Re: [arch-d] Splintering (fragmentation) vs Centralization vs Users

[Henning Schulzrinne <[e-mail]>]

I agree that neither technical nor legal solutions will likely solve the
underlying problem completely or for all time. But that's the nature of
most non-trivial problems other than math assignments. I'm in the "aim for
incremental improvements compared to the status quo" party.

Henning

On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 4:15 PM Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Thanks, Henning, interesting examples!
>
> On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 02:48:18PM -0400, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> > Antitrust actions in the technology space have involved interoperability
> > and protocols. Three examples:
> >
> > (1) The Microsoft 2001 settlement: "On November 2, 2001, the DOJ reached
> an
> > agreement with Microsoft to settle the case. The proposed settlement
> > required Microsoft to *share its application programming interfaces with
> > third-party companies a*nd appoint a panel of three people who would have
> > full access to Microsoft's systems, records, and source code for five
> years
> > in order to ensure compliance." (Wikipedia)
>
> That seems to have been an effort in futility given how the efforts for
> Wine have
> shown that it continues to an almost impossible task of reverse
> engineering trying to build
> a Microsoft free runtime for Applications written for Windows in general.
> Then again,
> for a subset of applications, namely games, Valve seems to have been able
> to produce some good
> results. But i wonder if/how that settlement had any impact on that
> history...
>
> > (2) The Carterphone and similar decisions to spur CPE competition led to
> > mandatory interoperability and compatibility rules codified in Part 68 (
> > part68.org) of 47 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations).
>
> And now with streaming services we do have complete vertical
> walled-gardens into the
> (software) user application. After we had so many good experience with
> such "CPE"
> standard interfaces enabling a healthy competition of consumer CPE...
> (i made a jump from telephony to AV-media delivery here).
>
> > (3) After 1996, various unbundled network interface specifications were
> > created to allow competitive local exchange carriers to provide services
> > via the incumbent's network.
>
> But if i am not mistaken (not sure about USA side details, i experienced
> only the
> european side) only on copper local loops because they originated from
> earlier monopoly / public-funding. Coax/Cable local loop for example does
> not
> have these regulations. Hance the uncompetitiveness in current markets
> when it
> comes to coax.
>
> And then there was also unbundling regulations in i think many countries,
> aka:
> direct access to the raw copper. Which then was attempted to be
> circumvented by
> incumbents by promoting technologies that do not support that level of
> unbundling
> (vectoring).
>
> > I suspect there are many more. They were all downstream from laws, court
> > decisions, and regulatory actions.
>
> Indeed. I would have expected the browser unbundling to be on top of any
> list ;-)
>
> Cheers
>     Toerless
>
> > Henning
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 1:38 PM David R. Oran <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 5 May 2023, at 19:20, Tony Li wrote:
> > >
> > > Or, perhaps the IAB might want to consider whether or not economic
> > > organization is within the scope of the Internet architecture.
> > >
> > > Trying to control the economic forces of the entire planet through a
> > > series of RFCs seems quixotic, to say the least.
> > >
> > > Consolidation is part of the natural evolution of any market.
> Anti-trust
> > > legislation has been necessary to ensure consumer protection, as no
> other
> > > mechanisms have ever sufficed. Expecting that we can do better would
> seem
> > > like an act of hubris.
> > >
> > > 100% agree, although it might be worth pondering if the IAB could
> provide
> > > useful data and advice on the technical c consequences of postulated
> > > anti-trust law/policy or regulations.
> > >
> > > Possibly…
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Architecture-discuss mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> >
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_architecture-2Ddiscuss&d=DwIDaQ&c=009klHSCxuh5AI1vNQzSO0KGjl4nbi2Q0M1QLJX9BeE&r=an13D03Wkt_XCHvUEPar0wASef4dPIUx8hC4vYI0ROE&m=xAJZPS6clxZM3Zcu1fLN8_oS55Qc8911Z0135eqlE1qG3JS-C1sao3HyBHhPRY_y&s=K7H3AkqybqV8QeRMgUSvz6P56_Ap3702mKT3IiHa4qQ&e=
>
>
> --
> ---
> [e-mail]
>