23 replies [Last post]
roytheboy
roytheboy's picture
Offline
Guru
North Wales, UK
Last seen: 6 years 20 weeks ago
North Wales, UK
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-09-18
Posts: 2233
Points: 41

Is the concept of a global computer network about to end?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4327928.stm

Life's a b*tch and then you die!

Hugo
Hugo's picture
Offline
Moderator
London
Last seen: 4 years 48 weeks ago
London
Joined: 2004-06-06
Posts: 15668
Points: 2806

Who should run the net?

Admit I've not read the article fully, but I thought the point about the network model that exists is that no can be said to own it as such, unless one of course is referring to the DNS protocols and of the name resolving servers controlled by ICCAN but is that not something that - although a embedded feature and technically the whole internet revolves around being able to resolve names to ip addresses - is actually removable we do not need it centralized and indeed you can - as has been tried - break that monopoly with a new system of TLD's.

If this is niggling about the fact that ICCAN holds authority over this aspect then I would prefer things to continue this way surely mild chaos would ensue if that aspect were to be truly challenged.

Hugo.

Before you make your first post it is vital that you READ THE POSTING GUIDELINES!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post ALL your code - both CSS & HTML - in [code] tags
Please validate and ensure you have included a full Doctype before posting.
Why validate? Read Me

larmyia
Offline
Elder
London
Last seen: 11 years 13 weeks ago
London
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2005-01-25
Posts: 1060
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

Roy, interesting article as usual. tbh I don't think I'd ever given this much thought and didn't think anyone "owned" the internet. but I guess there has to be a body in charge of overseeing certain things.

it seems to me that it shouldn't belong to anyone. just because the states got in there first why should it be them? but then again it would be a disaster to have several "internets" that weren't connected or anything.

why do "we" have to make everything so difficult? *sigh*

but interesting nonetheless.

larmyia

indobreakz
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 14 years 35 weeks ago
Joined: 2005-04-13
Posts: 19
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

In hindsight it was going to happen. Its all about control. Each government would love to control the internet, including democratic ones. I think this whole issue is a load of hot air because the internet is too important, too democratic and there are too many very clever people who are able to hack solutions to problems. It's the open protocols and most importantly the people, not governments or the UN who will in the end keep control. Where there is a will there is a way. So I am not worried. I am sure the people in power will realise that when it comes to the internet they really have none. Its a beast that runs its own show.

But imagine a group of leaders sitting around a table arguing about how the internet should do something in a certain way with weeks and weeks of deadlocked talks. We have seen it all before. Its not the way forward. A country with the kind of power the U.S. has will always have a bigger influence on the way things are done compared to other countries. That will not change whether the UN were to have control or not.

In the end too many organisations, people, governments, forums and even our lovely friendsters (God bless em' all!!!!!) rely on the internet. Even a few of our politicians, whether on Capitol Hill or in the houses of parliament, are probably enjoying the naughty side of the net too much to impose any rules that may spoil their fun!!!

J

briski
briski's picture
Offline
Elder
London
Last seen: 7 years 26 weeks ago
London
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-02-16
Posts: 1066
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

Not so sure about who's got access to "fun" or not. By the very nature of the internet it's becoming ever more important. I read that 90% of all Brazilian tax collections rellys on the internet. This means that Brazil CAN'T afford for a single country/someone to have power to effect that ability and so will do all they can to have it all better regulated. I am sure they are not the only case like this.

Alas this will inevitably mean lots of sitting about arguing about who's in charge and who can do this and that, which will no doubt result on the same old situation. Large powers get their way, everyone else is told to sod off and live with it I imagine. The Joys of life Tongue

wolfcry911
wolfcry911's picture
Offline
Guru
MA, USA
Last seen: 5 years 41 weeks ago
MA, USA
Timezone: GMT-5
Joined: 2004-09-01
Posts: 3224
Points: 237

Who should run the net?

Quote:
Who should run the internet?

TPH Cool

n8gz4ez
n8gz4ez's picture
Offline
Leader
Last seen: 10 years 46 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2005-06-13
Posts: 802
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

wolfcry911 wrote:
TPH Cool
=D>

This is my big chance . . . yep, I blew it . . .

drhowarddrfine
Offline
Leader
Last seen: 10 years 2 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2005-05-21
Posts: 764
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

I was going to say I'll run it but TPH can have it.

It's been a few days since I read the article but wasn't most of it about what naming more than anything else?

In any case, my question is, why should what we have now change? Someone above said they think it's all about control and I agree if they want to change things just for the sake of change.

IE7 is 10 years behind the standards or wrong.
But it works in IE!
IE is a cancer on the web -- Paul Thurott

muzishun
Offline
Enthusiast
Lawrence, KS
Last seen: 12 years 18 weeks ago
Lawrence, KS
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2005-02-08
Posts: 106
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

n8gz4ez wrote:
wolfcry911 wrote:
TPH Cool
=D>

Bill Parrott
Co-Owner and Co-Founder
Eternal Second Designs
http//www.EternalSecond.com/

larmyia
Offline
Elder
London
Last seen: 11 years 13 weeks ago
London
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2005-01-25
Posts: 1060
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

drhowarddrfine wrote:
In any case, my question is, why should what we have now change? Someone above said they think it's all about control and I agree if they want to change things just for the sake of change.

and may I ask where you are from drhowarddrfine? Smile

larmyia

thepineapplehead
thepineapplehead's picture
Offline
Guru
Last seen: 1 year 17 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-06-30
Posts: 9668
Points: 801

Who should run the net?

Ssssssssshhhh . . . I already am in charge of the net . . . . Wink

Verschwindende wrote:
  • CSS doesn't make pies

briski
briski's picture
Offline
Elder
London
Last seen: 7 years 26 weeks ago
London
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-02-16
Posts: 1066
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

OMG

If that's true, can we request a few changes? Laughing out loud

thepineapplehead
thepineapplehead's picture
Offline
Guru
Last seen: 1 year 17 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-06-30
Posts: 9668
Points: 801

Who should run the net?

such as . . . .

Verschwindende wrote:
  • CSS doesn't make pies

roytheboy
roytheboy's picture
Offline
Guru
North Wales, UK
Last seen: 6 years 20 weeks ago
North Wales, UK
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-09-18
Posts: 2233
Points: 41

Who should run the net?

drhowarddrfine wrote:
In any case, my question is, why should what we have now change? Someone above said they think it's all about control and I agree if they want to change things just for the sake of change.

I think you're missing the point here, in a rather naive way if I might be so bold. Nobody 'owns' the net per se because it is an organic collection of smaller networks, in that it grows naturally without a mechanistic overall game-plan.

BUT, he who controls the addressing systems controls both the net and the web. Ultimately this control is in the hands of ICANN which was due to become independent next year. BUT the US government is now refusing to release control of ICANN, therefore the US government ultimately controls the internet.

When you consider how much banking, trade and commerce relies on the net, surely you must realise that the fate of the economies of entire countries currently rests in the hands of an organisation that is controlled by the US government - a body that openly functions on the principle of self-interest.

I would be worried if the UK government controlled the net. I'm frightened by the fact that the US government controls it and I'm part of the so-called 'free world'! If I was from a country that had been victimised and/or bullied by the US (in fact, who isn't), I would be VERY worried by the current situation. If I was representing the interests of such countries, there is no way I would allow the fate of my country's economic stability to lie in the hands of the US government and I would therefore look to running my own naming system, even if it meant isolation from the rest of the net.

You need to look at the wider picture here - this is a BIG issue that could be very simply resolved by granting ICANN complete independence and ensuring that it is not answerable to any one government. The net and web as we know them could be about to fragment and as usual, the Bush administration is wanting to control the world in its normal arrogant way!

Footnote: I have nothing against America or Americans; just governments of all flavours and varieties, and particularly ones with track records like the US government.

Life's a b*tch and then you die!

drhowarddrfine
Offline
Leader
Last seen: 10 years 2 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2005-05-21
Posts: 764
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

I don't know. Six months ago were people so afraid of this? It just seems that it's not broken so why fix it?

I can see making ICANN independent of the government but I don't see why screwing up the naming system would be in the best interests of any government.

If the US turns it over to some world body like the UN, we can all see how well that would work.

And while many other countries may say they are "nervous" due to economic/finance/etc. considerations, remember that the US is the biggest market in the world, as an individual country, and has their own concerns about turning this over to someone else.

I say "they" as in the government but I am in the US.

IE7 is 10 years behind the standards or wrong.
But it works in IE!
IE is a cancer on the web -- Paul Thurott

roytheboy
roytheboy's picture
Offline
Guru
North Wales, UK
Last seen: 6 years 20 weeks ago
North Wales, UK
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-09-18
Posts: 2233
Points: 41

Who should run the net?

I'm very pleased to see that the UK is backing Argentina's multi-stakeholder proposal of a global forum made up of national governments, private sector representatives and civil groups.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4357360.stm

Life's a b*tch and then you die!

ClevaTreva
ClevaTreva's picture
Offline
Guru
A hilly place, UK
Last seen: 1 year 6 weeks ago
A hilly place, UK
Joined: 2004-02-05
Posts: 2902
Points: 0

Who should run the net?

Hi

I just read this thread for the first time.

Fact: Politicians the world over do what they for their personal self-interest, not necessarily their citizens.
Fact: Public bodies (quango's) are staffed with friends of politicians wanting to earn a fast buck for no work, and those same quango members usually have no direct experience whatsoever.
Fact: A privatised service always costs more and service levels fall.

The only people who can be trusted to operate this service are those with direct interest in high service levels, a modicum of good sense, efficiency and costs.

The name owners.

But there are too many for them to be able to effectively organise this service.

So, we need a body we can trust NOT to be self-serving and money-grabbing. Who suggested the UN? On their past record it would take a dozen bribes and five years to register a domain.

Again, I say, who then?

How about an organisation of those folks who run the data centres round the world? After all, they have as much to lose as we users do. And there are an identifiable number of them. They are worldwide.

Trevor

roytheboy
roytheboy's picture
Offline
Guru
North Wales, UK
Last seen: 6 years 20 weeks ago
North Wales, UK
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-09-18
Posts: 2233
Points: 41

Who should run the net?

Trevor,

I'm a very cynical person but not even I would state your three "facts" as facts. They are not facts at all. Although there are obviously elements of all sorts of people in politics and quangos, there are many people out there in positions of power that do care about people other than themselves. And that is a fact that I know for sure!

As I suggested at the beginning of this thread, this is a HUGE issue that affects us all, but if you think that governments don't need to be involved then you must be living one step outside of the real world Wink

...thanks for your thoughts all the same Smile

Life's a b*tch and then you die!

gary.turner
gary.turner's picture
Offline
Moderator
Dallas
Last seen: 20 hours 28 min ago
Dallas
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2004-06-25
Posts: 9745
Points: 3824

Who should run the net?

Given that the internet is an extension of the U.S. Dept. of Defense's network, I can see the reluctance to give up all control. The DoD found the multiple redundancies of an inter-net to be a benefit, and so encouraged and financed much of the infrastructure. Enlightened self interest at work. Had our FCC (Federal Communications Commission) been involved, they'd still be arguing whether a zero was a high or low voltage signal. That's bureaucracy.

The WWW rides on that internet as a distributed database, with naming rights to the address book residing in ICANN. My question is, what are the actual issues beyond a country's politicos and bureaucrats' loathing for anything to happen without their own spoons stirring the pot?

What are the issues affecting the users of the internet? Are these issues serious, and if so, are they the result of internal squabbling (of which I hear there is plenty) within the quasi-public ICANN, or is it the result of owner's (U.S.) meddling?

Is there harm being done? To whom? How?

cheers,

gary

If your web page is as clever as you can make it, it's probably too clever for you to debug or maintain.

roytheboy
roytheboy's picture
Offline
Guru
North Wales, UK
Last seen: 6 years 20 weeks ago
North Wales, UK
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-09-18
Posts: 2233
Points: 41

Who should run the net?

More from the BBC...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/default.stm#

Red header, bottom right of the page, but the link will probably change in a few days' time.

Life's a b*tch and then you die!

Hugo
Hugo's picture
Offline
Moderator
London
Last seen: 4 years 48 weeks ago
London
Joined: 2004-06-06
Posts: 15668
Points: 2806

Who should run the net?

It's all a storm in a china tea cup!

