OGN

[John Galloway[_1_]]

So, as I understand it, the current situation with the Open Glider
Network is that:

It relies on tracking Flarm collision data against Flarm's wishes.

It relies on using the Flarmnet database (which is encoded so that
the database can't be downlosded and be easily human readable)
against their wishes.

It relies on a free-to-OGN network of ground receivers that have been
voluntarily set up and funded by glider pilots (including myself who
has funded one) to receive Flarm transmissions.

Now the OGN want to sell us commercial transmitters

Hmmmm.

Flarm radar has been extremely useful and fun in the last year in
Europe but we glider pilots collectively own the vital ingredient which
is the ground receiver network and I for one wont be buying a tracker
from the OGN in those circumstances.

John Galloway

[Tim Newport-Peace[_2_]]

At 05:56 21 March 2015, John Galloway wrote:
>So, as I understand it, the current situation with the Open Glider
>Network is that:
>
>It relies on tracking Flarm collision data against Flarm's wishes.
>
>It relies on using the Flarmnet database (which is encoded so that
>the database can't be downlosded and be easily human readable)
>against their wishes.
>
>It relies on a free-to-OGN network of ground receivers that have been
>voluntarily set up and funded by glider pilots (including myself who
>has funded one) to receive Flarm transmissions.
>
>Now the OGN want to sell us commercial transmitters
>
>Hmmmm.
>
> Flarm radar has been extremely useful and fun in the last year in
>Europe but we glider pilots collectively own the vital ingredient which
>is the ground receiver network and I for one wont be buying a tracker
>from the OGN in those circumstances.
>
Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!

OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself, to
ensure the co-operation of Flarm.

Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.

[[email protected]]

> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!
>
Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart from ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not forcing anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).

> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself, to
> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.
Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's toy". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's difficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their time and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed network which would then only be bound to one commercial company.

OGN proposes a platform, on which FLARM can be very important player, but not the only one. And many of the OGN members (me included) strongly believe in openness of the protocols - and that is what OGN now proposes under "OGNTP".

>
> Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.

In which sense? Nobody forces you to build/have/fly with one.

Cheers
Wojtek

[Tim Newport-Peace[_2_]]

At 11:42 21 March 2015, wrote:
>> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!
>>=20
>Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart
from
>=
>ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not
>forcing=
> anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).
>
>> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself,
to
>> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.
>Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's
>toy=
>". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's
>di=
>fficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their
>ti=
>me and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed
>netwo=
>rk which would then only be bound to one commercial company.
>=20

Andrea states quite clearly:
/*
We think OGN is largely a cool thing, and we have reasons to believe
OGN+Flarm can fruitfully cooperate, to the benefit of gliding. If some
conditions
are met, such as OGN accepts the FlarmTrackingServer for decoding, and OGN
does not engage in an aircraft tracker. And OGN is learning that not
anything goes.
*/

So it it comes to a choice between tracking Flarm (of which there are
Thousands) or tracking your device (of which there are very few), the
choice is obvious.

And if Flarm does cease co-operating with OGN, I can see Tracking Receivers
being switched off as there will be virtually nothing to track.

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 12:33:33 +0000, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:

> And if Flarm does cease co-operating with OGN, I can see Tracking
> Receivers being switched off as there will be virtually nothing to
> track.
>
It seems that the main cause of the rift has been that some OGN members
have caused the problem by refusing to honour 'stealth', i.e. privacy,
settings on the grounds that they can do whatever they like with every
bit picked up by their received and that the pilots who own the FLARM
unit being tracked have no right to say what anybody else can do with the
messages it emits.

To me this is a spurious as the Creative Commons people's view that a
creator has no rights over his work. The way forward is for OGN to get
its beans in a row and fully implement the privacy elements of the FLARM
protocol: no ifs, buts or exceptions.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Benedict Smith]

At 11:42 21 March 2015, wrote:
>> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!
>>=20
>Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart
from
>=
>ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not
>forcing=
> anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).
>
>> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself,
to
>> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.
>Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's
>toy=
>". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's
>di=
>fficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their
>ti=
>me and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed
>netwo=
>rk which would then only be bound to one commercial company.
>=20
>OGN proposes a platform, on which FLARM can be very important player,
but
>n=
>ot the only one. And many of the OGN members (me included) strongly
>believe=
> in openness of the protocols - and that is what OGN now proposes under
>"OG=
>NTP".
>
>>=20
>> Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.
>
>In which sense? Nobody forces you to build/have/fly with one.=20
>
>Cheers
>Wojtek
>
>
I am looking forward to the OGN tracker, I already have most of the parts
and am just waiting for a couple of other bits to arrive from China, it is
truly
low cost and in no way competes with FLARMS offering, it is is a pure
tracking/logging solution, and does not ofer any collision warning so I
cannot
see why FLARM are so set against it (unless they are planning to offer a
similar device?)
Being community developed it will be something that can quickly change to
add features that pilots want in much the same way that projects such as
XCsoar develop and grow based on what people want to see.
I feel it is wrong to be blackmailed with threats by a commercial business

who only offer a closed system and seem determined to prevent innovation
from anyone else.
Ben.

