A Practical Navigator for the Internet Economy

New Peer-to-Peer Technologies Impact Internet

Maturation of Peer-to-Peer in Computing Spreads to Internet as Customer Control at Network Edges

New Non DNS Dependent and Customer Defined Architectures Enabled,

pp. 1-5

Find out how to order single copy ($125) or group license ($250) for just THIS issue.

An "Overview" by Gordon Cook

In working with Ed Gerck on the publication of his paper on trust, we especially liked the idea that the adoption both of the concept of trust as defined by Gerck and its related tools might enable users to define their own networks and connections, allowing them to build their own communities of interest. Even better it seemed was the promise that such communities, once defined, could then find each other on the Internet. For some in the "peer-to-peer" field, this is nothing less than the holy grail of peer-to-peer networking.

Since publishing the article, we realized that one of the attractions of Gerck's work was that it can be seen as an example of a new realm of peer-to-peer (P2P) applications. We expect to explore this realm in future issues.

To summarize a few examples: The coming together of internet telephony protocols via SIP proxy servers and related tools that we wrote about in our November 2001 issue is an example of these "peer-to-peer" capabilities. CANARIE implementation of OBGP fits the same pattern. In an economic and policy context, P2P concepts are particularly relevant to the building of customer-owned networks that don't rely on monopoly incumbent carriers. Ca*Net 4 which was funded by the Canadian government at a level of $110 million Canadian dollars on December 10, 2001 will bring peer-to-peer management of network resources directly to its end users. "Peer-to-peer" looks to be an important tool in helping users define on their own terms their own use of TCP/IP based Internets.

Speed Alone Must Not Define Broadband Technology Issues in Policy Making,

pp. 6-7

Patricia Fusco writes about FCC Chairman Powell: "broadband is a non-analog communication system that is IP-friendly, always connected, and eternally scalable. Eureka! For Powell's FCC, broadband is a premise, not a practice-a theory, not a technology. Egads, what a vexing muddle. How do you regulate conjecture?"

Francois Menard replies: Broadband cannot only be defined in terms of speed. I know of a company that has begun to use the following definition of broadband in its feasibility study reports:

"Broadband shall be defined as the capacity of end-users to replace transmission equipment connected to the network, as frequently as their needs changes and at the same pace as the progress of technology".

In other words, if you don't have these rights, you only have high-speed access. The speed that you get will be whatever speed the carrier decides to grant you. With that carrier's control of the physical facility are likely to come other limitations such as end-users being prevented from implementing end-to-end integrated services.

Dreams of IPv6 Continue

But Investment in v4 Infrastructure and Unresolved Routing Issues Continue to Thwart Deployment -- Meanwhile IETF Routing Director Resigns

More Static Public Internet May Push Innovation into Efforts Like Peer-to-Peer,

pp. 8 - 15

IPv6 is still seen as a way to avoid reliance on NAT and enable increased availability for protocols designed to take advantage of the nets end-to-end architecture. Yet the realization is growing that any sizable commercial transition will never take place until a transition to multi-homing under IPv6 is developed.

We republish a discussion from the IETF list that shows while pressure for v6 is growing, the cost of deployment remains high and roll out is likely to be slow.

Passive Optical Networks as a Means of Getting Affordable Fiber to the Home

Important but Troublesome Topic Debated in Ethernet in the First Mile Protocol Development Mail List,

pp. 16 - 23

PON [Passive Optical Network] is a means of sharing fiber to the home so that the installers don't have to run a strand to every house all the way back to an exchange point or a telco CO or a CATV head end. If you are going to bring Ethernet in the first mile technology to homes via fiber, according to some telcos, PON is the only way it will make economic sense. However, other players don't agree. Deployments of active architectures and Point-to-Point architectures for fiber-to-the-home are also occurring. We republish a discussion of ideas about the development of PON from the EFM list

Anatomy of a Small Revolution


Dave Hughes,

pp. 24 - 35

In time of national crisis and the apparent collapse of much of the early Internet dream, it seemed useful to talk with a man who single handedly had been able to "make a difference."

Dave Hughes tells in two parts (the conclusion will run in our March issue) the story of how he became a telecom community activist in Colorado Springs 25 years ago. He brought reforms first as a futurist in Army Green to Fort Carson in 1971-73. When General Rogers asked Hughes to accompany him to Washington and abroad, Hughes said: "Bernie, Washington has become a great soggy log floating down the Potomac, with a millions ants on it thinking they are steering it. Been there, done that. Anything worth value in THIS country, starts at the bottom, the grass roots of America. By the time it gets to Washington, in a FUTURE SHOCK - rapidly changing - society, its already obsolete.

No thanks, I am going to retire in my own city, and follow Voltaire's Candide's advice - 'Cultivate your own Garden.' Take a 'neighborhood on' as my Garden, use a microprocessor as a hoe, a modem as my wheelbarrow, and if I can make my Neighborhood work, maybe help greater Colorado Springs next, possibly Denver. But I won't live long enough to do Washington over, besides who cares?"

ICANN, Ignoring California Statute, Refuses to Show Its North American at Large Director its Books

Opportunity for Independent Review of Finances Lost,

pp. 36 ­ 40

Editor's Introduction: Karl Auerbach whose ICANN at Large Director's term is more than half over has now come squarely up against ICANN's attitude towards it's own directors and to the laws under which it is chartered. ICANN staff do what they want and defy the corporation's own Directors to stop them. Auerbach's experience should make it very clear to anyone contemplating any Directorial relationship with ICANN that those running this organization want only figureheads who will serve as window dressing for an organization that purports to serve the Internet while in reality it serves only the inner circle of corporate interests who set up the ICANN shell in the first place. ICANN's nature is becoming much more clear to those who pay attention to it. Folk who have studied it closely like Michael Froomkin, Milton Mueller and Larry Lessig see it for what it is. ICANN is an effort by a relatively small number of players within the information technology industry to use for their own advantage a US Commerce Department granted charter that calls on ICANN to act in the interest of all segments of the Internet community.

Our article concludes with the reasons why ICANN will likely get away with thumbing its nose at California state law.

Article and Discussion Highlights,

pp. 40 - 46

Executive Summary,

pp. 46-48