[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [atlarge-discuss] Severe Inaccuracies in Post from 25 July....
Dear all,
sent a very long and detailed response to Bradley on that "erroneous"
response of him (he his the first person who says "I was there" in response
to my "I was partly in charge") so we may work together in better
understanding.
A gateway has two sides. What Bradley describes is the world as seen from
the Internet and what I describe is the Internet as seen from the rest of
the world. Question is only to understand who was here before ...
On 21:57 23/08/02, Bradley D. Thornton said:
<snip>----------------------
"We should never forget that the ".arpa" namespace was delegated to the
Internet under the agreement of the International community of which the
FCC was only a partner, within the ITU/T frame, in agreement and under the
jurisdiction of at least 50 States (monopolies) from the entire world
We delegated them the right to connect "com" and "net", to connect
the ccTLDs, to connect domestic users through the public nets under our FCC
license. Never to rule the world. And the world never waited for them: the
X121 international addressing scheme we jointly implemented is only the
numeric names part of the International namespace that the DNS permits now
to match (ENUM)."
</snip>--------------------
Actually, this is completely incorrect wrt the alleged 'delegation'
of .ARPA. No international community, nor the FCC had anything to do
with this 'delegation' that never occured.
Fully detailed that to Bradley who obviously was not aware of Computer
Inquiry, Computer I, II and III, of the "enhanced" services as defined by
FCC, of VANs licenses, etc.. a few US oddities with a certain impact on the
status of a world which is not born in 1996.
cf. infra concerningthe "nerver occured"
.ARPA is the "original TLD", if you will, that EVERYTHING was under
prior to and during the switch-over to DNS from the hosts file.
What Bradley talks about is early 1985. A time there was alread more than
1.000.000 Minitel in operations; millions of daily transactions a day on
the public packet switch network (ie; the "Internet" as defined late on by
47 USC 230 (f)(1)) probably more than 40 profitable interconnected
international services and afew major public packet switch services like
Transpac in France, PSS in the UK, Datex-P in Germany etc...
That unique TLD was the unique root of the "legacy" namespace in the legacy
namespace. It was also the root name of the "ARPANET" sub-namespace in the
International system. The ARPANET system was not alone in the outer world.
There were many other network with their own namesapces. There namespaces
were flat. The only one hierarchical was the international namespace and
ARPA was the root name the Internet was known under.
When you interconnect two systems: in each system the other must have a
name :-)
The whole domain name issue: if HP connects the HP network and register
hp.com for that. Has HP become the core of the world, or has HP connected
to the world? Question of perspective. Common sense tends to think that the
largest and the oldest is the one you connect to.
Most
nodes were using UUCP, but what really occured is that we started
migrating entities to domains such as .MIL and .GOV and of course the
com/net/org/nato/int/edu's as well so that eventually .ARPA was only
used for network addressing (reverse lookups).
What Bradley talks about here is true. It is the progressive organization
in 1985 of the ARPANET intranet and some extranet and the implementation of
the DNS system.
After some time when SRI no longer managed the name space it went to
nic.ddn.mil and then internic.net etc...., and ARIN was formed to
handle the delegation of IP NET-BLKs for networks along with RIPE
and APNIC when the 'forward' part of the name space went to Internic
after the handoff from the capable management of the Defense Data
Network.
I would be interested in dates and details. This occured probably years after?
Actually, ARPANET started in late 60s, but IETF "Internet" real birth with
TCP/IP and DNS is 1983/85 if I understand well? USG "Internet" (as per 47
USC 230) is older but with different technologies (Tymnet, then ISO, and
now TCP/IP, and coming new technologies).
The ARPAnet (NSFnet/Internet - whatever you want to call it) was
created and managed by the United States Department of Defense and
operated in the beginning under contracts and grants provided to a
mere handful of US Universities (5 actually), then as time
progressed MERIT and NSF came into the picture prior to the total
turnover of the network to private interests (with the single
exception of some parts of the MILnet which are still autonomous and
government operated to this day (for obvious reasons). The only
direct dependance the DDN has upon todays Internet is wrt .ARPA for
reverse lookups and IP Blocks previously delegated to themselves by
themselves, and then managed by Jon Postel (aka the IANA), and now
managed by ARIN.
What would be great would be a complete chronology with relations and
comarison with the rest of the world. I try to do it, but I miss dates and
help. What is needed is precise dates, meetings, people names, decisions,
contracts, traffic data...
Let's not pretend that the rest of the world gave the US Military
permission to operate .ARPA -
How true. But this is not the proposition.
The proposition is that ARPA has joined the world system which never waited
for it to develop in using other technologies (the world being also lead
by US corporations).
That simply is not the case. In fact,
it's the exact opposite. I was there and a part of it. We created it
out of thin-air, then permitted others to use it, and then the rest
of the world was (Eventually) given permission to connect to us via
the NSFnet, BITnet, Larry's CSnet, etc...
I must say the rest of he world was not really excited about connecting
until the web application of the European Cern bythe traffic figures. May
be 95% of the traffic was on other systems because NSFnet, BITnet and
Larry's CSnet did not really advertize in the International and Domestic
shows?
We created .ARPA, we created com/net/org/nato/int/edu and all of the
ccTLDs too, most of which Jon (aka the IANA) delegated to his
buddies in trust for sometime down the road when those sovereign
governments could/might/may be able to take over the management of
those ccTLDs at some future point.
I will wait for Bradley comments on my precise information. A simple
reading of the RFC 920 shows that this vision of the ccTLDs is not correct.
Most of the ICANN problems would have been avoided if that intent had been
documented by IETF or IANA. Stll recently IETF people who shared in that
period explained how proud they were not to have engaged into that kind of
politcal details.
Most of all, such a pretence would have created a LOL among sovereign
states, which were operating monopolistic data services for a long, in some
cases with their own technologies, accordng to "X.7X" standards they had
commonly defined at the CCITT (ITU-T) where Telenet/BBN people were key
persons.
BTW my point is not to reduc the merits of the Internet. But to make clear
that we are not in a dream. That the Internet is not alone. That is mainly
comes from the web application and that to forget that is a total
sterilization of the networks development. The Internet is one of the three
main architectures which developped the Internatioinal network and that
future development are probably based upon the blending of their concepts
and advantages.
It is also that domincnce will lead to nowhere. Only concertance is the
future. In technology, name space management, human relations etc.
Some have, and some still
haven't, but that is a completely different matter - where ICANN's
directors and staff still haven't been imprisoned yet for their
felonious acts of blackmail, fraud through their various
disinformation campaigns, and several other impositions they have
orchestrated going back further than Senator Tom Bliley's calls to
put them in check for their crimes against humanity.
I must say that I do not find that in the quoted URL, but I fully support
this part. I am grald that an US Senator has the understanding and the
courage to say that. Right now there is a common agreement that the "Pax
Digitalia" is an USG dominance that many start resenting.
Such a position underlines that this is not at USG dominance but an ICANN
total failure. That Senator Tom Bliley seems to be someone of stature.
Could you provide us with the URL of his site?
jfc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de