation of how digital and urban rights become more and more interrelated. But what is the alternative to Google?, someone asked. How can one compete in terms of usability and economies of scale?

Monic Meisel, co-founder of Freifunk and an advocate for local applications in CNs since the early days, admitted that engaging people in using such local applications has proved extremely hard.

The examples of Autistici/Inventati and Framasoft, the French approach of "degooglisation" (un-googleing) of the internet, creating server cooperatives that are collectively (self-)managed, but also the MAZI toolkit to develop a local network, were brought as good examples on how technology can help to reduce the barriers to entry. Thiago from Brazil brought the experience from the Amazon, explaining how communities manage to build their own networks with very few resources, and highlighting the fact that it is the process that it is the most important and not the final outcome, the infrastructure in itself.

<figure><img src="image_53.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="3">3. Meeting between urban and digital activists at the Battlemesh 2018 in Berlin</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_54.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_55.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_56.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_57.png" /></figure>
This part of the discussion was concluded by Ileana from NetHood, also a co-author of this book, proposing to collectively develop and promote a broader perspective on sustainability, through various initiatives and projects, affirming differences and creating a diversity of choices for the liveability of the urban system.

The discussion then moved to some ethical dilemmas that activists might face in their effort to engage people in their actions. For example, the use of aggressive advertisement tactics was discussed, with some being in favour, seeing it as one of the only ways to compete for attention with the big corporations, and others against, considering that such tactics are not compatible with the values and principles of the movements.

Even more controversial was the proposal to use local networks as a means to block access to Facebook and Google. This seemed to be a very sensitive topic for digital activists, who were mostly reluctant to the idea. It led to a heated discussion about the meaning of internet freedom, and whether those who jeopardise this freedom should be actively excluded from alternative infrastructures.

After this introductory round, we all walked together toward the Prinzessinnengarten in small groups, some of them already "mixed", engaging in more informal discussions.

For most of the digital activists it was the first time they had visited the Prinzessinnengarten and they were offered a guided tour when we arrived. It was interesting to know that one of the principles of the garden is to allow easy access to experimentation by making it easy to make mistakes and thus learn, which is one of the main principles of hacking.

The need for compromises was also brought to the fore, with the description of the necessary commercial activities developed in the garden that subsidise non-profit projects like the Neighbourhood Academy.

During the "apéro" that followed at the wooden construction Die Laube, more mixed groups were formed and interesting discussions took place. For example, some urban activists were impressed by the resistance of digital activists to the temptation of blocking Google from their local networks, something not so obvious in political movements in which the exclusion of "racism", "violence", etc. is typically tolerated as a defence mechanism.

Someone also mentioned the pervasiveness of the internet and the reaction of friends living in the rainforest area in Brazil being informed about our discussion, saying "Don't come here, leave us alone, disconnected." But others commented that "they" will go there anyway, so it is better if connecting the unconnected comes with some values, principles and awareness
of important issues like privacy, digital coloniality and the risk of algorithmic manipulation.
<figure><img src="image_58.png" /></figure>
# 12. Self-teaching resources: a short collection

In planning the early stages of developing your community networks, you will probably want to look beyond this book to get more detailed information. Fortunately, there are many resources out there you can use to that effect.

The book "Wireless Networking in the Developing World" has been a precious reference for creating new community networks since 2005. It was written by community network practitioners and it compiled long experience on the technical aspects of wireless communications, sustainability, and more.

The MAZI toolkit, cited in Chapter 11, provides applications, software and guidelines to develop a local network. Yunohost and Framasoft, mentioned in Chapter 14, also provide free software. Freifunk.net and LibreMesh.org provide free software, and LibreRouter, under development, open hardware.
There are various organisations that produce up-to-date documentation on CNs, organise events and provide funding:

**The Internet Society (ISOC)** is more focused on policy and regulation issues, with a special focus on spectrum and education, running a very successful funding programme for supporting community networks all over the world called "Beyond the Net". ISOC also maintains a page fully dedicated to community networks resources.

**The Association for Progressive Communications (APC)** is a global organisation as well as a network of organisations that has produced and supported relevant publications such as the 2018 edition of its annual **Global Information Society Watch (GISWatch)** report, which focused on community networks and featured an important contribution from our research project netCommons. APC also produces a very informative monthly newsletter on community networks and other local access initiatives.

**DC3 is the Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)**, in which ISOC, APC and other organisations also participate, and has published three books on community networks, the latest being **The community network manual: How to build the Internet yourself**. It also maintains a list of resources, including books, documents, a list of community networks and much more.

There are also several community networks that produce documentation in their local languages, such as **Freifunk**, **guifi.net**, **AlterMundi**, **ninux.org**, and many others. These European communities meet annually at the Battle of the Mesh conference, and have recently formed an ISOC Community Networks Special Interest Group, which has a global scope.

Several mailing lists and newsletters exist that regularly discuss community networks-related topics and where you can find answers to your doubts and questions: DC3 maintains one, the Battlemesh organisation another, one from Radical Networks, and the Telecommonns mailing list for policy advocacy in Europe, just to name a few.

From an academic perspective, two recent issues of the **Journal of Peer Production: "Alternative Internets" and "CITY"**. They cover a diverse range of topics related to community networks. At the crossroads of academia, activism and art, a good reading can be the upcoming book by the late Armin Medosch, with a focus on history and the political dimension. Unfortunately, he didn't manage to conclude this book, but his friends are committed to finishing it and publishing it soon.
**NetHood** maintains a collection of links with a special focus on the local dimension of CNs and do-it-yourself (DIY) networking, a dedicated term for this specific dimension of a CN, at http://nethood.org/links. The **netCommons website (netcommons.eu)** is probably the major source of information and resources from a research and innovation point of view. Finally, more concrete resources and suggestions for further reading are provided in Appendix E.

