Re: Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported

["Abraham Y. Chen" <aychen () avinta com>]

Hi, Christian:

0)    Allow me following your "towers of babel world" metaphor to tell a 
short story.

1)    In the ancient days, peasants labored under the shadow of the 
Tower, following the rules of and paid tax to the Lord living in the 
Tower. In return, they expected protection from the Lord against harms. 
(Sometime ago, I read an archaeological article reporting certain 
evidence that the Load somewhere in England during medieval time might 
have been expected to protect his peasants from any harm, including even 
paid his life for famine.)

2)    In the modern world, the peasants still live around the Tower 
following the rules, paying taxes and expecting protection from the 
Lord, now represented by the government agencies such as local police, 
FCC, FTC, DoD, DHS, etc.

3)    In the Internet era, the peasants roam everywhere around the 
cyberspace freely enjoying the Internet way. However, their wealth is 
now being siphoned out to the invisible Lords (the multi-national 
businesses with virtual presence in each and every Tower). However, 
little can be expected in return when perpetrators attack, because no 
Lord assumes the responsibility, nor any can be held responsible.

4)    EzIP proposes an overlay cyberspace with geographic flavor to 
restore the society infrastructure back to Pt. 2) above, while providing 
the daily services of Pt. 3). It essentially offers a parallel Internet 
for the peasants who can again expect protection from their local 
government who collects taxes, while without losing the benefits of the 
digital revolution.

5)    The two cyberspaces are expected to coexist and none-interfering 
to each other. Peasants have the freedom of choice by living in either 
or try both then decide.

The above is just a quick rough thought, far from polished. It is 
intended to be a preliminary framework so that we can hang some meat on 
it for starting meaningful discussions.

Regards,


Abe (2022-04-01 14:17)






On 2022-03-27 11:03, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
> On 27 March 2022 15:53:25 Brandon Butterworth <brandon () rd bbc co uk> 
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun Mar 27, 2022 at 12:31:48AM -0400, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
> > > EzIP proposes to deploy 240/4
> > > address based RANs, each tethering off the current Internet via one 
> > > IPv4
> > > public address.
> >
> > So each RAN has no possibility of redundant connections? Nobody
> > of scale would accept such a limitation. It also looks like an
> > opportunity for telcos/governments to partition their part
> > of the internet and impose whatever censorship they wish.
> >
> > > As such, the collection of RANs forms an overlay network
> > > layer wrapping around the current Internet core. Consequently, only the
> > > SPRs in the RAN need to be able to transport 240/4 addressed packets.
> >
> > You previously described this as like connecting CG-NATs together via a
> > VPN. I don't see why we'd want to add maintaining a global VPN to
> > already difficult peering relationships. It could be used to exlude non
> > EzIP club members.
> >
> > > This is why we talk about enabling new (but based on existing design)
> > > routers to use 240/4 netblock for serving as SPRs, but not perturbing
> > > any routers in the current Internet.
> >
> > As it's a CG-NAT variant why are you delaying yourself by requiring
> > new address space that will take a long time to become available? Why
> > not use the already allocated space for CG-NAT? Sure it's only a /10
> > but that's an already (probably too) large RAN.
> >
> > It also seems unfeasibly optimistic that if the work was done globally
> > to make 240/4 useable that they'd want to dedicate it to the as yet
> > undeployed EzIP. You might stand more chance if you gained some
> > critical mass using the existing available 100.64/10 & rfc1918 space,
> > and then those that find they need more in one RAN will make the case
> > for 240/4 when it becomes necessary for them. Is 240/4 special to
> > EzIP such that alternative numbers may not be used?
> >
> > > I would like to share one intriguing graphics (see URL below) that
> > > is almost perfect for depicting the EzIP deployment configuration.
> > > Consider the blue sphere as the earth or the current Internet core and
> > > the golden colored land as the RANs. By connecting each continent,
> > > country or all the way down to a Region to the earth via one IPv4
> > > address, we have the EzIP configuration. With this architecture, each
> > > RAN looks like a private network.
> >
> > That sounds an entirely undesirable goal for the internet.
> >
> > brandon
>
> It isn't the Internet. It's at best a very poorly connected spur gateway.
>
> Too many today don't remember the towers of Babel world prior to the 
> Internet. If they did they'd understand that building on this type of 
> idea is like burying yourself.... And any customers so unwise to get 
> involved
>
> C


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus