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

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

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