As said ICCAN do not do a bad job, and this is more to do with petty jealousy. ICAAN have established the 'Global shared registry service' and accredited a number of registrars to compete for the registration of names of which there are around half a dozen in the UK. we need to work with ICANN and help it be the open and transparent organization it's remit says it must be. I don't know the extent to which the US government thinks or does exert a subtle control but I can see the vast chaos that could ensue if ICANN's position were to be challenged and most certainly do not trust the motives of many of those countries that would bleat on about it's dominance. As for the UN playing a major part, it saddens me to have to say that I think that would not be a great idea.

Hugo.

Before you make your first post it is vital that you READ THE POSTING GUIDELINES!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post ALL your code - both CSS & HTML - in [code] tags
Please validate and ensure you have included a full Doctype before posting.
Why validate? Read Me

gary.turner
gary.turner's picture
Offline
Moderator
Dallas
Last seen: 20 hours 28 min ago
Dallas
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2004-06-25
Posts: 9745
Points: 3824

Who should run the net?

That pretty much gibes with my take on the issue. No government wants not to have a say if someone else does, even if it were only nominal. Part two is that they can't stand that their citizens have uncontrolled access to anything.

The problem isn't that the U.S. has control, it's that they don't.

We are fortunate that the internet and the WWW grew too fast for government to keep up. Perhaps its growth has reached a tipping point toward a critical mass that governments can't control. I wouldn't want to bet the farm on it, though.

In the meantime, who would you trust to have substantial say in its running? There are not many governments that show individual freedom a modicum of respect. That leaves the likes of me and thee—and I'm not too sure of thee Wink, and for damned sure not the French. Shock Laughing out loud

[edit] I see that Hugo has posted in the meantime. I kinda have to agree with him, but didn't want to appear chauvinistic. [/edit]

cheers,

gary

If your web page is as clever as you can make it, it's probably too clever for you to debug or maintain.

Hugo
Hugo's picture
Offline
Moderator
London
Last seen: 4 years 48 weeks ago
London
Joined: 2004-06-06
Posts: 15668
Points: 2806

Who should run the net?

I didn't want you to have to appear chauvinistic Gary, as your put in that slightly awkward position of bias Smile.

Your first paragraph probably sums up the real nub of this issue which is one of 'if they have control we want control as well' that and the deep routed fear of many of these countries that their citizens might actually have un-fettered access to information, and it is on this basis and this basis alone that I would wish for the current situation to remain much as it is.

Your also, I'm sure , correct in surmising that in reality the problem is of establishing who has control and that in actual fact the US government has as much control as anyone else which is very little.

The web did indeed spiral out of control, the global network was never envisaged to have grown in the manner it has and most certainly not at the speed that it did, and it did so while everyones attention was elsewhere, by the time governments woke up to what it had become it was too late to exert any real dominance and control over and long may that situation prevail.

It's (the net) a natural antithesis to governments aims and the most important thing is that one way or another it is preserved and protected their must always be this mass voice and freedom of information that governments cannot directly exert influence on.

If I had to make a choice perhaps surprisingly I would choose that if any government did have an influence it would be the US despite my rather contrary views as to the role the US government has played in world affairs in the last few decades.

However if we all wanted to have a laugh, then I think we should hand it over to the French, lock stock and barrel. Smile

Hugo.

Before you make your first post it is vital that you READ THE POSTING GUIDELINES!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please post ALL your code - both CSS & HTML - in [code] tags
Please validate and ensure you have included a full Doctype before posting.
Why validate? Read Me

roytheboy
roytheboy's picture
Offline
Guru
North Wales, UK
Last seen: 6 years 20 weeks ago
North Wales, UK
Timezone: GMT+1
Joined: 2004-09-18
Posts: 2233
Points: 41

Who should run the net?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4450474.stm

The BBC wrote:
A compromise solution for the future of net governance was reached in a late-night meeting.

The US-based Icann body will continue to technically manage the net, but a new Internet Governance Forum (IGF) would be formed.

In his closing remarks, Mr Utsumi said a new page of net governance had been opened with the decision to form the forum.

He said it was recognition that all governments should have equal responsibility for internet governance. But the forum will not have any oversight powers in the technical functioning of the net, but will tackle cybersecurity issues.

But, stressed Mr Utsumi, it was only the start of a long process for the net, which would look very different in five years because of the nature of fast-changing technologies.

US officials called the agreement on net governance a "win-win" outcome, while Paul Twomey, president and CEO of Icann, was cautious, saying that the fundamental battle over net governance was not over.

Life's a b*tch and then you die!