<figure><img src="image_59.png" /></figure>

1

<footnote n="1">1. A scene from the APC project "Connecting the Unconnected: Supporting community networks and other community-based connectivity initiatives"</footnote>
# PART 4 :
HOW TO
START A
COMMUNITY
NETWORK?
You have now teamed up with people of different backgrounds who have all learned about community networks and seen the potential of a shared local telecom infrastructure. They are ready to work together, and have reached out to other organisations, people with experience in community networking, or even local businesses and public authorities who might be willing to provide support. Now that you are moving to the hands-on part of the project, you have also gathered educational material and resources to assist you in your endeavour.

So, in this part of the book, we will share inspiring stories about the first wonders of setting up network nodes, and then move on to explore various technical options you might want to consider for setting up your infrastructure.
# 13. Seeding nodes in a community network

<figure><img src="image_60.png" /></figure>

We begin this part with hands-on accounts about how to install the first nodes of your network.

In the following three stories, vortex, Jürgen Neumann and Ramon Roca share the joys and wonders of seeding the first antennas of a wireless community network!

Community networks, as you now know, are normally not planned and built in a single engineering effort. Rather, they grow around a small group of early enthusiasts who decide to seed nodes. Obviously, there are exceptions, like Broadband for the Rural North (B4RN) in the United Kingdom, which follows a more structured growth model, probably also due to their technical choice of using only optical fibre to build a very high-capacity infrastructure.
# Story #12: The story of groundzero (by vortex)

This message was posted online by vortex on 10 February 2002. Since late December 2000, groundzero has been offering open wireless access to the local area around Bethnal Green in the East End of London.

To the best of our knowledge, groundzero is the oldest, most stable and reliable public wireless access point in London, if not the UK. Actually we think it may be the longest running such gateway in Europe.

## The host

The host is a PII (Pentium II) laptop running Red Hat Linux 7.2 with patches. Its primary function is to act as a wireless gateway and support ancillary services such as IP forwarding and tunnelling, firewalling, and experimental dynamic routing. It is currently also running various applications:

- Apache

- mod_perl

- mysql

- scoop

- BIND 9

- DHCPD 3

- Net SNMPD

- PoPToP, L2TPD and

- FreeSWAN (for peering with other wireless and wired connections).

## The wireless card

An Orinoco Silver 802.11b PCMCIA

card (Figure 1) is used to provide the wireless gateway. This brand and model of card was chosen for a number of reasons including the ability to connect it to an external antenna as well as the wide driver support at the time for all Linux, *BSD's, and MS OS's.

## Connectors, cabling and antenna

The Orinoco Silver card has a connector for an external antenna, which connects to a pigtail connector, which in turn is connected to a lightning protector, followed by 50 feet of LMR400 coaxial cable. At the far end of the coaxial cable is a Hyperlink Technologies Omnidirectional 16dBi antenna used to serve the local area.

Initially this antenna was mounted on a heavyweight industrial tripod that was free-standing but ballasted on a street-facing balcony (above a shop). If you are considering a similar set-up, you should pay attention to potential very strong wind and ballast the tripod used to mount the antenna accordingly. After positioning and testing, the antenna was moved to a rooftop chimney mount on a two-metre mast rising above a very firmly mounted TV mast. The work to mount the antenna and the final mounting is shown in Figure 1 and 2.

## Client connections

The first permanent connection was to the host "newsfilter", where a publicly accessible web server was run from the far end of a 500-metre wireless link. This initial link was so inspiring! It worked reliably
<figure><img src="image_61.png" /></figure>

1

<figure><img src="image_62.png" /></figure>

2

<footnote n="1">1. The original Orinoco 802.11b network card serving groundzero</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. Final mounting of the antenna (right) of the groundzero.free2air.net host and access point (not reachable anymore)</footnote>
despite the distance and despite
the fact that heavy passing
traffic could affect the network
link quality and speed! Zoo was
then connected permanently to
groundzero in February 2001. Other
current connected friends include
the crew from "Ambient TV" via the
host "gastower", as well as the Mute
magazine-supported "youarehere"
project.

<figure><img src="image_63.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_64.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">1. The initial topology with access points and their IP addresses</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. One of the first Freifunk nodes set up with a white patch sector antenna for remote connection and a black omnidirectional antenna on top of it to offer local service</footnote>
# Story #13: Seeding the first Freifunk nodes (by Jürgen Neumann)

Berlin, some time in 2002. I used two different types of antennas: a white square sector antenna and a black thin omnidirectional antenna on top of it. The sector antenna connected the house to an internet service provider about 2 km away.

Figure 2 shows the mounting on the flat roof; the ISP antenna providing service can be guessed from the white sector antenna pointing. The omni antenna offered access to this internet uplink for my neighbours. My housemates and I used a wired connection to the Wi-Fi router, as we all had Ethernet cables in each of our rooms.

Before the installation, the 35 house residents shared one asymmetric telephone line modem connection with 56 kbits/s, because German Telekom did not provide DSL in our district by that time. After the installation of the Wi-Fi link, we had 1 Mbit/s symmetric. A fantastic DIY upgrade back in 2002! All my housemates and neighbours were really happy about it. :-)

From there, it only took us a few more months, until my house became part of the so-called BerlinBackBone, an early experiment for a Freifunk-based wireless

backhaul whose topology is shown in Figure 1.

Starting from the c-base, our hackerspace and regular meeting point in the centre of the town, it interconnected the local wireless networks in the outer districts of the city.

I will never forget the moment when for the first time I was able to ping my own access point on the rooftop of my house, while sitting in c-base, at one of our regular Wednesday meetings. I then felt certain that we could build our very own city-wide information infrastructure.
## Story #14: Kickstarting guifi.net (by Ramon Roca)

At that time, there were several initiatives already existing in Catalonia, like Mataro Sense Fils, Barcelona Wireless, and many others. Also, some people, like me, living in very small villages or dispersed farmhouses in the countryside were looking for solutions for themselves.

At some point, we started to get in touch and realised that, apart from getting connectivity for each of us, it would make sense to cooperate at all levels, and even for those who already had access, to share the gateways. We were convinced that this would contribute a lot to the cohesion of the community for the benefit of all. That launched guifi.net in 2004.

The very first initiative was to create a backbone connecting all the already existing but individual infrastructure in the region of Osona. For achieving this, a "Supernode" was installed in one of the towers at the Seminari de Vic (where, by the way, this book was written - Figure 9 shows a moment of relaxation in this process), which is at the top of a small hill and from there we had views to all of us. Everything was set up in a few days and worked, so we realised that

with small efforts, it was possible to connect people at very long distances in various remote villages and rural areas; Figure 10 shows how many links departed from this "Supernode" a few months after installation.

We felt that we were doing something very big, something which the large companies were saying was not possible at that time, and for which the political administration was claiming to have programmes, but which was actually never implemented here. Instead, we found out it was something we could do as citizens!
<figure><img src="image_65.png" /></figure>

1

<figure><img src="image_66.png" /></figure>

2

<footnote n="1">1. Seminari de Vic, the venue of the netCommons booksprint, where the first "Supernode" of the guifi.net network was installed</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. Links from the "Supernode" at Seminari de Vic at some time during guifi.net's evolution</footnote>
# 14. Explore your technical options

<figure><img src="image_67.png" /></figure>

A community network is a multi-dimensional project, which includes many different complementary technical components. For each component, there is a large variety of choices which will depend on the specific context and available resources. Examples of such choices are given below just to provide a better understanding of these different components and a rough idea of the trade-offs involved.

So, in this part of the book, we will share inspiring stories about the first wonders of setting up network nodes, and then move on to explore various technical options you might want to consider for setting up your infrastructure.

## 14.1. Gateway to the internet

If you decide to connect your community network to the public internet, you'll have two basic options to reach out beyond the local boundaries of your community, which can be used in parallel to create redundancy.

**Using a commercial internet subscription:** That's probably the easiest. Any traditional ADSL or, better, fibre-optic subscription from a mainstream internet access provider will do the trick. The only requirement is to have one person in your community who has subscribed to such a service and is willing to make it available to the community. A drawback is that if traffic gets too
voluminous, the connection might be slowed as the bandwidth might not be able to absorb all the community's traffic.

**Finding a transit operator to the global internet:** The most basic answer is to interconnect with existing networks nearby, which will then be able to relay the traffic of your community and thereby connect your local network to the global internet. These can be owned by public authorities or private corporations. You will have to contract with them and pay them a fee which will vary depending on the amount of traffic you send to their network. It is possible that they will offer you direct connection to the global internet (transit), or just collect your traffic and bring it to another network operator who will be able to provide you with transit services. In Toulouse, France, Tetaneutral was lucky enough to realise that a data centre run by an independent, for-profit company had been built just next to the squat where most of their infrastructure was based (it's the main hub for their mostly wireless network where the community's servers are hosted). They thus simply rolled out a fibre-optic cable to the data centre and directly reached that data centre where a transit operator could then connect their network to the global internet. No need for another intermediary to collect the network and bring it to the transit operator.

## 14.2. Nodes and links

The establishment of links between nodes of a CN, through a wired or wireless connection, serves a very concrete objective: to extend the coverage of the services offered by different nodes of the network to a larger geographic area. Some of the nodes host certain services like internet connectivity or local applications, others serve only as "forwarders" or as access points. The placement of network nodes and the chosen links between them can significantly influence the performance, stability and evolution of a CN. But even the biggest CNs started from somewhere, so don't hesitate to create a node where the need is.

## 14.3. Wireless

In the case of wireless, the installation of a network "node" entails the following elements:

* A suitable location, typically roofs of high buildings since wireless links require "Line of sight"

* One or more antennas and 802.11 devices

* A router

* An energy source.
<figure><img src="image_68.png" /></figure>

There are many proprietary solutions for antennas, routers or both in the same device, and it is rather easy to establish a wireless link by just mounting such gear on two roofs that can "see" each other. However, there are many good reasons why free software and open hardware solutions should be preferred. The Freifunk.net and LibreMesh.org communities are maintaining the appropriate software, and a new open hardware router, the LibreRouter, is also under development and almost out.

In practice, many community networks are advocates of free software and open hardware, but they often make compromises, especially when the "community" is also constituted by non-experts for whom the usability of the proprietary solutions can make a big difference.

### 14.4. Fibre

At the beginning, when most community networks ran on wireless, the nodes were typically placed on tall buildings like bell towers of churches, agriculture silos, or also at the top of hills and mountains. The requirement was to have good views (in order to have a good line of sight everywhere and thus provide better coverage) as well as electricity to power the equipment. If electricity was not present, then solar power and a battery to operate 24 hours a day were also an option, considering that the power consumption of such equipment is not too high. But at the end of the 2000s, some communities like guifi.net moved
<figure><img src="image_69.png" /></figure>

to fibre-optic last-mile networks. When you deploy fibre, you can choose between two kind of architectures:

* Passive nodes (boxes with connections) than can be placed anywhere (in a wall, in a post or on the street).

* Active nodes (those requiring power), which are typically placed in racks, whether outdoors or indoors (there are racks suitable for every type of placement).

Usually, deploying fibre will require you to have access to lamp posts, ducts and other facilities through which your fibre cables will be deployed. It does not matter if it is public or private space, as long as it is easily accessible for those who have to maintain the network. Legal aspects are highlighted later (in Chapter 19).

