Re: [arch-d] possible new IAB programme on Internet resilience

Guntur Wiseno Putra <> Fri, 03 January 2020 02:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FAB81200BA for <>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 18:10:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.998
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_AFFORDABLE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nO9iLva5oJdi for <>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 18:10:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A131120058 for <>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 18:10:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id b18so37525437otp.0 for <>; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 18:10:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bg2aaGBlf+lmp9DHwN5sXIHSXKGSYxvFUHRxx3hcM1I=; b=oA7Kgh4wcEHzaBa38tBm/c/u3ZHNec7r4Wuv5dnVQed0oaOlWfE0iDBTdQrHbfdqeC kGvSdld9rhVNyBCFzOXa9Vou3zIA726prDbMgcxhZbOKj+cUncmccv01IKM3vvvHywav hhKE2PiiefQHUOAxNXOK50jff0J+sJyD/EZh8Dhw+2TUIpRYSqmzWbeZR2edlhXi4Rd3 vKmOqMJACQPpBmavpIlwSp3lR/+ioTYzdtrqv1frqyLAuYAZvdO3XgDH6NkFoTgnNWSC ovK4BsRWlzPgWyRVg3exBA+Szy76znR0o8vJg6PaM7B3tp29d9UCUDW+eTEDdvjZf+Qh j7Ew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bg2aaGBlf+lmp9DHwN5sXIHSXKGSYxvFUHRxx3hcM1I=; b=GlDLQs3WWjxV9NqMr1pXBa0G/u1V3WfLc6fikWvZgbvNYhwD77fpEGWD3s7ahznGqf XDQoCkt5eVnn1inxDxlQRiiWB6f9w0LQRH6Pl/BX4Btc/sLxzmqF0GsZV5BfxLMfqRH9 v2fTiEdh+Zof6gvzl/1ZFpbmeaTVjf8P9vtvxrNrpuodj6N8NqJfLkIa56fuLSytJEx4 4mAhS6D4vRZd3hbpOyw0gng9YrCcvDzNuWpuMgJa53UOOEJkEqAtfHxK+V5fCO6/YhIP sCMYYyHTzlT4heVTtGkhJ97HvmciZ1GKUBuw+2lTW51ETTGt0y34s6FWNraqXqh2MUzj Vlnw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVFO840jFHrLPTjGXIJmIFrViVKJ+5oS3WzEBbAQ+tJBiaWhEQN sJzbqzyC0dHoQUB+p5+L3YOWVQqiWV4niF2Dx/M=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzedOe6DzBMNJg9E0RA4PbA4oFZtsNg1WKAOIR2GHQnbnZswfmawvEBDs52gXbbTeRvypozxG/MYsXsZGTDrCA=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:10a:: with SMTP id i10mr91289447otp.365.1578017436916; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 18:10:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1155:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 18:10:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
From: Guntur Wiseno Putra <>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2020 09:10:36 +0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Jeff Tantsura <>
Cc: Dan York <>, "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c6e085059b32d071"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] possible new IAB programme on Internet resilience
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2020 02:10:40 -0000

Dear architecture-discuss,

"Communication" may be understood as "society" and Internet is about
networks of human communications...

If it matters --and perhaps others: (1) UN's inititives for Sustainable
Development Goals by supports of ICTs --including Internet & (2)
engineering Internet's (architectural) resiliency (*), one closed enough in
J. Hillier's "Strategic Navigation: a Multiplanar Methodology for Strategic
Spatial Planning" I mentioned above is "sustainability" referring to
longer-term plans.

"Multiplanar theory offers the potential for multiple plans (Hillier 2007,
2011) :

– several (or one collectively preferred) trajectories or “visions” of the
longer-term future, including concepts towards which human and non-human
actants “desire” to navigate, such as sustainability (Deleuze and
Guattari’s planes of immanence) ;

– shorter-term, location-specific detailed plans and projects with
collaboratively determined tangible goals, for example, for city centre
regeneration, provision of affordable housing and so on (Deleuze and
Guattari’s planes of organisation)".
(*) Apologize: I rendering "resilience" without accessing Stephen's
document directly at github --there was an icon feature I could not access
by clicking (the triple lines in up-right corner) and I wandered if there
were guidances to use the website...

Guntur Wiseno Putra

Pada Kamis, 02 Januari 2020, Jeff Tantsura <>

> While I share Lucy’ points, wrt connectivity of Outpost/similar platforms
> back to the centralized DC‘s - noone is reinventing the wheel(there’s no
> value), outer encap is IP,  do we really care what’s inside?
> Regards,
> Jeff
> On Jan 1, 2020, at 12:11, Dan York <> wrote:
>  Brian,
> On Jan 1, 2020, at 2:12 PM, Brian E Carpenter <>
> wrote:
> Cherry-picking from your interesing message:
> What if there winds up being a lack of diversity of paths through the
> “open” and “public” Internet? What if increasingly traffic winds up
> traveling through these proprietary global networks (to which you need to
> pay to connect and through that gain permission to send traffic - and only
> to that company’s platforms)?
> Is this really new, from a technical viewpoint?
> I’m not sure. I haven’t yet worked enough personally with these newer
> networks to be able to fully answer that question.  My knowledge comes from
> reading articles, going through tutorials, listening to talks / podcasts,
> and experimenting to the degree I can. But I don’t operate a network or
> data center where I could join in to one (or more) of them… so I have to
> defer to those who have that kind of more direct experience.
> It reminds me very much of the early 1990s, when policy based BGP4 routing
> first became a thing, and acceptable use policies were applied by NSFNET,
> ESNET, and their equivalents in Europe and Asia. That was all about money,
> of course, except that it was public money.
> Interesting thought. I guess the difference I could see was that in those
> days the networks were all using the same open standards-based protocols,
> even with AUP’s being applied. They were all weaving together a common
> network fabric, from what I saw as a network user at that time.
> With these newer private networks, they may - or may not - be using the
> same protocols that the public Internet is using. You may or may not know.
> (And from a purely operational point-of-view, you may not care… a main
> reason for using the private network is to have low-latency connectivity to
> applications or content.)
> In at least one of the cases (Amazon Outposts), my understanding is that
> the company comes and installs hardware in your data center that then
> connects your network back to Amazon’s AWS network. Is it all running open
> Internet protocols? Or are there proprietary protocols (or “extensions”)
> that are making the connectivity that much faster/better?  (And I honestly
> do not know.)  Do you only have connectivity to their platform(s)? Or do
> you have wider connectivity?
> To me, this is part of the question - do these newer, global, private
> networks *increase* the overall resilience of the open, public Internet? Or
> do they *decrease* the overall resilience of the open, public Internet? Or
> do they not really have any effect? Or is it too soon to tell?
> Interesting times,
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list