+
−=head1 AnoNet2 FAQ
+
−
+
−Back to homepage - L<http://www.anonet2.org/>
+
−
+
−=head2 Resources
+
−
+
−=over
+
−
+
−=item Why do you use 1.0.0.0/8?  It's been assigned to APNIC.  You should use private (RFC1918) address space like 10.0.0.0/8.
+
−
+
−AnoNet is a public internet, and as such it should use public address
+
−space.  ICANN (a private corporation) controls the public resources on
+
−the IcannNet (a.k.a. the "public" Internet), and has delegated 1.0.0.0/8
+
−on the IcannNet to APNIC.  AnoNet is a separate public internet, that
+
−doesn't answer to ICANN (nor to anybody else, for that matter).  Now,
+
−that said, when AnoNet started using 1.0.0.0/8 it was reserved (i.e.,
+
−not to be allocated), but because of ICANN's mismanagement of the IPv4
+
−address space (which is why nearly all 4 billion addresses have already
+
−been assigned, in a world with only 6 billion total people, including all
+
−the starving babies in Africa who don't even know yet what a computer is),
+
−ICANN had to take 1.0.0.0/8 out of its "reserved" pool and to put it into
+
−the "assignable" pool.  AnoNet has no control over ICANN policy, so while
+
−AnoNet did attempt to avoid directly conflicting with IcannNet addresses,
+
−ICANN ultimately made sure that attempt would fail.  (If you'd like to
+
−connect to an internet with address space that's still in the ICANN
+
−"reserved" pool, you may want to try VAnet.)  Using private address
+
−space is inappropriate for a public internet, per RFC1918.  (If you'd
+
−like to connect to an internet that uses private address space anyway,
+
−you may want to try dn42 at L<http://www.dn42.net/>.)
+
−
+
−=item You should register 1.0.0.0/8, before you use it.
+
−
+
−By the same logic, ICANN should register 0.0.0.0/0, before it uses it.
+
−ICANN claims divine authority over 0.0.0.0/8, and allows people to use
+
−parts of it if they meet certain conditions set by the IETF and ICANN.
+
−The IETF conditions are reasonable if you don't assume that Internet
+
−is owned by ICANN.  The ICANN conditions, on the other hand, are highly
+
−unfair and actively hurt people who want their freedom (by requiring them
+
−to give up their anonymity, to sign a restrictive agreement, and to have a
+
−relationship with a regulated company with its own restrictive agreement).
+
−Therefore, ICANN is not a suitable government for a free internet.
+
−The AnoNet1 government claims "trust us instead," but AnoNet2 doesn't
+
−require you to trust anybody.  That's the only way for you to guarantee
+
−that AnoNet will never mismanage IP space the same way that ICANN does.
+
−
+
−=item ICANN isn't mismanaging the IPv4-space.  IcannNet usage is just exploding faster than anybody ever predicted.
+
−
+
−L<http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/081610-5billion-devices-internet.html>
+
−claims that the IcannNet only has about 5 billion total devices, of
+
−which only about 1 billion "regularly connect" (PCs, laptops, etc.).
+
−There are plenty of possible addressing schemes that could accomodate a
+
−billion "regularly connecting" devices with an address space quadruple
+
−the size (even without NAT, if you want).  ICANN clearly isn't using
+
−any of them.  By any sane technical definition, that would certainly
+
−qualify as "mismanagement."
+
−
+
−=item If you use 1.0.0.0/8, you're squatting on somebody else's resources.
+
−
+
−If you use 1.0.0.0/8 on the IcannNet, then your statement is correct,
+
−but AnoNet and IcannNet are two totally separate public internets,
+
−so it's ridiculous to accuse a participant in one to be squatting
+
−on resources on the other.  ICANN has no divine right to 1.0.0.0/8
+
−(nor to any other netblock, for that matter) outside the IcannNet.
+
−Moreover, using 10.0.0.0/8 I<would> be squatting on private address
+
−space (address space that's reserved for your own home network),
+
−per RFC1918.  (While AnoNet couldn't care less about ICANN, we do use
+
−the IETF protocols (with s/IcannNet/AnoNet/), so if the IETF says that
+
−10.0.0.0/8 is reserved for your own home network, far be it from us to
+
−steal it for some "public" network.)
+
−
+
−=item AnoNet runs on the IcannNet.  Therefore, you _are_ squatting.
+
−
+
−That last accusation has no logical basis.  Just because most AnoNet
+
−links are tunneled over the IcannNet doesn't give ICANN a right to rule
+
−the content of those tunnels.  (In almost exactly the same way, just
+
−because most IcannNet links move over telecom equipment doesn't give the
+
−ITU a right to rule the content of those links.)  In fact, ICANN itself
+
−will happily confirm that it has neither authority nor ambition to rule
+
−the content of IcannNet communications between endpoints, inclusive of
+
−AnoNet tunnels.  Therefore, even if you buy the logical validity of your
+
−claim, ICANN will still shoot it down.
+
−
+
−=item Okay, you're not squatting, but now that 1.0.0.0/8 is being actively used on IcannNet, you should move to 10.0.0.0/8 to avoid conflicts.
+
−
+
−AnoNet is under no obligation to shrink its address space just because IcannNet decided to create a conflict.  Also, moving to 10.0.0.0/8 will create more conflicts than staying in 1.0.0.0/8 (since 10.0.0.0/8 is far more congested than 1.0.0.0/8 will ever be).
+
−
+
−=item You should move to IPv6, then.
+
−
+
−That's not the only logical conclusion, based on the above.  However, AnoNet has no rules, so you're more than welcome to move to IPv6, and/or to try to convince others to do the same.  As long as you don't start out with unrealistic expectations, you probably won't be disappointed with the results of your preaching effort.  [Update: It appears that IPv6 may have some deployment on AnoNet, now.  (Maybe somebody read the above as a challenge and decided to run with it.)  Perhaps the guys using it will fill in some details here.]
+
−
+
−=back
+
−
+
−=head2 Peering
+
−
+
−=over
+
−
+
−=item What is peering all about?
+
−
+
−AnoNet is an internet.  An internet means an internetwork, or a
+
−network that connects between networks.  An internetwork is normally
+
−constructed by making links between the different networks, and then
+
−carrying internetwork traffic along those links.  (If network A has
+
−a link to network B, then traffic from A to B or from B to A should
+
−probably pass through that link.)  Such a link is called a "peering,"
+
−and the two sides of that link are called "peers."  On the IcannNet,
+
−peerings are normally done over leased lines, but due to the nature of
+
−AnoNet, using leased lines isn't much of an option for most peerings.
+
−Therefore, most peerings are done over tunnels on the IcannNet.
+
−The most common software for AnoNet tunnels is OpenVPN, although
+
−tinc and L<quicktun|http://wiki.qontrol.nl/QuickTun> are also used.
+
−(tinc in particular deserves special attention: it can create a mesh
+
−between participants, sacrificing anonymity to achieve lower latency.)
+
−
+
−=item Whom should I peer with?
+
−
+
−If you want to protect your anonymity, you'll want to peer with only
+
−a few others.  If you're more interested in getting good latency,
+
−you'll want a more promiscuous peering policy.  Your peers are able to
+
−access certain information (like your IP) that isn't easy for others
+
−to access, so the harm in having too many peers is that the secrecy of
+
−that information is protected by the "weakest" link.  (The greater the
+
−number of people who know a secret, the greater the number of people
+
−who are likely to hear about it within a given time interval.)
+
−
+
−=item How can I talk to the rest of AnoNet, if I'm only peered with a few others?
+
−
+
−How can you talk to Google, if you're only hooked up to your local ISP?
+
−The answer is that your ISP offers you "transit" to its peers, which
+
−in turn offer your ISP transit to their peers, etc.  (If network A is
+
−connected to network B, which itself is connected to network C, then
+
−with B's permission network A can talk to network C.)  On AnoNet, most
+
−peerings have BGP sessions managing the routing tables on both sides,
+
−in order to provide mutual transit.  (On AnoNet, providing transit is
+
−an advantage, since it improves your own anonymity.)
+
−
+
−=item Won't providing transit slow down my Internet connection?
+
−
+
−If you're the preferred transit provider between two guys who feel
+
−like streaming a whole ton of real-time studio-quality video back and
+
−forth all day, that can certainly slow down (to put it mildly) your
+
−dial-up connection.  In reality, most traffic on AnoNet is plain text,
+
−so you probably don't have too much to worry about, especially if you
+
−have some sort of broadband connection.  That said, if it ever _does_
+
−become an issue, all you have to do is stop providing transit (although
+
−the particular case above is unlikely to persist even if you do nothing
+
−at all, since the two streaming guys will quickly figure out that going
+
−through you won't get them anywhere, and they'll most likely seek another
+
−transit provider - or even just peer with each other directly), or use
+
−simple BGP tricks to make transit through you less attractive to some
+
−or all of the AnoNet.
+
−
+
−=back
+
−
+
−=head2 DNS
+
−
+
−=over
+
−
+
−=item How is DNS handled on AnoNet?
+
−
+
−AnoNet has a number of TLDs (Top-Level Domains), the most interesting
+
−one being .ano.  The entire zone is public (unlike, say, the .com zone
+
−on the IcannNet), so you can easily deploy your own TLD nameservers.
+
−In fact, the git resdb already includes scripts to generate both
+
−tinydns and BIND zonefiles automatically.  That said, SRN has public
+
−root and TLD nameservers, if you don't feel like setting up your own.
+
−SRN also has a public recursive resolver (which also resolves IcannNet
+
−names), which you can use if you can't even be bothered to set up your
+
−own recursive resolver.  Please note that you're telling SRN about all
+
−hostnames that you lookup if you do this.  (Right now, you're probably
+
−telling your ISP the same information, BTW.)
+
−
+
−=item I want my own domain.  How can I set it up?
+
−
+
−You have a number of options, depending on (a) your current
+
−infrastructure, and (b) your interest/ability to deploy additional
+
−infrastructure.  The resource database is just a whole bunch of
+
−directories/files stored in a git repository, so adding a domain into
+
−"AnoNet" essentially boils down to adding the right files/directories into
+
−everybody's git repository.  (Fortunately, most guys send and receive
+
−updates among themselves on a regular basis, so your new domain should
+
−"propagate" around rather quickly, once it's made its way into one
+
−repository.)  If you have git, you can "git clone" the repository from
+
−someone, add your domain (there's a small script to make the job easy,
+
−if you don't want to do it by hand),  and then send someone a diff.
+
−If you feel like setting up your own git server, then all you have to
+
−do is make the changes on your own repo, and then tell somebody the URL
+
−to your git server.  You'll probably want to take advantage of the same
+
−opportunity to add your own git URL into the resource database, so others
+
−can pull from you on a regular basis.  If you don't have git and don't
+
−feel like setting it up, all you have to do is find someone else who
+
−does have git (or feels like setting it up), and doesn't mind making
+
−the changes for you.  SRN is always such a "someone."  Next, you'll
+
−want to set up your nameservers to resolve names within your domain.
+
−If you have tinydns or BIND, just read the relevant documentation.
+
−If you don't have a nameserver and don't feel like setting one up, tell
+
−SRN what names you want (like "www.yourdomain.ano," "ftp.yourdomain.ano,"
+
−etc.), and he'll add them into his own nameservers.
+
−
+
−=item What can I do with my own domain?
+
−
+
−You can host Web pages, an FTP site, IRC, email, an online shop (but
+
−taking payments may not be so simple), or anything else that strikes
+
−your fancy.
+
−
+
−=back
+
−
+
−=head2 Censorship
+
−
+
−=over
+
−
+
−=item Is it safe to speak my mind on AnoNet?
+
−
+
−The short answer is "probably."  The long answer is that nobody has
+
−ever been censored on AnoNet2, a fact that's not likely to change.
+
−(If that fact ever does change, it'll be noted here as soon as possible.)
+
−
+
−=item Will I be censored for child porn?
+
−
+
−AnoNet1 has an official policy against CP, and it redefines "censorship"
+
−to not include censoring CP.  AnoNet2 has no policies.  That said,
+
−you're not likely to find any CP here, since that's simply not a common
+
−contribution to AnoNet2.  (Whether or not it'd be a welcome contribution
+
−is something you'll want to take up with individual participants.
+
−SRN would like you to know that he believes the CP (and porn, in general)
+
−industry destroys the world for no useful purpose.  Nobody else has
+
−voiced an opinion here.)
+
−
+
−=item Will I be censored for hateful speech?
+
−
+
−It depends on the forum.  If you do it on your own server, don't expect
+
−too many people to hang around there if you make a practice of making
+
−it unpleasant for them to be there.  If you start cursing people out on
+
−somebody else's IRC server for no apparent reason, there's a non-trivial
+
−chance that the operator will /kill your connection.  SRN encourages
+
−you to set up your own channel on irc.somerandomnick.ano, and to say
+
−whatever the heck you want there.
+
−
+
−=item Will I be censored for trolling?