Laying out a fibre network will also require some special tools and expertise, for instance to solder fibre-optic cables. But after some basic training, it is generally quite easy to do! And of course, using fibre will increase by tenfold or more the speed of people's connection. We advise you to choose a place with a clean atmosphere and not many chemicals: Ramon Roca told us that once, guifi.net participants had placed an active node in the engine room of a sewage treatment plant of a public school, but there were so many corrosive chemicals in the air that they started destroying guifi.net's equipment!
14.5. Servers

Practice has shown that, from the moment that a community network offers access to the internet, local services – those hosted on servers within the network – either degrade or, even when successful, usually address a narrower audience that their mainstream alternatives.

One of the reasons is that the capabilities of local services are not well communicated, neither to the public nor to application designers. Part of the misunderstanding is due to the difficulty to imagine a more intimate digital space, a local application accessible only to those connected to a community network, in the "let's connect everything" mentality promoted today.

> Open and free software applications required in this setting have not yet reached the usability levels of global platforms, but software like NextCloud and Etherpad are making significant progress and are changing this perception that free software is only for geeks.

Various toolkits and platforms for local services like yunohost, Framasoft and the MAZI toolkit exist, which you will be able to replicate on your network to start servicing your community with great, decentralised and free software!
<figure><img src="image_70.png" /></figure>
# 15. Start organising your community

As a community network grows and takes form, it gives shape to one or more communities related to it, the community of its users, its maintainers, its allies.

There are many choices during the first steps of the network development that can influence this evolution. So, depending on how concrete your vision is at the early stages, you might need to make appropriate decisions for these choices. In any case, it is good to start organising early, to think about the objectives and the goals, the dimension you have in mind, and discuss all this with friends and other participants.

**First of all, as we have already stressed, it is important to select people with the appropriate skills who share similar values and objectives.**

Second, a physical space acting as a meeting place, an info point, a library, a hub for your community network will help a lot to engage more people along the way.

But beware that it will also frame the character of the community you are building. Depending on your environment and locality, you can seek help
from the local authorities (municipality, county, etc.) or from local cultural
associations, sometimes even local religious organisations, or sport clubs.
They often have social spaces, or high buildings like churches, and may be
willing to share and may end up getting involved in the community
network too.

The same holds with the online forum that you will choose for online
discussions, coordination, decision making, etc. Clearly, a Facebook group can
be more inclusive if you would wish to address a more mainstream audience,
while a self-hosted Mattermost or Discourse.org platform might raise the
barrier to entry a little, but would make clear what the political values of the
project are. Clearly you can choose to have more than one platform addressing
different needs, and probably at some point you will want to have your own
domain and set up a "traditional" web portal, like guifi.net, ninux.org and other
community networks have done.

Finally, the name and overall branding of your network is also very important
in this respect, so the naming and domain selection is a strategic choice.
But don't wait to be fully confident about all your decisions before you start,
you can change and add, and this is one of the beauties of building your own
network, placing it into your community and into the world. Those that will join
later will also have an opinion, and it is important they can participate in the
formation of the identity.
## 16. Decide on your legal status

<figure><img src="image_71.png" /></figure>

It may seem strange that the issue of your community network's legal status is only coming up now. But from our experience, these questions are only raised once your community has come together and started its network. However, the question of whether or not you should have a legal status is actually a crucial one, one which you will make based on your ethical values and the legal constraints you are subject to.

### 16.1. Why should you consider incorporating your community network?

To start your community network, you will have to make a choice on whether or not to get a legal status. You might prefer sticking to an informal and flexible structure relying on self-management. Or you might want a more structured organisation, where all roles are clearly defined and distributed. You may also find a middle ground, something in between.
Whatever you choose, your community's decision in this regard should be based on its goals and preferred mode of governance. But it is also one that you'll need to make with legal considerations in mind. The fact is that, overall, we found out during our research that having a legal entity (a legal form like an association or a cooperative) for all the members and participants of your community network will reduce legal risk for individual participants. Take data protection law for instance. When you are providing access to a network for your community, the law applicable in Europe says that those who manage the network engage in the processing of personal data - the data of the network's users. From a legal point of view, that means you are a "data controller". This legal qualification implies legal liability. You have to respect specific requirements (that are explained in the next section). If you fail to comply, you may be prosecuted and might have to pay a financial penalty. Other forms of more legal liability may also apply.

> When a community network has no specific legal form, it is more difficult to understand who the "data controller" is, or who is more generally responsible if something goes wrong. Liability might only bear on private individuals participating in running the network.

Having a legal form is a way to share liability and distribute it among the members of the community, and make the organisation liable rather than individual persons. But even then, it does not necessarily mean having a strict organisation.

### 16.2. What are the different legal statuses that you may consider?

There are several forms of legal status provided by your national law that you will be able to choose from when considering what legal status to take. These range from non-profit status such as associations or foundations, to forms of for-profit legal status that put the interest of the community first, such as cooperatives. Here we have collected some informative stories from different community networks in different countries, illustrating some of the reasons why they chose to incorporate and what legal status they found best for their needs. Each of them found a different, valid path. Many other solutions exist and many other paths have been explored, with or without success. Find yours! And remember that these decisions can also be changed as the network evolves and grows.
# Story #15: guifi.net becoming a foundation (by Ramon Roca)

guifi.net started in an informal way in 2004 as a group of citizens connecting to each other and getting access to the internet in small villages in the countryside of Catalonia. That was done without a legal entity or formal "bylaws", but from the very beginning there were written principles of the community as a commons ("Comuns per la Xarxa Oberta, Lliure i Neutral") inspired by the Pico Peering Agreement.

Because these principles were documented and well understood among our members, this was at first enough to successfully address the problems that arose in the first stage of our growth. Over the first years, we grew and built a significant amount of new infrastructure. When we started considering rolling out a fibre-optic network, we had a debate and decided to establish a legal entity. We felt like the status of a foundation was best to grow and coordinate many different participants, while remaining loyal to the original principles in terms of keeping the infrastructure neutral and safe from any speculation.

During that internal debate, several aspects convinced us that the status of a foundation was right for us, and

coherent with our priority to ensure the protection of our infrastructure as a commons:

**1. Declaring the network to be a public good** and handing over its management to public administrations was not considered safe enough: there were already many cases of public assets being privatised or appropriated by the public sector.

**2. Taking the form of a cooperative or association**, with one vote per person, would have potentially created the risk of unfair representation of our community. For example, by growing guifi.net in urban areas, votes coming from urban participants could become a majority and relegate those living in rural areas, undermining our original priority of connecting everyone.

**3. Foundations are protected against threats such as a hostile takeover.** They cannot be sold. They adopt long-lasting objectives through their bylaws. A drawback with the status of a foundation is that it does not necessarily entail democratic governance. So, we had to include additional specific mechanisms to establish open and participative governance. We also adopted a declaration and related measures to ensure that it would remain neutral from partisan, government or economic interests.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS RECLAIMED

<figure><img src="image_72.png" /></figure>
# Story #16: When a community network becomes a cooperative (by Spyou)

The project of the SCANI cooperative started in 2012 out of a non-profit internet access provider that had been around since 1998. We didn't plan anything at first. No business plan. No grandiose speech of great endeavours. We just seeded a few radio antennas here and there to build a tiny network. We only had two ethical principles:

* No public subsidies.

* No conflict of interest, by separating decision making and the money that we might make as a non-profit.

But being a traditional non-profit association was at least for some, especially local elected representatives, hindering the development and professionalisation of our operations. As we were told, we were the nice little computer club of Cheny, our village.

We could give courses to teach people how to use a computer or even inform about the politics of digital technologies.

However, the "heavy lifting" of planning and rolling out radio and

fibre-optic networks was not for us. Too tiny. Too not credible.

Our reaction was to become a "cooperative for digital planning", a way to scale up and say "hey, we are here, and we are going to digitally network this territory". With, on top of that, two overarching principles:

* To avoid mobilising public money without being able to reimburse them, we now have social capital which local governments can acquire (capped at 50%). We can now use public money, and we can give it back when we don't want it anymore or when we no longer need it.

* To solve the issue of remuneration and direction of the whole cooperative, we opted for a system with an executive board ("conseil d'administration") that includes two members that might be paid for their participation in the technical operation of SCANI (because those who spend the most time on the cooperative are ideally positioned to decide, but they need to eat at some point and need to be compensated), and an oversight board (whose only role is to oversee, so it's typically not as time-consuming) which comes into play if there is a problem (for instance, a conflict of interest).

Quite pragmatically, the status of a cooperative is not necessarily useful to reach these goals, but it makes it easier: **people are sympathetic to our work, we are not exposed to being sued by fiscal
authorities for unfair competition,
we have written rules that are
more stringent than those of a
non-profit organisation, so our
structure is easier to pass on to
potential followers.

In the end, I remain convinced that
it all comes down to people and
timing. I'm not sure we can turn
into a model that would be better
or more adapted than a non-profit
association. I'm not even sure that
an official entity is necessary, but it
sure can help to be considered and
to work with other organisations.

I did not talk too much about
problems. They are basically the

same as in any other human group:
lack of communication between
people, lack of time to come to grips
with our issues and actions, and
so a lack of a clear vision of the
larger picture leading to arguments,
irritations, departure, return,
nervousness and waste of time...
Add to that some disagreements
over the whole purpose (some of
those who were there from the
beginning realised a little late that
they actually wanted a small internet
access provider to be managed by a
couple of friends, not a cooperative
open to all; they eventually left the
dock to return to the bottom of the
ship's hold...).

<figure><img src="image_73.png" /></figure>
# Story #17: Freifunk getting a legal status (by Jürgen Neumann)

Today Freifunk is a meta-community of hundreds of local communities. As such, Freifunk has no legal entity. But to interact with the rest of the world, you sometimes need a legal entity. To solve this problem, there are several registered not-for-profit organisations related to Freifunk in various regions of Germany. One of them is the Foerderverein Freie Netzwerke e.V. aka FFN. This was also the first registered legal club in the context of Freifunk.

The initial need to set up the entity was to facilitate the organisation of the first international get-together of free network activists in Berlin in 2003, the "Freifunk Summer Convention". We needed to rent a large venue, get insurance for it, and rent some expensive video equipment. We did not want a private person to take the risk. Another reason to register a legal entity was to comply with German publishing laws to provide on our website the name and contact information of those responsible for the content published.

> We had a lot of discussion about the name of this new organisation. Many people just wanted to call it Freifunk. But I argued for a clear separation of the community of

activists and the legal entity. The reason for that was that everybody should be able to become a "Freifunka", as we call Freifunk activists, without having to be a member in the legal entity.

My feeling was also that the community should not be governed by a hierarchically structured organisation, but that the not-for-profit organisation should remain at the service of the community. Finally we agreed on that idea.

Today, some of these associated not-for-profit entities in the Freifunk ecosystem are also formally registered as internet service providers. Besides other services already mentioned, they do offer internet gateways for the community and maintenance services for backhaul infrastructures.
### 16.3. Should I formally register as an internet access provider?

If your community has decided to incorporate itself - be it as a foundation, an association or a cooperative - you might wonder if there are any further steps you can take so that your wonderful project can get the recognition it deserves from public authorities.

From a legal point of view, your community network provides an "electronic communications network or service" (legally an Electronic Communication Service or ECS - see the Glossary). As such, you may have to register before a specific authority. The actual procedure and terms depend on the country in which you are based. Most of the time, you will have to provide specific information to your telecommunication national regulatory authority (NRA). Its job is to monitor the telecom market, implement EU telecommunication and competition law, and ensure the rights of users of telecom devices. There is one in each EU member state.

