I can see these as goals that the Internet Society might want to
adopt. I'm not sure that 2) and 3) are IETF goals in any way,
and I think we've got as close to stating 1) in technical terms
as we ever will (see RFC 7258 for the bibliography on that).
One more comment in line...
On 16/05/2014 07:16, Dave Cridland wrote:
I find myself agreeing with pretty much everything you wrote here. The
thing I agree with most of all is the idea of selecting some long-range
goals so we can at least aim for them. My inlined comments are all minor.
On 15 May 2014 17:57, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
1) Security: All Internet protocols should provide confidentiality and
integrity by default.
I generally agree with this as a default stance, but I do have some worries
that particularly on the constrained client end, we may need to ensure that
we can lose much of the security. It's happened before.
I think we can ensure that the network proxies involved always handle
services which require confidentiality and integrity, though.
This suggests we have a "zeroth law", as Asimov would put it, of:
0) Interoperability: All Internet protocols should be capable of
independent implementation on a range of platforms and deployments with no
visible limitation in functionality.
Frankly I doubt that. Either it's fairly meaningless (a "range" could be
just two types of device) or it's impossible (some protocols are definitely
only going to work in specific environments; see ROLL for example).
Brian
2) Access: The Internet is for everyone and everyone should be able to
use it regardless of their geographic location or political
interference.
I think "use" is far too weak here. I'm folding over to your next point, of
course, somewhat, but perhaps "engage", or "take part in". A typical home
user cannot, for example, spin up a webserver. An atypical user can, by
punching suitable holes in NAT devices (oh, if only that were literal), but
cannot run a VOIP service. I'd like to return to an Internet where if you
could read a web page you could run a server.
3) Autonomy: [Here I need a concise definition]
I entirely agree with your goals here, and "Autonomy" is a good name for it.
What about:
Autonomy: Every individual on the Internet should be able to assert
ownership and control over their own data, and be on equal footing as
regards both offering and consuming content and services, as well as
communication.
So those are my goals. What goals should we be attempting to address?
What are realistic timescales?
Are we just going to be happy with a faster Internet with an
effectively unlimited address space or do we have bigger goals?
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/