+
−
+
−Since "trolling" is an overly ambiguous term, it's highly unlikely that
+
−you'll ever get /kicked or /killed for doing it.  In fact, SRN encourages
+
−you to see if you can out-troll him on irc.somerandomnick.ano.  That said,
+
−you should certainly expect people to /ignore you if you make a practice
+
−of saying stuff that people really don't want to hear.  (You may want to
+
−create a separate IRC nick for trolling, if you anticipate trolling a lot,
+
−but want people to still hear you when you have something interesting
+
−to say: this way, everybody wins.)
+
−
+
−=item Will I be censored for spreading lies?
+
−
+
−not likely, but people may /ignore you if you make a practice of saying
+
−stuff that people don't consider worth hearing
+
−
+
−=back
+
−
+
−=head2 AnoNet1 vs. AnoNet2
+
−
+
−=over
+
−
+
−=item Why does AnoNet2 exist?  What's wrong with AnoNet1?
+
−
+
−There used to be only one AnoNet.  Unfortunately, a few bad apples (who
+
−happen to be the guys who control AnoNet1) split AnoNet by forcing a part
+
−of AnoNet to become disconnected from the rest of AnoNet.  That piece
+
−(AnoNet2) has been steadily growing, while "the rest" (AnoNet1) has been
+
−slowly decaying.
+
−
+
−=item Is AnoNet1 dead, then?
+
−
+
−AnoNet1 isn't dead yet.  It's currently about the same size as AnoNet2.
+
−However, AnoNet2 has more services online, and AnoNet2 is still growing,
+
−while AnoNet1 is getting smaller.
+
−
+
−=item What's the difference between AnoNet1 and AnoNet2, then?
+
−
+
−AnoNet2 lost peering with AnoNet1 because AnoNet1 is too centralized
+
−to avoid censorship.  AnoNet2, therefore, is essentially a reboot of
+
−AnoNet1, while paying careful attention to preventing another AnoNet split
+
−from ever being necessary.  (The irony, of course, is that the level of
+
−decentralization engineered into AnoNet2 makes it trivial for anyone in
+
−AnoNet2 to split it.  Such a split doesn't happen simply because "the
+
−management" hasn't done anything stupid enough to make one necessary.)
+
−
+
−=item Who's "the management" in AnoNet2?  What prevents it from becoming evil when AnoNet2 grows closer to the size of AnoNet1?
+
−
+
−AnoNet2 (like AnoNet1) has no official government.  Unlike AnoNet1,
+
−though, AnoNet2's technical construction is such that the unofficial
+
−government members (primarily UFO and SRN, at this point) don't have
+
−enough power to force their way (not to mention that they don't really
+
−_want_ to force their way, anyway).  A recent practical example of this
+
−anarchy is IPv6: SRN has made no secret of his strong opposition to IPv6,
+
−but that didn't stop an enterprising new AnoNet2 user from deploying
+
−it himself and connecting with others, even after "the management"
+
−(both UFO and SRN) flatly refused to participate.
+
−
+
−Update: The IPv6 version of AnoNet2 now has 4 members, and lex is
+
−providing data to feed SRN's new IPv6 graphs, which are only reachable
+
−over IPv4.  (After lex grew the network to 3, UFO joined.)
+
−
+
−=item Why don't AnoNet1 and AnoNet2 merge again?
+
−
+
−The short answer is that a number of people have tried to do just that,
+
−but AnoNet1 has adopted an exclusionary policy towards AnoNet2, for some
+
−unspecified reason.  You get bonus points if you can figure out what that
+
−reason is.  (AnoNet2 has been very careful to avoid collisions in resource
+
−allocations with AnoNet1, even though AnoNet1 has deliberately removed
+
−its own record of AnoNet2 resources in a recent "cleanup" of the DNS.
+
−If AnoNet1 ever decides to reconnect with AnoNet2, no technical problems
+
−should result.)
+
−
+
−=item Why does AnoNet2 filter advertisements to AnoNet1?  Doesn't that prevent the two darknets from ever merging again?
+
−
+
−AnoNet1 has deemed the filters necessary, for some unspecified reason.
+
−(Advertising AnoNet2 routes on AnoNet1 is a great way to get yourself
+
−kicked from AnoNet1.)  Again, you get bonus points if you can figure out
+
−what that reason is.  (Hint: crzydmnd and risc likely know the reason,
+
−but good luck getting them to spill the beans.  Censoring the question
+
−seems to be their favorite "answer.")  Suffice it to say that if AnoNet1
+
−wanted to merge with AnoNet2, nobody on AnoNet2 is likely to object.
+
−
+
−Update: AnoNet1 and AnoNet2 now have full routing again, but some AnoNet1
+
−members still filter most AnoNet2 routes locally (and for downstream
+
−peers).  The "official" AnoNet1 wiki, for example, is unreachable from
+
−most of AnoNet2.
+
−
+
−=item Do I have to choose between AnoNet1 and AnoNet2, or is there a way to join both?
+
−
+
−On the IP level, when you join one you automatically join the other.
+
−The easiest way to claim resources is with the AnoNet2 resdb.  It is
+
−the only complete database of AnoNet resources, and it is the only
+
−decentralized resource database.  You can join IRC on AnoNet1 or AnoNet2
+
−or both (but crzydmnd and risc kick people from AnoNet1 IRC, apparently
+
−for fun).  You can contribute to the AnoNet1 wiki or the AnoNet2 wikis,
+
−or you can make your own.
+
−
+
−=item If the two parts of AnoNet are connected again, why are they still being advertized separately?
+
−
+
−Currently, there is still a single point of failure connecting AnoNet1
+
−and AnoNet2 at the IP level.  In addition, AnoNet1 and AnoNet2 still
+
−have completely separate governments.  (AnoNet1 has a government, while
+
−AnoNet2 doesn't.)
+
−
+
−=item Which darknet preserves my anonymity better, AnoNet1 or AnoNet2?
+
−
+
−Well, AnoNet1 has stricter rules (and more centralization, as a
+
−prerequisite to rule enforcement), so as long as you trust "the powers
+
−that be" to preserve your anonymity, you get better anonymity guarantees.
+
−However, your anonymity faces significant risk if any member of the
+
−AnoNet1 "government" (which doesn't even admit who's who) betrays your
+
−trust.  (That risk isn't so far-fetched, incidentally, since any type
+
−of law enforcement "sting-type" operation against one of those guys is
+
−likely to compromise his guarantees, even through no malice on his part.
+
−Now, since malice has already been observed, the guarantees become even
+
−less reliable.)  The AnoNet2 rules have more room for flexibility,
+
−since centralized police authority is not available on AnoNet2.
+
−Therefore, your anonymity guarantees are somewhat weaker, but far more
+
−likely to be reliable.  You also have better theoretical anonymity on
+
−AnoNet2, because marking a subnet "reserved" on AnoNet1 no longer works.
+
−("The management" is too nosy, and threatens disconnection against anyone
+
−who doesn't provide requested information.)
+
−
+
−=item Where, then, am I more anonymous?
+
−
+
−In the real world, AnoNet2 anonymity wins, hands down.  (On AnoNet1,
+
−any Easystreet network administrator can easily correlate IcannNet IP
+
−addresses with CP IP addresses and IRC nicks, allowing him to reliably
+
−learn the identity of all new AnoNet1 members.  AnoNet2 has many different
+
−ways of joining, including one rather interesting tor-based approach
+
−recently demonstrated, where the user never showed his IcannNet IP
+
−address to anyone on AnoNet2.)
+
−
+
−=item How can I learn more about AnoNet1 vs. AnoNet2?
+
−
+
−L<http://www.anonet2.org/darknet_comparison> gives a basic comparison.
+
−If you want more in-depth information about the relative anonymity value
+
−of each, L<http://www.anonet2.org/anonymity> may be what you're after.
+
−
+
−=back
+
−
+
−=head2 AnoNet vs. IcannNet
+
−
+
−=over
+
−
+
−=item What's IcannNet???
+
−
+
−IcannNet is the internet (mis)managed by ICANN.  It's what most people
+
−call "the" Internet.
+
−
+
−=item What's wrong with IcannNet?
+
−
+
−The short answer is that ICANN is very highly centralized, resulting
+
−in centralized decision-making (and centralized lobbying, arm-twisting,
+
−etc.).
+
−
+
−=item Does AnoNet really aim to replace IcannNet?
+
−
+
−Yes, the long-term goal behind AnoNet is to render IcannNet obsolete.
+
−In the short-term, though, it'd be highly unlikely for IcannNet to
+
−disappear even in the hypothetical case where everyone were to move to
+
−AnoNet tomorrow, since the overwhelming majority of AnoNet peering is
+
−tunneled over IcannNet.
+
−
+
−=back