Why Should We Expect A Rebuilt Internet To Work Any Better?
from the a-centrally-planned-internet dept
Researchers associated with various universities and government-backed initiatives are exploring the idea that the existing internet should be scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up. Right off the bat, it seems pretty safe to say that our current internet infrastructure, which has billions upon billions invested into it, isn't going to be dismantled, and the researchers involved with these projects almost certainly realize that. Still, these studies are interesting from an academic perspective, and because they may influence future build-outs in some way. Those who are in favor of a clean start point to a number of different areas where the internet could be made better. Security is obviously a big one, and many of the different plans explore ways of building more security directly into the infrastructure of the internet. They also point to the rise of the mobile internet as something that the original internet researchers never conceived of, and thus didn't account for. As one professor puts it, in light of how much things have changed, "It's sort of a miracle that it continues to work well today." That sentiment, of course, would seem to betray the whole thing, since the internet does work well, despite it undergoing radical changes over the years.The whole question sounds analogous to the debate between free markets and central planning. If you believe that complex systems need a high level of planning in order to work, it would seem miraculous that a free market system could remain relatively stable and efficient. But history has shown that, if anything, it's the centrally planned economies that more often go haywire. Perhaps the internet question should be turned around: why should we trust that a rebuilt internet, that was designed to fix the problems that we can imagine today, would be able to accommodate completely unforeseen issues that arise 40 years down the road?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Change is good;
Maybe with the new Internet2 the administrator won't have to shutdown the internet every April 1 to clean out old internet links. I hate having to do that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Change is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overconfidence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As an old fart on the Internet
Little has been long-term planned in this environment. It has been built ad-hoc layer upon layer, until now you don't even recognize the original intent.
How many have ever used the command line to download a file by FTP?
How many remember e-mail was supposed to be only text, that binary attachments was a later proposition? Could you imagine how many security problems would go away if e-mail was text only?
Let me also barf on this idea from another point: Please name for many ANY large IT project with major planning that has produced a usable product. Vista is selling in dribbles. XP was only accepted after the public flogged MS into fixing their misconceptions of what people needed.
The FBI's database project failed miserably.
Let's instead try a different approach: KISS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: As an old fart on the Internet
But your assertion that the internet is layers upon layers of stuff is not true.
The internet is simply a bunch of circuits moving bits, and formatting them into IP packets. The packet has a small header (20 bytes minimum) and stuff goes inside.
Reliable transmission, which most people use almost exclusively except for VOIP and a few other things that stream, is another small packet inside the IP packet.
This is not convoluted and not crufty. It's elegantly simple, and it's scaled incredibly well. Most of the changes have been in routing algorithms, and they all work nicely.
IPv6 was already an attempt at over-thinking the problems of IPv4, and one of the reasons it hasnt caught on is that besides providing more address space, almost every feature they added into the protocol is done BETTER with the things built on top of IPv4 to change the problems.
We will only migrate to IPv6 because of Asia coming online, and needing more IP addresses. All the smarty pants additional features pretty much suck in the real world compared with the normal ways we figured out how to do things with IPv6.
KISS is indeed the proper way to do things, and the world is rife with over-engineered crap that doesnt work.
Luckily those people arent allowed to build the bridges we drive cars over, but they can teach CS at prestigious universities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Democracy
If someone proposed the internet today how many law enforcement measures would be added that erode our freedom?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overconfidence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm all for a rebuild!
Yes, that was a rather off-the-wall analogy, but it's really how I saw it in my mind. I just feel it is time to produce a new pair of pants with a new material that combines the strengths of the various patch jobs. Ironically, both pants and software perform (and look) better and are stronger when implemented with native support of the upgrades.
That is my 2 cents... probably all it's worth too. LOL!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who would you call to fix technology?
Ditto for the government and .gov sites. Actually, they would probably make a good team if convolution is the goal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who would you call to fix technology?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Who would you call to fix technology?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Who would you call to fix technology?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would you call to fix technolo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Educated Idiots
If they are such technical geniuses they could at least design a web site... These university geniuses sound like "educated idiots" maybe they need a couple years in their field actually working with technology and less time sitting around thinking about how smart their ideas are. As a person with multiple degrees. I understand that design and implementation are not always in alignment. Maybe that is what they need a head alignment. They need to compare their designs with reality... :-P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Educated Idiots
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did anyone get Al Gore's approval...
Since creative technologies tend to follow the need for better ways to get porn, maybe we should have Nacho Vidal and Ron Jeremy design the next version?
Just a few thoughts...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Last time I checked...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Websites
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Websites
On another note, there is no real connection between how good a website looks, and how solid a product or bit of research is behiend the website. Think of some of the most god-awful website that we are forced to go to, all because a particular company or open-source group has a product that we want or need.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Special Interests
The RIAA will demand DRM everywhere. The government will ask demand the ability to monitor and control it. All existing business models will seek to make sure that it can't upset them in the future.
