Re: Government Determined To Control For Monitoring The Internet
From: Winged (Winged_at_nofollow.com)
Date: 11/16/05
- Next message: relic: "Re: Problem with disk upgrade of Windows XP Pro"
- Previous message: Kadaitcha Man: "Re: Problem with disk upgrade of Windows XP Pro"
- In reply to: tightwad: "Government Determined To Control For Monitoring The Internet"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:38:22 -0600
tightwad wrote:
>
>>
>>> Government showdown could break up Internet, experts warn
>>
>>
>>
>>> <http://www.physorg.com/news8159.html>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Also see: EU says Internet control plan gains support
>>
>>
>>
>>> <http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10050081/>
I have worked with the Europeans on various Standard boards.
I remember a situation on the ANSI X-12 standard committee when we were
trying to move the ANSI X-12 standard to the ISO standards board. The
insisted that the European Edifact standard was far more robust, even
robust enough to encompass everything that the X-12 standard was capable
of, or it would with modification when they published the Edifact2000M
standard. This irrespective of the fact that ANSI X12 EDI standard met
the EDI set requirements they had previously agreed to. They insisted
they would block attempts to move ANSI X-12 to an ISO standard even
though they had nothing that would meet the requirement. To make a long
story short, we agreed to let the European consortium would modify the
Edifact standard to meet the EDI requirements. That was 20 years ago.
Edifact 2000M never met the data interchange requirements, something
most of the ANSI X-12 participants knew from the beginning, who were
familiar with the Edifact standard. Why did the European consortium
make this stand, very simple, money and lots of it was involved.
Money is also the driver here. After my exp of working with the Euro
consortium I honestly could give a damn if they choose to break what
ICANN has managed fairly successfully for a number of years. Let the
Euro group break their communications and split from the Internet.
This can be done and be managed. They can use their choice of odd
controls, but it should be at their own peril and that of their people.
This can be accomplished and the Internet can be zoned off. But I
have seen nothing in my humble experience that shows that an multitude
group could accomplish better and cheaper than ICANN. The only
motivation I see here is dynamics at play that don't make much sense
from an operational perspective. I feel if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I am obviously missing something here. (Actually once again major money
is involved) At this juncture while major efforts are to move the net to
IPV6 are underway worldwide I am a bit hesitant to throw the baby out
with the wash water.
It might work out just fine to have an international consortium, but I
suspect it would drive costs up, create more fractualization of the net
and impede finally getting IPV6 implemented which again IMHO is terribly
important to move to the next generation web. We do not need more tiers
added before the IPV6 migration is complete.
Perhaps we should agree when the consortium fully moves to the Euro...naw..
Winged
- Next message: relic: "Re: Problem with disk upgrade of Windows XP Pro"
- Previous message: Kadaitcha Man: "Re: Problem with disk upgrade of Windows XP Pro"
- In reply to: tightwad: "Government Determined To Control For Monitoring The Internet"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
