[discuss] [governance] Re: Comcast undertakes 9 year IETF cosponsorship!?

joseph alhadeff joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
Mon Mar 24 02:58:33 UTC 2014

Sometimes when we address architecture issues, I wonder if we don't 
place to much emphasis of everything being the result of a grand design 
that had foreseen the eventual spread and use of the Internet.  Many 
decisions rooted in the ability to connect academic and other 
institutions in time of network disruption were the foundations of 
today's Internet.  The decisions were logical a the time, but are far 
from optimized for what the internet have become. Perhaps architectural 
evolution rather than, or in combination with choices may be more accurate?
On 3/23/2014 10:47 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2014, at 9:21 am, Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>> Because you are good enough to say that I know spam well .. I am sorry, how or why is the true origin of spam or any sort of email complex to identify?   At least from the perspective of a receiving mail system, there is the originating IP address, there are various authentication mechanisms (such as DMARC) which allow receiving systems to identify and flag / reject forged mail etc etc.
> What Jefsey's point may have been (not trying to put words into his mouth, but this is my interpretation) is that one of the characteristic faults of the technical community is that it is prone to uncritically laud the Internet's architecture as being wholly beneficial, neutral in terms of welfare distribution, and fully supportive of democratic ideals (or worse, a substitute for democratic ideals).  In reality the effects of those architectural choices are very much more of a mixed bag, with some gains and some losses, unequally distributed, and with limited accountability to those affected by them.  So the simple example (perhaps) being given is that is that spam is a problem that was enabled by the architectural choices made by the Internet technical community, the very same choices that also provide us with many positive benefits such as resilience against censorship (but also other negatives such as vulnerability to surveillance).
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
> host -t NAPTR|awk -F! '{print $3}'
> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to enable encryption at your end. For instructions, see http://jere.my/l/pgp.
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140323/54ee3158/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list