In any case, this authority can give you the information you need regarding paperwork obligations. In Germany, Spain and France, this registration is free of charge. However, in other countries it can still be costly. Fortunately, a forthcoming EU law is about to change this. It encourages national authorities to avoid requesting these administrative fees from "commons-based" and non-profit networks (see our policy guidelines in Appendix C, also freely available for anyone as a stand-alone document, Enabling the Telecommons: Guidelines for Policy-Makers).

For now, this paperwork might seem like a burden to you. However, it often gives you rights, such as access to resources (e.g. radio frequencies allocation, interconnectivity with other networks, legal protections, etc.). Plus, depending on your national law, you may be fined if you decline to do it. So, it's probably a good idea to consult with the NRA first.
## Story #18: Registering with telecom authorities: an easy way to become a legitimate stakeholder (by Pierre)

Let me tell you about how we managed this issue at Franciliens.net, a French community network that is a member of the Fédération FDN. One of the first steps for the creation of an internet access provider in France is for it to declare itself to the telecommunications regulator, the Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes (ARCEP), based on article L.33-1 of the Code of the Post and Electronic Communications (CPCE). Even if this formality is mandatory, it has only a declarative value. There is no actual control, unlike an authorisation system.

Beyond the legal obligation, this formality allows us to be considered and treated by the authorities as an operator, whatever our size. It is the formality that makes our activist telecom operator a legitimate interlocutor, which has the right to speak on all matters related to the regulation of electronic communications. It is therefore

an important tool for an activist organisation that wishes to be heard within an existing legal framework.

Regarding Franciliens.net, of which I was head of the board at the time of our declaration, the latter was one of the very first formalities that we accomplished, as soon as the "non-profit association" had been created (through a declaration to administrative authorities). We didn't even have a bank account yet. The declaration itself was quite simple: the form is available online on the ARCEP's website, and it only requires straightforward information, including a letter from the heads of the organisation, the proof of creation of the organisation and a descriptive summary of the network you want to operate. One of the first concrete effects that the L.33-1 declaration had for Franciliens.net was the possibility to receive notification of all the calls for co-investment from fibre optics operators, and consequently to better grasp the state of fibre-to-the-home deployments in France. This topic is a big issue for us, as we would like to operate fibre-optic networks. Another effect, probably the most long-lasting considering the rapidly growing number of declared non-profit internet access providers in France, was to boost the credibility of the spokespersons of the Fédération FDN when they speak with the ARCEP. The fact of acting as representatives of many declared operators gives them more weight, paving the way for our upcoming policy actions!
17. Consider your
revenue models

When you want to start a
community network, you will need
to spend time and money for
labour, equipment and services,
such as websites or an uplink to
the internet. You are planning to set
up an information technology (IT)
infrastructure and to operate it for
several years.

To do so, you will need to find out the amount of money needed to start your
project and also how much money you will need to keep it up and running.
In other words: at some point you need to know all your initial and recurring
costs. Initial costs include everything you have to purchase to start - the one-
off starting costs. Recurring costs are things like loans, electricity or rental
fees, which you'll face on a regular basis.

Keeping in mind that any hardware will be outdated or break down at some
point, you will also need to save some money to replace it from time to time. An
advisable and very common method to deal with this is to calculate the price
of the device and simply divide it by the period of time you expect it to last.
This is called depreciation. Here is an example: an average computer device
like an access-point is supposed to last for three to five years. If the initial
costs are 500€ and you plan to use it for five years, your annual depreciation will then be 100€. So, to make sure your project survives after this period, it is of fundamental importance that you collect these 100€ every year and keep these savings to replace your device later on.

In an early stage, most communities are self-funded, meaning that the community members will spend their own time and money to set up a first nucleus of the network infrastructure. This is of course the easiest and most practical way to actually get going. But for further expansion of the network infrastructure, you will have to discuss with the members of the community and agree on a suitable revenue model. Depending on your local environment and your community, there is a choice of various alternatives to generate revenue. For example, it could be self-funded, sponsored, or financed by member fees or paid services. It can also of course be a mix of all these options. For now, you should just start thinking about revenue models and discuss them in your community. You will find more detailed information on these issues later on in this book, in Chapters 20 and 23.
## Story #19: An example of a small-scale ad hoc economic model for community networking: free2air (by Adam Burns)

At free2air initial economic resources were provided by a small group of people who donated their time, expertise and equipment. In addition, people providing value-added services on top of the local network (video streaming, professional printing, digital telephony, etc). Regular participants often worked together, assisting each other through sharing expertise in technical network routing, planning and other tasks.

The economic model of the free2air community network was based on offering free connectivity and local services to light or occasional personal users. As usage of the network increased and became heavier or more frequent, users would be asked to help underwrite the running costs of the resources on the basis of "pay what you can and think it is worth". People would also be encouraged to join regular meetings and workshops should they wish to. Local businesses such as internet cafés were charged a

monthly subscription. At peak, 30 to 50 subscribers on that basis proved to be sufficient to cover labour and equipment costs of network maintenance and upgrades, as well as contributing to further workshops and meetings.
# Story #20: The cost structure of Freifunk (by Jürgen Neumann)

Let's have a closer look at cost structures at first:

1. Hardware (computers, router, cables, antennas)

2. Education

3. Roll-out (set-up costs)

4. Electricity

5. Maintenance and support services.

I'm leaving out costs for internet access, as in Freifunk's model of a free network, this is an extra service that can be run on top of a free network (e.g. via a virtual private network).

Here in Germany, all of the costs listed above are truly user-contributed. Users buy their own hardware and pay for electricity themselves. We as individuals offer free trainings to educate them how to connect the routers to the network. So, the roll-out is done by every single user himself/herself. This is very important, because only this makes it possible to grow the network almost endlessly without the need of having a huge administrative team to manage the network.

