[discuss] shifts in IANA/accountability discussion: your thoughts?

Sun Jun 15 10:33:09 UTC 2014

At 04:00 15/06/2014, Barry Shein wrote:
>I'm often amazed what gets put on the table, entire redesigns of the
>internet. I am not opposed to the idea but at least present some
>tentative technical RFCs and running code!

Dear Barry,

The problem with "us" is the lack of definition of the "technical 
community", at it encompasses architectonics (understanding how the 
things are), architecture (deciding how things should be), 
engineering (designing working things), developping/manufacturing 
(making these things), operations (making things run), use (utilizing 
things for a purpose which is not necesarily the one they were 
thought for), and messing at every layer.

The RFC model has become an interesting format, but the RFC Editor is 
hampered by the IETF Trust rights: this means that non-IETF RFCs are 
dispersed in several places and have a lose nomenclature. (FSP4NET 
considers an IRFC [interesting, independent, innovative, i-etc) index 
and wiki to help in that area, if you want to help?).

This being said: what do you think VGNs are about? Are you trying to 
keep your updated on non-IETF R&D and ? The essence of the internet 
is non-neutrality, loc/ID locking, US centricity, etc. etc. These 
things are progressively turned around. HomeRoot, SuperIANA, Happy-IP 
etc. are demand's side simple and general expectations, they are 
progressively matched by supply's side technology propositions, 
expectations, competition.

I certainly accept that the real "technical" issue today is not fully 
visible. This is due to the engaged amounts of money being involved 
and the mental hysteresis of this complex technical community. It is 
"statUS-quo" of a large system vs. "inter-use" of a universal diversity.

If you want to observe it yourselef, just decide to start considering 
being a VGN Master, for yourself, your familly, your place, your 
city, your trade, your country, a project of yours, etc. and start 
shopping for the architecture and the economic model you should use 
:-)  You will be taken aback by the technical reality available to you.

This is what FSP4NET is about. Not so much about an alternative to a 
useless ICANN NTIA replacement, but how to best manage the today's 
network reality when you think about your own interests and not the 
US, Govts, Google, ISPs, and others' interests or oversight. However, 
this certainly includes what happens at that internet strata (layers 
from 1 to 5), at the VGN layers 6 and 7 that are to be finished, and 
at the inter-use layers above (the layers the OSI 1978 model did not 
investigate) to be eventually considered something delayed by the 
statUS-quo since 1983, a 30 years innovation respite that 
alternatively permitted the network to dramatically densify.

>That said are we about dance down that semantic hole: Just because
>something is free to the end user doesn't mean it doesn't cost
>anything, it just means it's being paid for by some other means,
>marketing, advertising, taxes, narcotrafficking, etc.

This is why the opposition is "StatUS-quo"'s "no-states system" vs. 
"inter-use"'s subsidiarity implying that local infrastructure is to 
be supported localy along local legislation.

>There's little argument that much on the internet is cost-free to the
>user, such as a google search.
>
>Ugh, I think this can be a rat hole, let's assume we all know there
>are abstract costs (e.g., being advertised at, your time), there're
>access costs (how did you get to google), the device, etc.

I want to go to freely Google and others. I do not want to be trapped 
into Google by influence, advertising, manipulation, social engineering, etc.

>But in much of the world the internet is nearly free if you can get
>use of a wi-fi capable device and you're willing to sit in a wi-fi hot
>spot which in some places cover entire city squares etc.
>
>And you're willing to limit yourself to free services. Which is a lot
>of services, not a terrible limitation.

Why do you want me to "limit" to anything. I want to be free to 
manage my VGN the way I want, and not to pay/be influenced for/by 
others' VGNs. This has a name: Liberty.

>That's one of the amazing things about the internet, abstract issues
>of privacy etc aside, you can get at services which entire rich govts
>could only dream of 25 years ago, they literally could not buy what
>you can get from a google search for money, or only primitive
>versions.
>
>Today you can get it for no incremental cost. The entire planet,
>literally billions of people, have put vast amounts of information
>online and give a lot of it away for free. Everything from jokes,
>opinions, chit-chat, to valuable research, training, reference
>materials, databases, even porn! And even unprecedented access to each
>other.

Actually what is amazing is the qui pro quo. What is amazing is that 
we did it for Google (and others) to benefit from it. Why? Actually 
for a simple reason inherited from the early days we experimented 
nationwide in France with the Minitel test-success: V23. The edges 
are asymetric and still are today.

Best

jfc
as spokeperson for fsp4net 