[pcool]

OGN was tracking Flarms using cheap devices reprogrammed using the Flarm
protocol. OGN did it using the 2008 Flarm protocol published on the usenet.
Now that Flarm has changed the protocol, OGN will either need to reverse
engineering the new flarm firmware (legal in germany, illegal in many other
part of the world) or wait until someone else will do it for them.
At the same time, Flarm will propose to OGN to have all the OGN nodes
transmitting the received data to their servers, where they will be
decrypted, checked for authorization and retransmitted to OGN server.
Flarm will so get full control of all OGN stations. Flarm would enter the
tracking market with an existing network not even financed for hardware.
Only alternative, shutting down everything. Flarm will benefit of OGN
software which is opensource in any case.
There is only one winner in either cases, and it is not OGN.
Unless OGN can break the new radio protocol, of course, in such case it
would be a real smash.
only my vision!
p


wrote in message
...

> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!
>
Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart from
ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not forcing
anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).

> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself, to
> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.
Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's
toy". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's
difficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their
time and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed
network which would then only be bound to one commercial company.

OGN proposes a platform, on which FLARM can be very important player, but
not the only one. And many of the OGN members (me included) strongly believe
in openness of the protocols - and that is what OGN now proposes under
"OGNTP".

>
> Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.

In which sense? Nobody forces you to build/have/fly with one.

Cheers
Wojtek

[Paul Ruskin[_2_]]

I think there are some interesting issues here.

First off, I'm a supporter of Flarm. I have one, I think it's great, I encourage other people to get one.

But. Flarm has a defacto monopoly on glider anti-collision systems. No one can enter that market unless they conform to the Flarm protocol, for obvious reasons. And monopolies tend to behave in certain ways - they don't innovate, and they try to stamp on competition. It isn't Flarm that developed a glider tracking system - it's OGN. And Flarm's statement that they will only cooperate with OGN if it doesn't develop it's tracker is pure monopoly behaviour. Understandable, but not necessarily desirable. So whilst the OGN tracker doesn't particularly interest me, I don't think that Flarm should be allowed to stop it happening.

The privacy debate is an interesting one. I don't think it's as black and white as some make out. There isn't an absolute right to privacy - it's balanced by other things. If I walk down the street, I can't stop people taking photos of me, or CCTV recording where I am. If I fly using a transponder, people will see where I am (and to John Galloway's point about OGN using Flarm transmissions against Flarm's will, I ask if Flight Radar 24 needs the permission of transponder manufacturers such as Trig and Becker before they listen to transponder emissions. I don't think so.) In its last version OGN made a credible attempt to address the privacy issue - if you didn't put your details on Flarmnet, you weren't identified. If you used stealth mode, you weren't shown. Yes, there was a record of flights deep in the system which could be dug out, but then, there is in Flarm's system. And I don't think the fact that Flarm transmissions are encrypted is relevant, there are thousands of devices out there which turn those encrypted transmissions into clear text - and it's not OGN receivers, it's Flarms.

I don't think OGN can be criticised for using Flarmnet. That was a database published, without any Terms and Conditions in pretty much clear text, which allowed people to be identified when in the air, which is what OGN used it for. I suspect its rapid growth in the last year was due to, not in spite of, OGN (certainly at my club there were many entries). And when Flarmnet (funded by Flarm) objected, OGN stopped using it and set up their own.

But in any case, if that isn't enough, I think that OGN can address privacy concerns. Flarm has implemented a privacy bit - and OGN should respect this - and throw away any packets which have it set (providing it's opt out). It should not even keep them for S&R purposes - if you don't want to be tracked, we won't track you - at all. In addition, the new OGN database has a setting for 'I don't want to be tracked'. So there's two ways for those that don't want to be tracked not to be. And you'll only be identified if you put your details on that database. I've just added mine.

But what about the future? Well, I'd encourage OGN to keep going, and I'll actively support it - I think the collective, open nature of the venture is what a lot of gliding is about. I'd encourage Flarm to co-operate with it, without making unreasonable demands. If it implements the proposed tracking server, great - that may well work - though there are some technical concerns about the approach. In any case, I suspect that a new OGN client will come along soon, independent of Flarm the company - so there will be a couple of ways of achieving the same object. But that ought to get us back to the position of being able to build an even better tracking network, whilst allowing those who don't want to be tracked not to be.

Paul