Does the Internet Need to be Rebuilt?

[Gawain 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/ap_on_hi_te/rebuilding_the_internet_8

I can see the need for advancing the technology to allow for better speed, throughput, etc. Some are talking about a complete "re-wire" so-to-speak.

What I find interesting about the article is that there is no mention of the companies that actually "are" the Internet (8 or 9 Tier 1 carriers that I know of).

I think the fundamental redundancy in the Internet today is one of the best parts of it.

I also posted this in SC, because I don't think the folks in Bonfire would care.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gene03 0]

"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[Andrewwhyte 1]

The cost to all of us of the lack of security on the internet is huge. There is, however, no guarantee that a re-do will provide security that is any less fleeting than a microsoft patch.
What we can be assured of is that everyday users with their mobile devices will leave a documented trail of their minute to minute whereabouts for the big brother industry as well as marketers to follow

[akarunway 1]

Quote

The cost to all of us of the lack of security on the internet is huge. There is, however, no guarantee that a re-do will provide security that is any less fleeting than a microsoft patch.
What we can be assured of is that everyday users with their mobile devices will leave a documented trail of their minute to minute whereabouts for the big brother industry as well as marketers to follow

I was going to post this yesterday but out of fear of being attacked for my spelling (LOL) I did not. Big Brother gets my vote. Who and where. Read the one where the govt. is gonna put the own router on a sat. in space just for military purposes?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[JoeyRamone 0]

Sure call Al Gore he can do it.

[Zipp0 1]

I can get FIOS at 50MPS with the net as it stands now, and my DSL is all I need for the forseeable future. As far as security, the internet is the same as the real world. We sacrifice a little security for net freedom. Update your anti-virus and spyware tools and you are fine.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[marcandalysse 0]

Quote

I can get FIOS at 50MPS

They just finished tearing up my yard to put in FIOS....isn't that a replacement for DSL? How much does it cost you vs DSL or cable options?

marc

"The reason angels can fly is that they take themselves so lightly." --GK Chesterton

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

I can get FIOS at 50MPS

They just finished tearing up my yard to put in FIOS....isn't that a replacement for DSL? How much does it cost you vs DSL or cable options?

marc

It's a DSL alternative. It's a bit more expensive than DSL, but it's not worth it for me right now. Plus, if I put 50MBS into my old ass computer, it would probably detonate.

With fiber optic, they can offer phone, TV and internet, all over the one fiber line. That's the long term plan, I'd guess.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

What I find interesting about the article is that there is no mention of the companies that actually "are" the Internet (8 or 9 Tier 1 carriers that I know of).

I think the fundamental redundancy in the Internet today is one of the best parts of it.

There are a few issues with the internet in it's current form. One is that the USA is holding on to so many IP addys that they don't need to use. I know that some companies are releasing some back into use (even some Class A) as companies have hired people to better network their organizations.

Also, there is a large issue with redundancy with the Internet. As it is, I believe there are only 12 or 13 primary name domain controlers around the world. Brining down one or two of these via any type of attack or failure would have a significant impact on internet connectivity.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[champu 1]

Quote

The cost to all of us of the lack of security on the internet is huge.

The internet, considering the transport layer and down, is just a channel. If you can communicate securely over a wireless channel, then you can communicate securely over TCP/IP.

Improving security on the internet isn't a matter of tearing it up and rewiring things, it may just be a matter of realizing the world wide web, specifically, is not the greatest place to perform certain types of communication.

/edited: than/then

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

As it is, I believe there are only 12 or 13 primary name domain controlers around the world. Brining down one or two of these via any type of attack or failure would have a significant impact on internet connectivity.

That is root DNS servers, the Internet isn't run by Windows. There are 13 root DNS server addresses. The actual number of servers is many times more. Google for anycast.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[billvon 3,107]

The Internet* was not designed to be secure. It was designed to be immune to a nuclear attack, which is why its routing protocols are so robust.

It performs its intended function admirably - it gets information from point A to point B quite well. Additional security can easily be provided by adding layers in the protocol stack that allow encryption/authentication - and many people have done just that. No need to "rebuild" anything - "building" will suffice for many, many years.

(Note that there IS a need to go from IPv4 to IPv6 to handle the proliferation of new networked devices; that's happening now.)

(* = the TCP/IP protocol, not the World Wide Web, or any other protocols that ride on top of TCP/IP.)

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

(Note that there IS a need to go from IPv4 to IPv6 to handle the proliferation of new networked devices; that's happening now.)

I finally checked that off on my "ToDo" list this past weekend. See attachment.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[kelpdiver 2]

another article written by someone with a limited grasp of the subject.

The sky isn't falling, or anything near it.

Sure, a clean slate running on ipv6 or something else with virtually unlimited addressing space could be more efficient, but to date we've managed to cobble together plenty of kludges that get the job done and don't involve massive spending on new hardware and infrastructure. We were supposed to be out of IP addresses a long long time ago, but the use of 10net space has continued to push back that deadline. I use two IPs at home for 15 networked devices, and I barely use the 2nd.

Security? That's a concern for windows, yes. I've been wired over dsl for over a decade with not a single incident.

VOIP or other time critical services might promote the next generation - I don't know. Since I got my dsl before naked lines were available, I already have my ma bell connection and it's not worth 3 service tech visits to switch just to pay more money to a VOIP service when I barely use my home line anyway.