You already have that distributed network...
... if you want to use WiFi, you can, there's a "mesh" protocol. It's what the XO machines use (or used) and it's a mess because there are a limited number of channels but you need a ton of overlap, so it requires precise positioning to span more than a few nodes.
The *only* reasons why you don't have your own private, distributed alt-Internet *right now*:
* We've all agreed on using the same DNS root servers.
* We've all set up our connections with ISPs that use the same 3 or 4 backbone carriers (how many are there, really?)
Truth is, if you want an alt-Internet, it's not hard. Get a connection to the next hop that is off the main Internet grid... point-to-point leased line, dialup, cell, carrier pigeon (yes, there's an RFC for TCP/IP using carrier pigeon as the physical layer).
In other words, you don't have it for social, not technical reasons. We've all agreed to do things the easy way by using the same infrastructure, instead of doing it like we did 30 years ago.
On the first issue... frankly, there are two sides to this coin.
If a country like China hits us with an all out "cyber assault"... the government needs to be able to pull the plug. No court, nothing. The moment Congress declares war, the President needs to be able to do it. Fact is, the damage that China could do to us, having pre-scouted targets and prepped attacks well in advance (and it's common knowledge that they've already tried to do this) against targets like power plants means that we *need* to pull the plug. It's our equivalent of putting everyone into bomb shelters. It sucks, but that's reality. In a scenario like that, the attacker is bringing down the network ANYWAYS (or worse, leaving select portions on to continue the attacks), so es machts nicht.
The other side of the coin is, would this be used as a weapon against US citizens, perhaps in the name of "war on terror" or something similar? It absolutely should not, unless there is a clear and present danger (say, a group like "Anonymous" hijacks nukes).
I've always favored the idea that the system should be set up so that the government is allowed to break the laws in times of crisis, but the breakage needs to be fully transparent with a full trial afterwards... not to determine guilt, but to determine if the breakage was warranted. That's the best way that I've thought of to give the government the flexibility it requires with the protections we need.
J.Ja
Contributr 