Users in other places can start a network themselves once they know how to do this. Our meshing

technology is a very important key issue to these kinds of organically growing infrastructures.

Maintenance and support services are also user-contributed. We do organise this like in a Linux User Group. We offer regular meetings very locally. For example, in Berlin we offer regular meetings once a week in the evenings in almost every district. These meetings work like a typical user group. People who have questions or problems can go there. They can ask their questions, and the person with the minimum skills needed to answer the questions is pleased to do so. If the question is more complicated, a more educated person is asked to answer. And only if it is even more complicated are the true experts needed. This is a very important methodology to deal with local resources. Also people learn from the very beginning to teach and help each other. It also helps to educate the "experts" not to get involved in every issue, but also to give other people a chance to help others and to learn more and more over time, so that they can become experts themselves one day.

There is another important issue I would like to address at this point. I know that many of the costs addressed above can not always be covered by the users in the local community themselves. But I think it is a good way to try to help the others to get to own their own nodes (access points). Because in the end it is all about the ownership of the network. Our networks are owned by the users! So it will be very
hard to sell them to a commercial
entity for the good of only a few
people who might have established
some superpower within the local
community. This is to protect the
wealth that over time the community
has built into the network. It also
protects us from the laws which are
addressed to network providers. As
there is no single entity that runs
the network, there is no legal body
other than all the single users who
are offering this service. At least here
in Europe these people therefore are
not service providers. As mentioned
before, a service like e.g. internet can
be run as a different model on top of
the network! This is a very important
issue that I cannot stress often
enough!

So as I know that this model might
not be adoptable so easily, you
should find ways of how to realise
this. One could be that the routers
and other equipment are sold to
the users with micro-credits. There
might be other ways to solve this
issue, but I am sure that you as local
people will know much better than
me how to deal with this.

<figure><img src="image_74.png" /></figure>
# PART 5 :
HOW TO GET
A COMMUNITY
NETWORK
REALLY
RUNNING?
Congratulations! You have gathered a great team of people to start your community network and get it running. Now that you are ready to experiment with your network, you can consider expanding it, launching new services like hosting the community's emails, or testing local online applications that the community wants to use to improve their lives.

In this chapter, we go one step further in considering various aspects of running the network. It might look tedious at first, but after the early phase of development of your community network, you will need to adopt basic practices that will ensure that your friends and neighbours are happy with the common resource you have established together.
<figure><img src="image_75.png" /></figure>
# 18. Monitoring and managing your network

In this part, we will guide you through basic notions on how to manage communications on your network. This is called "monitoring" your network.

Monitoring is the process of collecting data that is relevant to the operation and availability of network resources, like capacity, packet losses, routes that fail, signal-to-noise ratio on links, and so on. It might sound technical, but as you will see there are also political and administrative implications to this. In a nutshell, we could put it this way: with (distributed) ownership comes responsibility.

## 18.1. Why monitor?

Visualisation of the resources and connectivity that each member contributes to a community network is an invaluable tool to show the impact of participation on the collective achievements brought by the community network itself.
Monitoring is also useful for a number of aspects of ownership responsibilities. Monitoring helps the owner visualise and understand how the resources are used and where to plan any future upgrades or changes.
Two basic reasons for monitoring should be considered. Problem management concentrates on issues of the present: things that need to be addressed immediately or in the near-term future. Network and capacity planning are issues that need to be addressed according to the rate of change of network usage growth. **A key component is to use historical data to visualise this rate of growth.** We will give an overview of both approaches.

## Troubleshooting

The main goal of troubleshooting is to keep the common resources of the network available to the community. Monitoring helps those who manage the network to identify (and hopefully fix) any issue before members of the community notice that there is a problem at all.

Problems facing members of the community network usually come in two varieties:

* A fault or change in a network resource that impacts access to, or availability of, this or another resource. Such a fault will impact access to resources for many or even all members of the community. These problems may come at a high cost to an owner in terms of many people needing assistance at once (all trying to ask for help or support at the same time). The goal of monitoring for these types of problems is to notify owners of a resource of the problem as soon as possible, sometimes even before it really happens. Usually, monitoring a network will prevent major problems, for instance, identifying a single point of failure in the network, so that resources in that point can be added, increasing the network's resilience.

* A lack of knowledge on how to access a resource. Such a problem is usually experienced by a single member of a community and can be resolved by providing clear channels of help and support such as a community help wiki or forum pages or FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions). Where to find such resources should be clearly communicated to the community.

Encouragement of a friendly, lively, experienced community helps keep this advice fresh and current.

The goal of problem management is to reduce repetitive strain on owners who support the network resources, as well as on people with specific knowledge who answer the questions of other community members.
<figure><img src="image_76.png" /></figure>

1

<figure><img src="image_77.png" /></figure>

2

<footnote n="1">1. Freifunk mesh radio links in a portion of the network; clicking on the link shows its length and quality measured as the inverse of the estimated loss rate (known as ETX); 1 means top quality</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. Freifunk single node map showing location and characteristics of the node together with the number of connected users (clients).</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_78.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_79.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_80.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="3">3. The OLSR statistics over time reported by one of the Freifunk nodes. OLSR is the routing protocol used by the network; the statistics include the number of neighbour nodes, the number of routes (end-to-end logical connections between nodes) seen by the specific node, and the number of links in the entire network as communicated through OLSR</footnote>
# OLSR-Verbindungen

