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

Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Fri, 05 May 2023 17:21 UTC

Return-Path: <tony1athome@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1D5CC1522C8 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 May 2023 10:21:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.096, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Af2vu2vKuuUM for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 May 2023 10:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38F98C1524C8 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 May 2023 10:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1aaff9c93a5so13924575ad.2 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 05 May 2023 10:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683307260; x=1685899260; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:sender:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8ySiGdkMZuAl1zrUvi3+0rAC2XoWy+JjObUctqq7pD8=; b=IaJvyej0ug6xHg5iCHPT5t2qGGkfGgxffJPnn8pqPxypNWivt6TiTggZ9iw3p+rqm0 +fHM5w2WqDZLyqmecCI0q+zTojqp/8GKIn9i1AnXHZpELxOJtbZ1X19ZLQCeS6zHu6Ip 36BvKZOEqEjn+0hJOVUaayBBRBzhsuy3bLBS6jQWuR49Qc/PUewFmakVVWWoJeHcpBDS s5D9OoYqaUyvQ4kKJHQ7cmufqY4F71jEfVIa+kHD6SxYQ/jnVg7W1jRrBzuewsToWn09 sCIqv9B8RBaICyn9uUEwslF6uVzk/lOdK7EcXtuO87AJ7ISARePqhblq7jYFq/cCN4GZ o+kQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683307260; x=1685899260; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:sender:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8ySiGdkMZuAl1zrUvi3+0rAC2XoWy+JjObUctqq7pD8=; b=DVJm5aw6MYdHU0TqoO++BSxde6u6hgVeBLKsZd5h63dsEk+b/butkICxTHJNGWv5eb WyrSp9BOIJVpw4b+wzqcZ2fGVJHmYNwPuHAYYtZkOi+bUffXU3LCKl6dBtI9c/JT+LA5 45gs8nYEScLxoR1vS2206qPOkIAsCJgDb7PaEhc8CtKulD8PCovTdZsh/DbJSudmCI73 G83RYrsu59TmuFEszfFA6uUZEDd6Wr5lM/+cFV4mfpRZVFGm4luks9GJgHH4s5jUTWf0 sSJ2HFiIEEnvS2PAs3ft/i+Lg3EVBcRieIsZVv4t23N7V/EZlAKd+o924YVj3dxE8lIs OWTA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwYR1RUg7NZG48QmIItQc0QpXUm5NaGaJwQ/yrtvtzFiBgh+PXz ceZKS7EIPl5CN4U4mvP0pMs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6t8yTSGrwrsRlAyGlGQzcBE4HbqRsV+OAhP4frxCp2yyCs5P7S1Ofr/2qC9dt3k82bExRCcQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d483:b0:1a2:9051:f09e with SMTP id c3-20020a170902d48300b001a29051f09emr2272477plg.21.1683307260299; Fri, 05 May 2023 10:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-73-231-0-74.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.231.0.74]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h12-20020a170902748c00b001a9581d3ef5sm2033639pll.97.2023.05.05.10.20.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 05 May 2023 10:20:59 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.500.231\))
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <8af99305-de33-911a-6fd0-d9bd5f0c2294@huitema.net>
Date: Fri, 05 May 2023 10:20:48 -0700
Cc: Arnaud Taddei <arnaud.taddei=40broadcom.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org, Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <285E3C91-FD39-4565-A8A7-C32569C05A22@tony.li>
References: <0f0da4833f81463b972558d972285595@boeing.com> <12045445-15D9-40F9-8306-4F3F98AB6BBE@apple.com> <911c3777-47e0-fad0-b0f9-7cbb81ba5a56@gmail.com> <4B5D79EE-062B-480D-AB58-E782476926BB@broadcom.com> <8af99305-de33-911a-6fd0-d9bd5f0c2294@huitema.net>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.500.231)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/Q22x7GBMc_IjOkfFGtoJ0znTmJA>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Splintering (fragmentation) vs Centralization vs Users
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 May 2023 17:21:05 -0000

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.

Regards,
Tony


> On May 5, 2023, at 9:47 AM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> wrote:
> 
> Brian asks: "Is there scope for IAB guidance to the IETF about what aspects of protocols, especially security protocols, might encourage or discourage either centralization or splintering?" I think there is, or more likely, that the IAB (and the IETF) have better find something.
> 
> Because the alternative position is, "Yeah, we design protocols that can just as well enable decentralization or foster monopolization, be good for society or be atrocious. Whether they do one or the other is someone else's problem." And that sounds very much like "Our job is to put the rockets up. Where they fall, that's another department."
> 
> -- Christian Huitema
> 
> On 5/4/2023 11:14 PM, Arnaud Taddei wrote:
>> Good write up Brian which reminds me 2 things + 1 addition
>> 1) DINRG had a similar discussion in IETF 116 on the theme "does a new technolog drive those tendendencies?” (This was about centralisation)
>> 2) We looked at IMAP for example and I reminded a discussion I had perhaps 25 years ago with Bill Yeager and he had a really good metaphor (and that was prior to “social networks” era), which then led me to another such discussion with Mark Crispin (rip)
>> The addition is that my brain is missing security in the picture as a "superposition state” (and I use Quantum Physics on purpose … not just in memory of our joint past at CERN!) in particular recognising the intrication of privacy and security.
>> Now I thought initially ‘because defence is creating its own twist here’ but then I realized that to a certain degree this is as well because each of the 3 constituencies of your picture are not just defenders, they are attackers too in multiple forms.
>> I am not sure (this early morning) if this is a primary level issue or if it is a secondary level issue in your proposal.
>> Hope this helps a little bit
>>> On 4 May 2023, at 23:39, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> After a little off-list discussion, I have a few more general thoughts
>>> on this topic. (I won't identify the other person in that discussion,
>>> to respect their privacy.)
>>> 
>>> I mentioned that some security technology that we develop could be
>>> "dual use", e.g. useful both for privacy and useful for walled gardens.
>>> So perhaps we should be careful when evaluating new ideas that they
>>> cannot be used for undesirable purposes as well as the intended purpose.
>>> If we consider that both excessive centralization and excessive
>>> splintering (a.k.a. fragmentation) are bad things, does a new technology
>>> drive those tendendencies? Could we design it differently to avoid
>>> this?
>>> 
>>> Is there scope for IAB guidance to the IETF about what aspects of
>>> protocols, especially security protocols, might encourage or discourage
>>> either centralization or splintering?
>>> 
>>> That could be a productive use of the IAB's resources where we might
>>> have some impact. Discussion of wider societal, commercial and
>>> political issues in the IAB and IETF would get nowhere, and in my
>>> opinion is best left to ISOC.
>>> 
>>> There's very clearly a 3-way tussle, and that makes all discussion
>>> difficult, especially since each national government has different
>>> goals. ASCII art:
>>> 
>>>                Users
>>>           (freedom of action,
>>>                privacy)
>>>                /    \
>>>               /      \
>>>              /        \
>>>      National          Global
>>>   governments -------- businesses
>>>   (defend or          (capture &
>>>    control             exploit
>>>    citizens &          customers)
>>>    economy)
>>> 
>>> Regards
>>>   Brian Carpenter
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Architecture-discuss mailing list
>>> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
>>> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss&source=gmail-imap&ust=1683841175000000&usg=AOvVaw3DIB56mqn7ZU0a53yuDvJE
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture-discuss mailing list
>> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss