[discuss] Real world Impact of multiple roots
jefsey at jefsey.com
Tue Jan 28 15:37:15 UTC 2014
At 19:30 27/01/2014, Dr. Ben Fuller wrote:
>Thanks. This is very useful as were the links. If I understand you
>correctly, two roots can be accommodated by our existing Internet.
>We only need that they work together. Hence, the economic impacts
>may not be a problem.
As a general matter, you will easily understand that when one
communicates one has to:
1. have something (data) to communicate
2. to formulate it in a format, language, encryption
3. to send it
4. to have it carried
5. to have it presented out of the format, possibly translated after
having been decrypted
6. to have it obtained by the receiver in a way he can use
7. to have it understood/used.
The internet is responsible for task #4 from end to end, i.e. to
transport the data of the message (datagram) you sent from host to
host, i.e. from an IP address to an IP address. Period.
There are additional service tools that help sending and receiving
it. One of these services is the DNS which associates a type of
semantic address (named a domain name) to an IP address. The way this
service is being used is shared among users: this permits the
parameters (data of the equivalence name/IP) of one user to interfere
with the parameters of another user on a per class basis. This is
why, in the same class, the same data must be used. There is only one
class being used (class "IN": this is what makes the ICANN/NTIA
Internet for most of the users),however, there are 65,635 possible classes.
Another major limitation of the internet which was meant to have two phases:
(1) phase one: to be proof of the catenet concept,
(2) phase two: to become multitechnology transparent like Tymnet.
is that it supports only *one single format*: ASCII text. This means
that task #2 and #5 cannot (1) optimize, secure, and multilingualize
the network (2) support active content.
Up to Snowden, the gigantic lacks of the internet prototype architecture:
- left everyone in the middle of "patches" (mails, web, dns,
etc.) to insure a minimum of services
- and their limitations and vulnerabilities were not
understood by the public, users, or policymakers.
(1) people are still rather concerned about realizing the extent of
digital intelligence (which is only a small part of big data).
However, they will increasingly become horrified when understanding
that the snooping is universally permitted by the (planned or
erroneous) vulnerability of the technology, and still more when they
understand that every CPU is a weapon that can be used against them
by digital intruders, or for digital invaders to manipulate them.
(2) this is raising the end-users, people, politics, and governments
awareness of the situation and of the digital risks in life. It is,
therefore, possible now to engage in completing the network
architecture as was planned 40 years ago without fearing that only
crime will take advantage of the resulting innovation, due to the
first phase minded status quo of most of the techies.
More information about the discuss