## Übersicht über aktuell bestehende OLSR-Verbindungen

<table><thead><tr><th>Nachbar-IP</th><th>Hostname</th><th>Schnittstelle</th><th>Lokale Interface-IP</th><th>LQ</th><th>NLQ</th><th>ETX</th><th>SNR</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>10.31.9.254</td><td>k9-ff-gw.olsr</td><td>wan</td><td>10.31.9.241</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.9.252</td><td>mid2.liberacion.olsr</td><td>wan</td><td>10.31.9.241</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.7.157</td><td>mid10.f2a-bbb-rt1.olsr</td><td>vlan25</td><td>10.31.9.25</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.9.231</td><td>mid1.k9-bbb-31.olsr</td><td>vlan30</td><td>10.31.9.225</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.9.233</td><td>mid1.k9-bbb-33.olsr</td><td>vlan30</td><td>10.31.9.225</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.9.232</td><td>mid1.k9-bbb-32.olsr</td><td>vlan30</td><td>10.31.9.225</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.230.228.5</td><td>v36-core.olsr</td><td>vlan23</td><td>10.31.9.23</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.10.17</td><td>mid6.Zwingli-Core.olsr</td><td>vlan20</td><td>10.31.9.20</td><td>0.944</td><td>1.000</td><td>1.058</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10.31.4.81</td><td>mid8-sama-core.olsr</td><td>vlan21</td><td>10.31.9.21</td><td>0.086</td><td>1.000</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

## Legende:

* LQ: Erfolgsquote vom Nachbarn empfangener Pakete

* NLO: Erfolgsquote zum Nachbarn gesendeter Pakete

* ETX: Zu erwartende Sendeversuche pro Paket

* Green: Very good (ETX < 2)

* Yellow: Good (2 < ETX < 4)

* Orange: Still usable (4 < ETX < 10)

* Red: Bad (ETX > 10)

* SNR: Signal Noise Ratio in dB

* Green: Very good (SNR > 30)

* Yellow: Good (30 > SNR > 20)

* Orange: Still usable (20 < SNR > 5)

* Red: Bad (SNR < 5)

<figure><img src="image_81.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_82.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_83.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_84.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_85.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_86.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_87.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_88.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_89.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="4">4. Detailed link quality measures from a specific node toward its direct neighbours, measured both as ETX and as SNR (two different metrics, essentially monitoring signal quality and interfering signals)</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5. A detailed technical breakdown of wireless interface characteristics of a node; the nine plots give information as a function of time for about one day on parameters like the physical layer, bit rate available, signal power and quality</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_90.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="6">6. Chord diagram representing the logical connectivity between a large number of nodes in Freifunk Berlin. Although "unreadable" at first sight, these graphs are useful to highlight anomalies (e.g. the red interconnections) and empower intervention to solve them; details can sometimes be embedded in the links</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_91.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="7">7. Visualisation of guifi.net internet exchange and territorial fibre bandwidth utilisation encoded as colour code; the width of the connection indicates its capacity</footnote>
## Network planning

The goal of network planning is to deploy resources in the most efficient way to properly sustain the needs of each and every user. You need to plan the capacity of the links, i.e. to "right-size" transmission resources, balancing the capability of a resource to grow with the community's needs against the costs of upgrading resources to fit and scale with predicted future needs. Collection of monitoring data is an essential part of network planning and capacity planning in particular, as visualising growth of resource usage can help predict when upgrade investments may be necessary before they impact the everyday usage of the growing community.

> You will also need to properly replicate key resources so that the network is not blocked by trivial problems. For instance, you should avoid having a single "authenticator" if your network has an access control mechanism.

## 18.2. What to monitor?

Some technical components are essential to smoothen availability of commonly used network resources. Typical initial resources of a community network include:

* Internet connectivity

* Capacity availability

* Local access availability

* Number of users connected

* Number of network nodes connected

* Link quality of radio connections

* Traffic load on network links and routers.

There are many different tools that can assist with monitoring, and many well-established community networks offer online resources to help with monitoring and visualising the birth, growth and current status of a community network. The examples of visualisation shown in Figures 1 to 7 are taken from Freifunk and guifi.net monitoring tools.

Most of these monitoring examples are visualisations that are available not only to the owner of the resources, but are also open to all users of the network. There is a practical advantage to this approach: the more people are interested in the status and growth of the network, the more healthy it is likely to remain.
The visual representation of the network can become a symbol of collective achievement and pride of involvement in a common endeavour, and incentivise people to keep all information up to date.

But be careful: before opening up such information to the community, you should ensure that the privacy expectations of the network's users will be respected when showing this information.

<figure><img src="image_92.png" /></figure>
## Story #21: Tools, knowledge and self-management: with great powers come great responsibility (by Adam Burns)

Around 2000, in London, the free2air community network was already making available traditional network measurement and management tools to reflect this data back to the entire local community. This gave visibility of common network resources, which in turn helped the community empower themselves in terms of providing feedback mechanisms useful in collective self-management of common resources. These tools were also used as a visual aid to understanding and resolving issues and problems within the local network.

One such tool, accessible only within the community network, visualised the status of the community network resources and allowed all participants and users of the network to understand quickly the status of the resources. In one case, by visualising the reason behind why the network was very slow, the local tool showed that most of the network bandwidth was used by one computer, and that the network bandwidth was

mostly being used by a file transfer application called "bittorrent".

This tool also shows that this computer was also being used to connect to a Hotmail chat system by the username hey_treacle. The combination of this data allowed the regular network user (whose pseudonym was vortex) to contact the new user (hey_treacle) and engage in an introduction to the community network and politely raise the issue that their computer was using all the resources and this was affecting other people's use of the common resource.

The following conversation took place:

(14:48:16) hey_treacle: hello?

(14:48:21) vortex: hi.

(14:48:27) hey_treacle: who's this?

(14:49:00) vortex: adam. I run the free2air-ap wireless network.

(14:49:05) hey_treacle: ah cool

(14:49:15) vortex: just thought I'd say hi.

(14:49:21) hey_treacle: nice one

(14:49:24) hey_treacle: I live next door

(14:49:45) vortex: you can see details of the network at http://media.free2air.net:3000