[ih] 'Internet' vs 'internet'

[Joe Touch]

> On Oct 3, 2018, at 12:12 PM, Jack Haverty <jack at 3kitty.org> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> At Oracle, we had our own world-wide internet, and assigned our own IP
> addresses, regardless of whether or not the particular number was in use
> in the public Internet.  But we were connected to the Internet through
> computers which were dual-homed, and thus could receive email, use FTP,
> etc. as needed. We could interact with the obvious players, e.g.,
> Yahoo!, but also with computers inside our customers' private internets.

I would call that “accessing Internet content”, but definitely NOT being “on the Internet” (note: I appreciate this also applies to nearly all consumer access because of NATs).

Being “on the Internet” IMO has minimum requirements; I presented these as candidate requirements at a meeting in 2004:

Internet User “Bill of Rights"
The Internet is an association of communicating parties. Consenting parties should be able to communicate in an unrestricted fashion, insofar as they do not impinge on the corresponding rights of other parties. The following is a list of specific rights to that end:

1. REAL IP: Users have the right to a real IP address, routable from anywhere on the Internet.

2. REAL DNS (& REVERSE-DNS): Users have the right to a valid reverse DNS name for that IP address, and the forward lookup of that name that matches that address.

3. RECEIVE ANY: Users have the right to receive any valid IP packet, using any valid transport protocol on any valid port (if applicable), up to the limits of their local resources and network connection.

4. SEND ANY: Users have the right to send any valid IP packet to any valid real IP address, using any transport protocol, on any valid port (if applicable), provided it uses an inconsequential amount of resources of the network and potential receiver until mutual consent is established.

5. ENFORCEMENT: Users have the right to know the ISP responsible for traffic from any valid IP address, sufficient to register a complaint regarding violations of any of these rules. 

——
Everything else is, at best, access to Internet *information* but undermines the ability to participate directly in Internet protocols themselves. That’s sort of like saying you can watch TV, but only from still photos taken across the street through a smudged window.

Calling that “the Internet” isn’t evolution of terms to common usage. It’s misleading advertising.

Joe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20181004/9b0011b4/attachment.htm>