[discuss] Net Neutrality: Perhaps the FCC is the wrong agency?

[FSP4NET]

At 17:23 04/06/2014, willi uebelherr wrote:
> > In this aggregate of Masters' VGN and Lasters'VGN that makes the
> > internet there is no core. It is purely distributed and meshed.
> > There is therefore the need to address things through an
> > architectonics referential system, i.e. a system which does not
> > depend on people, but on the universe itself or at least to a
> > sufficiently stable and large part of it, i.e. a purely algorithmic
> > hazardous portion of it.
>Yes, this is my intention. And for that that i propose the 
>geografical defined IP address to make this very easy, because then 
>we don't need any Internet Gouvernance. We act together based on our 
>common interest for a free communication overall over the planet. A 
>free communication system for the free access to free knowledge for 
>all people of our (free) world.

I have not made the computation of the room available in an IPv6 
scheme. There are the GSM coordinates already in wide use. I do not 
know if this is something usable. My worry is however the ocean waste 
of addresses. This is why I am interested in a Fuller's dimaxion map. 
Another interesting approach is simply to use ... prefix+telephone 
numbers+extensions : this roughly takes into account the network and 
democraphic topology.

As I have mentionned the WSIS has decided that the information 
society (hence its systems) was to be people centered/à caractère 
humain/centrada en la persona. Everyone and every corporation now has 
one or several téléphone numbers. There is an ENUM support by the DNS 
and probably several things to do to.

If you are interested in it, this belongs to the various 
possibilities that I wiwh to consider IRT to my suggestion 
"Happy-IP". The real issue would be a unique universal numbering plan 
we could use everywhere in the digisphere, probably based upon a 
specialized DNS zone. The idea would be "http://uninum.org" being 
used along RFC 6116 and 6117, the DNS being open to every kind of 
names and numbers.

The main thing is to compile the RFCs from a Independent User (IUser) 
point of view in order to clearly determine what is already reserved 
by the IETF/IANA and what is available to users. In the DNS and 
addressing areas. What is in place is to simplify the US VGN BUG 
oriented (Being Unilaterally Global) management. Since 1977 this was 
a last resort solution for stability. The removal of the NTIA 
"umbrella" makes the situation uncertain. This is why we need 
precautionary fail-secure contingency plans for the governance of our 
own VGNs. If the NTIA's project comes to an happy non-e-colonization 
end, this would be perfect. But this is not what appears to be under 
preparation, therefore this is why we need to prepare ourselves.

Best
jfc
alliance spoke person