[ih] A revolution in Internet point-of-view - Was Re: Internet analyses (Was Re: IPv8...)

[John Day]

Well said.

A combination of that and what you could convince others to do, given their corporate desires were different, comfort level, their experiences were different (or lack thereof). (I have found that if you have never seen certain kinds of solutions, it is not easy to see that they could exist or have further implications.)

I agree with your view of the users. Just yesterday, I told someone that I was working on the things that ’they shouldn’t have to know about.’ On the other hand, that infrastructure can have a profound effect of how the applications work. The ‘fragmentation’ you speak of also seems to be working on the infrastructure.  Isn’t the use of CDNs moving applications to the so-called ‘edge’ making the infrastructure as well more ‘regional’ in some sense?

But there is another issue here:  What do we teach those who are learning about that all of this?  Do we just teach them how it works (which I consider vocational)?  Or do we try to teach them what we learned? What not to do? How to do it better? IOW, do we teach them to do better or to repeat the same mistakes?

It has been awhile since I saw any of the ‘official' Chinese IP stuff. What I had seen was far from impressive. Nor have I heard how it is being received. Some of the academic work I have seen submitted to SGOs is pretty bad. If you know otherwise, I would like to see it.

Take care,
John


> On Apr 28, 2026, at 16:11, Karl Auerbach <karl at iwl.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't think it is fruitful to try to assign any blame to what we and others did with the Internet or ISO/OSI ... we were all exploring a new world.  We, in the Internet community, tended to come from the "lets try new ideas and see if they work" point of view, while others, such is ISO/OSI came out of an older bureaucratic tradition.  And we all make mistakes - and I find it unfortunate that many of us (myself included) find it hard to say "oops, I goofed" or "I didn't fully understand what I was doing". Mistakes are the lampposts that illuminate the better paths we ought to have taken.
> 
> What I want to mention is that on the Internet we are undergoing a revolution in perspective.
> 
> And at the same time our 1960's/1970's sense of "a seamless network for all of us, for the world" seems to be being assaulted by a new sense of regionalism; nationalism; religious exclusion, isolation, and protection; and simple protection against criminals and intruders.  This change is breaking our once seamless network into pieces.
> 
> For most of us we think of the net as a means to move packets around, unvexed in their flow end-to-end, and for a few higher level protocols to assemble those packets into meaningful streams (often with security wrappings.)
> 
> The revolution that I am mentioning is coming from users who view "the net" more as an assemblage of applications that work with one another - texting, social media, voice/video meetings, maps/navigation, etc.  These users really don't care much (or know much) about the things we think of as "the Internet": they really are not concerned with packets, transport protocols, TLS, routing, DNS, etc.
> 
> Another way to put this is that in the minds of today's users the network has moved up a level of abstraction - where we were concerned with getting packets and protocols deployed they are thinking of the interoperation of their favorite applications.
> 
> This means, at least to me it means, that the elegance of the underlying packet and transport plumbing - our Internet - has become not only something like a utility, but also opens the door to some radical changes deployed in local contexts - such as using things like China's IP proposals in parts of the net that are transport layer proxied from "our" Internet.
> 
> (BTW, I am not aware of how well China's IP proposals are fairing.)
> 
>         --karl--
>