If we want a better internet we need to evolve it in parts as a community effort. Community wireless is a step in this direction and ISP's, cable and telephone companies have lobbied to stop it.
The new internet will have to be a democratic effort in the face of special interest opposition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Special Interests
Yes community is the most important thing. This is where the NEW internet should start, with the people who actually use it.
I already see this new idea failing because they are coming at the internet with professional paradigms. This type of vertical communication belays the very point of the internet to begin with. You have to start with everyone to begin with, not just your cronies and special interest groups.
"The new internet will have to be a democratic effort in the face of special interest opposition."
I agree, I see several internet-like systems designed by the people emerging as competition to the Internet. The one net to rule them all concept is a dumb idea when it takes only one legislator/provider to press the red button and end any part of it they feel like.
Just like open source has taught us, we the people can own something that is real together. This is a public good that cannot be exhausted and continues to grow as it is used.
Sound familiar? Yep, its called community. Thats what makes the Internet special and it is the next major upgrade for the Internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Besides, this isn't a US Issue
This is just a nice way for some people to get some grant money and stay employed for a few years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet Rebuild
Telcos for the supposed internet rebuild, and it was
squandered and pilfered:
http://www.newnetworks.com/broadbandscandals.htm
http://www.muniwireless.com/article /articleview/5011
The Internet as we know it does need some major changes in a few areas. The Core routers should
all be optical routing, and I am tempted to say
even 2nd tier, due to its near zero latency.
The other shift I would make is IPv6 due to NAT
making a lot of things not work properly.
Security is more an issue for the clients, the Internet
itself is just a conduit for data some more security
comes with IPv6.
Also I would say as much as possible, phase out
Asynchronous data protocols like ATM, and move
towards synchronous communications like SONET.
SONET already has a lot of the backbone, ATM is
just cheaper, and its cheaper for a reason.
Peer routers that are overloaded and have high
traceroute values should be required to be upgraded.
A LOT of ISPs are cheaping it, and not upgrading some
of their overloaded gateway infrastructure, and
they use piracy as their primary reasoning.
I think what it will take to break the monopolies is
ISP Cooperatives, Net Access by the ppl for the
ppl as a non-profit with contractors rolling it out
via dark fiber and bypassing the greedy blood sucking
telcos once and for all.
If the third world can have better GSM2 cell phones
for less than what we pay it is just greed.
"PERIOD"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Educated Idiots: Part II
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Educated Idiots: Part II
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah Right...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Educated Idiots: Part II
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Educated Idiots: Part II
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You Win The Tard War
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rebuilding. It's what we do.
The Internet is not a US-controlled commodity. As a matter of fact, the presumption that some university researchers and the US government has the authority to do so is simply arrogant and misguided. The US has fewer Internet users (233m) than do Asia (399m) or Europe (315m). Can you imagine how difficult it would be to achieve any sort of international consensus regarding new standards for a centralized Internet strategy? We can't even agree on basic local issues in towns and cities across the nation.
This is simply further evidence of our penchant for 'rebuilding' things that aren't ours in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
learn from the past
The free market built the internet, the free market will take care of adapting and changing it to suite societies needs. The free market has brought the internet this far why not let the free market dictate it's evolution in the future.
BiraRai
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rebuild? Here's what we need...
2. VoIP phone system.
3. Delivery to my home by power lines or my choice of cellular provider at a reasonable price.
Then I'll tell the phone and cable monopolies what they can do with their networks, watch CSI when I want to, and not be bothered by my local broadcaster degrading my HD images to NTSC because they feel they need to put up a weather map in the corner, and they can't produce an HD signal locally.
I already listen to radio over the Internet, and get my news that way too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uneducated input
I'll speak in terms of a realist. The majority of businesses on the web right now are that of the adult industry. Any changes made would have a direct impact on their business model. They have a somewhat anonymous business model that is slightly harder to track unless the "client" uses a credit card.
Any extra security or other forms of client registration would practically kill this anonymity, and thus drastically injure the current largest single industry on the web.
Now I'm not saying that the shear number of these sites hasn't gotten slightly out of hand, but that's the beauty of the current model "limitless expansion".
Once this becomes a regulated process the so called innovation and expansion that the proprietors of this new internet are suggesting will happen will be drastically decreased. Not only on the adult side but also websites like youtube, myspace and the like. The more restrictions there are on innovation the harder it is to come up with new and creative ideas.
Now I've also had the chance to work directly with IPv6 Development teams and from what I've seen its a huge leap in the right direction. IMO a better and more suitable fix to the internet problems right now, than a complete overhaul.
Now as for the people working on the overhaul, I don't blame them. Again with the whole idea of innovation in perspective, then why not? As long as its not forced on people why not just have both running side by side. I remember seeing something on techdirt on this topic earlier on and I personally feel that that would be the ideal situation for many people, so at least that way the "democratic process" that some of you on here were talking about, wouldn't be removed.
Now I might be talking out of my A$$ but that's just my opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]