[Air-l] A definition of the internet

Tue Oct 17 08:40:34 PDT 2006

I pretty much concur... with the caveat as you mention the slow but
supposedly impending move to IP v 6...   and with the idea that the
functionality of TCP/IP actually being replaced.... by an equivalent or
better protocol/protocol defining mechanism.

The functional idea of the TCP/IP (that I am pointing to) whether ip v4 or v
6 is that we have a basic protocol and from this sessions can be initiatied
and more importantly new protocols can be defined.

And so we have agreement on protocols and means of defining and referencing
further protocols ... and we have networks that agree (peering) to handle
such traffic in certain ways.

Now I dont know if in this loosely framed statement I'm taking an
essentialist approach, but I think it is very important to see the Internet
in this way ... in order to defend the Internet conceptually.... in the
realm of public opinion, academic research and in legal contest
(legislative, judiciary and other institutional fronts (e.g. FCC)) ...

If we study discourse on connectivity/broadband/Internet we see these terms
often conflated, sometimes strategically/intentionally, sometimes not
(accident of insufficient clarity).

Broadband has a set of legal definitions too... and the gap between the
public and political discourse on this and the legal definitions (per FCC,
et al) is quite stark.  Over-all this connects to the broader topics of
commercial speech and the gap between what is allowable as commercial speech
and what is understood from commercial speech.

I raise the issue of Broadband in relation to Internet because as people
fight for connectivity and political leaders make hay out of the issue ...
they run the risk of not getting what they think they are pushing for.   As
researchers and public intellectuals we have a role in this process, and we
should take pains to make the distinctions clear .. for example when
legislation calls for Broadband deployment, we should ask why it doenst
explicitly call for Broadband Internet deployment?

The  Internet ... TCP/IP networks with peering agreements has a certain
character because of it's technical specification and the peering agreements
based on that specification.   That character is defined in a manner such
that connection speeds are not central... rather it is the notion of  a
stack (OSI) where different layers are accorded different roles.

As we hear the cry for Broadband or Big Broadband with greater and greater
speeds (comparing with the bandwidth available in other countries, or in
other regions (whatever the unit of comparison)) the focus shifts away from
what is central to the Internet, and establishes a basis on which to extend
our capacity in such a way that we move away from the essential character of
the Internet.

Another way we risk this shift away from the Internet is in the calls for
building more "Intelligence" into the network (sometimes with 'security'
being the driving wedge).  Reading David Isenberg's work on the "Rise of the
Stupid Network" we see the virtues of the TCP/IP based networks as one where
the intelligence of the network is by design at the edges.

I'd also point to conceptual work of Garth Graham - taking the TCP/IP as a
form of social contract... where we are all peers.  Imagine a
reconceptualization of politics in such a frame... I know a number of us
are.

Regards to all.

-MM

On 10/17/06, Kevin Guidry <krguidry at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/17/06, Michael Maranda <mmaranda at afcn.org> wrote:
> > Yes, in my brief phrase "Internet as an agreement(s)"  I think we lead
> > towards an understanding of this ... it's an agreement around TCP/IP ...
> > that TCP/IP be a protocol over which we can define additional protocols,
> and
> > around peering agreements by which traffic will be carried through
> networks
> > held by others.
>
>    Is TCP/IP really a core, defining feature of the Internet?
> Wouldn't it still be "the Internet" if we could somehow replace TCP/IP
> with something functionally equivalent?  I have a difficult time
> making the current networking protocols selected out of the middle of
> the networking stack a defining feature of what I view as a merely a
> means of linking disparate networks. Couldn't we rightfully say that a
> device on the other side of a bridge linking a non-IP network to the
> Internet is just as much on the Internet as a device on an IP network?
>    I certainly don't deny (a) the major historical role that TCP/IP
> has played and continues to play in the development and operation of
> the Internet and (b) the dominance of TCP/IP in the majority of
> computer networks.  But it just seems to me that TCP/IP as the
> underlying protocol of the majority of the Internet is a historical
> accident.  Other protocols that provided the same functionality could
> just as easily been used.  An Internet with some other
> functionally-equivalent protocol would still be the Internet just as
> my LAN at home is still essentially the same despite moving from
> Ethernet over Cat5 to 802.11g over the air.  It also seems to me that
> the slow-moving-but-supposedly-imminent move to IPv6 provides some
> support for my argument since we are replacing one of the core
> protocols used on the Internet with another protocol but it's still
> going to be the Internet.
>    I am also uncomfortable conflating the effects and uses of the
> Internet with its definition.  Your initial thoughts related to
> "agreements" seems to me to be the closest to what I would call a
> "good" definition.
>
>
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/
>

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Executive Director, CTCNet Chicago Chapter
Co-Founder, Chicago Digital Access Alliance
Co-Chair, Illinois Community Technology Coalition
President, Association For Community Networking

Support the efforts of the Chicago Digital Access Alliance:
http://www.digitalaccessalliance.org