Re: [arch-d] Musings on Internet evolution

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Vittorio,

> 1) centralization: in practice, much of the Internet is now decentralized technically but centralized economically and in terms of control into the hands of a few immense and unaccountable businesses; 

I certainly agree. As you say, this was not the focus of this article, but we do in fact mention consolidation in the challenges section. We and many others have written separately about the details of consolidation and centralisation. See for instance [1].

> 2) digital sovereignty: how can national governments restore some degree of non-negotiable control over the consequences that the Internet has on their societies, and fulfill their strategic need for the Internet to continue working even in the face of strained international relations.

That’s a very interesting topic, probably also worth more thought and writing.

Sovereignty is of course also complex, to start with because you on one hand want global reach and access to information, but you do want some local control. And when I say control, I don’t mean in the sense of controlling what the newspapers are allowed to write. Or that the one in charge should be the government. Rather, I mean for instance the ability to design your network as resilient, e.g., the ability to function when breakages occur elsewhere. Or the freedom to use local Internet infrastructure.

Jari

[1] Plugging in the recent ISOC-sponsored special issue of Journal of Cyber Policy here: https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rcyb20/current <https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rcyb20/current>