At 22:35 22/08/2012, Carl Smith wrote:
>Thanks Avri,
>
>This will work with V6, But would dramatically change the status quo.
>There would be radical changes for commercial aspects to the Net.
>
>Lou

There will be radical changes for commercial aspects of the Net the 
day we might insure the Civil Society, the Governements, the Users 
and the International organizations understand how the DNS works.

That day,

1. the ICANN's bluff will be called off.
2. the Internet will be quite more "neutral" because more forces will 
be involved, IUsers and Civil Society to begin with.
3. innovation will be able to take-off, specially in the direction of 
what is called CCN (i.e. content centric networking), i.e. access to 
remote files in the network cloud on the basis of their content, even 
crypted one (consider an open wikipedia: this is wiki 3.0).

For those who joined our IUsers list at the IETF ([log in to unmask]), 
they know we started today investigating on a "dangerous project": a 
"President Internet Book", i.e. a way to explain the whole digital 
ecosystem, the Internet is a part of for everyone to understand and 
share the same specifications and user guide. This work is a long 
term work and we need many people to share into it, of every 
specialisation because "2.0" is a network centric bridge to something 
societaly really new: the people centric society decided by the WSIS.

The idea behind it is NOT to tell an embellished history of the US 
internet once more but what future "3.0" is to be, so it may be 
agreed upon, pertinently discussed, the Internet+ prototyped, network 
services tested. In cooperation with the ITU which permitted "1.0" 
and IETF which permitted "2.0" and throughout much work and 
development to come and explanations that even Presidents may understand.

I think this is now possible because we are "mid-way": we learned, 
gained experience, developped tools, met legal and societal issues, 
tried a global governance, made mistakes and obtained successes and 
most of all I do not think we made too many blocking mistakes and we 
discovered with the IDNA2008 consensus that the Internet architecture 
was much more resilient than expected, would we read RFCs appropriately.

jfc

http://iucg.org Internet Users Contributing Group
[log in to unmask] - to learn, understand and propose


>On 8/22/2012 5:51 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>On 22 Aug 2012, at 10:34, Andrei Barburas wrote:
>>
>>>Two or more domain names can share the same IP address and not 
>>>every domain/site has a unique IP address. As for the Internet 
>>>working without the DNS, it is true when you refer to IPv6, not IPv4.
>>
>>the Internet worked before DNS and I expect it would work without 
>>it, thought there would need to be some set of mechanisms for 
>>turning structured human intelligible names into the 
>>structured  digit based names commonly referred to as numbers (aka addresses).
>>
>>it is true as we still don't know how to route on urls, we still 
>>need a mechanism to translate between the names we humans are 
>>comfortable with and the names that the software is designed for.
>>
>>not sure why this is not the case for IPv6 as well.
>>
>>avri
>>