[governance] Re: User input to Internet architecture work

[Stephane Bortzmeyer]

On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 01:55:38PM +0100,
 Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote 
 a message of 25 lines which said:

> Well there is a channel; Internet-drafts (ID).  And I believe that a
> well written, well thought out ID that spoke of the user
> requirements, and which created by a group of non-trolls, could get
> a fair hearing.

OK, I want to believe that, too. So, next step is, who would be
interested by actual work on such a document? I give here a few
personal ideas, not to limit the discussion or to force a specific
viewpoint, but to make it more concrete, by providing examples.

[Note they are requirments for the general Internet architecture, NOT
for a given network's setup (for instance, people have the right to
put a firewall in front of their network, despite the second and third
requirments).]

Such a document could list user requirments such as:

* no provider lock-in. If there is a market of providers, then user's
choice is a necessity to avoid oligopoles. Technical solutions that
limit the ability of the user to switch providers are
bad. Counter-example, an architecture where all IP addresses would be
PA (Provider-Aggregeatable) would create a serious lock-in (although
not an 100 % lock-in since renumbering your machines is still
possible, while painful).

* freedom to create and deploy new applications, even applications
which were not planned at the beginning. Counter-example: I've
recently seen a proposal for a "future Internet" based on
applications, with an architecture centered around a small set if
usages (and, since "the code is the law", such an architecture would
probably prevent innovation).

* freedom to be called as well as calling. There are other uses of the
Internet than browsing the Web. Some of these uses require the ability
of the ordinary user to be the responder of a communication, not only
the initiator. This should be possible on personal machines, without
renting a dedicated box. Counter-example: NAT seriously threatens
that. There is a high risk that, a few years from now, the typical
individual user connection, and may be the SOHO as well, will be with
private addresses only.


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance