Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
  • Sign in / Register
jami-project
jami-project
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
    • Releases
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
    • Locked Files
  • Issues 171
    • Issues 171
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
    • Iterations
  • Requirements
    • Requirements
    • List
  • Security & Compliance
    • Security & Compliance
    • Dependency List
    • License Compliance
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Incidents
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Insights
    • Issue
    • Repository
    • Value Stream
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Members
    • Members
  • Collapse sidebar
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
  • savoirfairelinux
  • jami-projectjami-project
  • Issues
  • #581

Closed
Open
Opened Mar 17, 2019 by amuza@amuuza

Real decentralization

Real decentralization avoids any centralization. Currently Jami depends on a connection to the Internet with a public IP address. LAN peer discovery and communications with private IP addresses is a must for real decentralization, so you do not depend on an Internet Service Provider nor you are exposed to any kind of Internet Shutdown.

Community networks and other autonomous networks fighting centralization use their own network infrastructure and they do not need an Internet Service Provider for every service. They try to use apps that work both with and without an Internet connection.

It would be nice if Jami could go real decentralized and work within community networks too. I guess it might be interesting to have a look on the code of other Free Software projects like Retroshare, ZeroNet or Bitmessage, which can perfectly communicate with and without an Internet connection. Maybe some of their code could be somehow adapted to Jami.

I could have joined issue 566 on jami-project or issue 47 on jami-daemon but preferred to open a new one to give it a different point of view and gain attention to this important topic. I am ok if you close this new issue and focus on jami-project's 566 or jami-daemon's 47.

By the way, why was ring-project issue 289 closed?

Assignee
Assign to
None
Milestone
None
Assign milestone
Time tracking
None
Due date
None
Reference: savoirfairelinux/ring-project#581