Researchers explore scrapping Internet

although i want to believe there is nothing that can be done to shut down this net, i have to consider how the market has advanced so far.

everyone was set up for cable internet from the hop. yet we got stuck with the 56k until "they" decided we were ready for faster. faster has been developed since the 70's so why did we have to wait until 98' or whenever they introduced it?

cant they lay fibre to every home on this net to improve bandwidth and all that jaz? why a new net?

this doesnt even make any sense, im going to stop worring about this now.

um-gazz. Just reading the pdf. I think the key phrases I found were;
"it should support small sensors and ad-hoc networks, as well as RFID."
RFID=Verichip=666 (my opinion). My guess is you won't be able to access the new internet without some form of RFID card or implant. Since the new internet will network all retail and wholesale operations, under the guise of tax control, one will not be able to buy or sell without RFID verification. (see Revelation) The system is in place, they just need to tighten the noose a bit.
Also;
"Support anonymity where prudent, and accountability where necessary."

Perfect. Who's in charge of what's prudent. Our government? They can't even account for their emails, let alone something as important as the right to anonymity.
And shame on Standford, for being the government stool pigeon, chasing the almighty buck.
The time is near. We will have to pick up the sword of truth, and fight for our God given rights.

There's no need to rebuild the internet, All that's needed is to implement IPv6 asap rather than the very slow progress at present. With IPv6 it would be possible to identify the source of all data by the unique hardware (MAC) address and thus bye bye spammers, junk email, viruses (eventually). There's no point in doing something bad if it has your hardware id splattered all over it!

Now here's something for the conspiracy theorists. IPv6 allows for 64bit network/subnet addressing and 64bit hardware(MAC) addressing. The MAC address is sufficient for several billion unique devices for every person on this planet...with room to spare. So why have that huge additional 64 bit network addressing? For example you could have a network address for every solar system in every galaxy of the universe. Oh and they are just about to launch a satellite with a router onboard.....hmmmm go for it alien/ufo conspiritors!

Originally posted by stompk
um-gazz. Just reading the pdf. I think the key phrases I found were;
"it should support small sensors and ad-hoc networks, as well as RFID."
"Support anonymity where prudent, and accountability where necessary."

Revealing, and interesting.

For anyone who wants to download the research teams PDF file:

cleanslate.stanford.edu...

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
The internet cannot be shut down. How would one go about shutting it down?

Not that hard I´m afraid. Just isolate the main InterNIC DNS servers.

Remember the .org attack a few months back? Anyone with some power can shut large portions if not all the net down within hours.

Right for a kick off stopping the DNS servers okay will stop the use of .org etc but whats to stop people just using the IP address for the server hosting a web site. After all a Domain name is a pointer that directs a user when entered to the unique IP address.

The Internet cannot be shut down... and in this thread I feel it is important to establish the difference between the web and the Internet.

The internet is "networked" computers across the world mainly used within the business environment.

The Web is webpages that use Hyperlinks and are linked to other websites, granted that hyperlinked addresses are pointed towards domain name but a bit of tinkering can change the hyperlink location to the IP address with the .html/.php resource.

To shut the Internet/Web down would mean shutting every server offline and/or severing everylink that is available throughout the web.

Hmmm sounds hard, yep impossible.

I think that creating a new more secure internet seperatly is possible, using different protocols other than HTTP and other networking standards than the ISO standard model would allow a internet that could be unaccessible from the latter.

The Internet could end up branching in different directions such as an Official Internet/web and an Underground Internet/Web. Although the seperation of communication methodology could damage aspects of Internet business activity such as ECommerce.

This is the most absurd and stupid idea to come out yet.

Okay America controls the backbone servers and could possibly do it but I think integration into the current system is more likely since it is more feasible. If any government US or otherwise attempted to shut the internet down for what ever reasons then they would suffer multi national back lash from the rest of the world and it would do them no favours other than to be seen as the control freaks they really are. Yes the internet does have it's major issues and some I would gladly like to see the back of and some of it is very sick but for the most part the net is a place of freedom of information and that should never change.

As for any one government controlling us all through it that's not going to work there are 100,000's of PC's on here at anyone time do you really think every country is going to send people round to monitor what you do on the internet 2 I really think not it would be a nightmare. I suspect they may integrate it into the current system but as for shutting the net down well that's not workable and it would cause a massive back lash and may even give people a much needed wake up call to the fact that something else much more sinister is in control of all governments and world leaders.

That's just my take on it. What stupid idea will they think of next?

Im just trying to work out the backbone servers you mean..

DNS servers?
Search engines?
ummmm the NASA website?

At the end of the day if the government do shut servers down... whats stopping people from picking up Apache and hosting a website from there own computers.

Can you imagine the bombs the "l337" boys will begin dropping if something like that was to take place. I believe you would have nerd terrorism if the internet was ever "scrapped."

Originally posted by malcr
Now here's something for the conspiracy theorists. IPv6 allows for 64bit network/subnet addressing and 64bit hardware(MAC) addressing. The MAC address is sufficient for several billion unique devices for every person on this planet...with room to spare. So why have that huge additional 64 bit network addressing? For example you could have a network address for every solar system in every galaxy of the universe. Oh and they are just about to launch a satellite with a router onboard.....hmmmm go for it alien/ufo conspiritors!

Why so many addresses? So the same doesn't happen with IPv4 -- that we could eventually run out of addresses.

Why so many? Because in the future probably ALL devices will have some sort of connectivity.

We already have Internet capable refrigerators, it's not too much of a stretch to think that eventually all devices will have internet/networking capabilities.

Refrigerators, microwaves, TV sets, cars, etc.

Originally posted by Astras
The internet is "networked" computers across the world mainly used within the business environment.

To shut the Internet/Web down would mean shutting every server offline and/or severing everylink that is available throughout the web.

Actually you don't have to shut down every server. If they change or shut down the routers, what does it matter if you have your computer/server on, if the information doesn't get routed to your network/computers?

When there's an attack, like a DDoS, administrators can blackhole the IP address, so it doesn't get routed anywhere and mitigates the attack.

What if administrators and companies would blackhole all IPv4/IPv6/"old Internet" traffic?

And what if the ISPs decide to change to this new internet? All their customers will be forced to use it.

Why do people keep yelling about "they can't shut down the Internet without shutting down servers and backbones!@#" yeesh...

I used Telenet as an example in my first post on page one. Telenet preceded the Internet we know today. Thousands and thousands of companies, colleges, and individual users were on Telenet, as well as dozens of other networks. Telenet was a PAD (Packet Assembler/Disassembler) based network, meaning you connected to your local Telenet PAD, usually via dialup, and then connected to whatever remote PAD you wanted. For example, NASA's PAD was "321 321".

Then came TCP/IP based networks, which rapidly gained favor. They were more robust, fault tolerant, and allowed far more complex network topologies.

Slowly systems and users were migrated from the aging Telenet to what became known as the Internet. Most of them didn't really notice much difference. Instead of connecting to a PAD, you connected to an IP via Telnet. Not until things like Gopher and Usenet started circulating was the dramatic impact of this migration witnessed. Shortly after the first graphical browsers were produced, mainly to make viewing porn easier. Porn on Usenet had limited practicality.

These same steps will be taken again, some already have been. IPv6 is needed. But most systems on the network today, while they may technically be compatible with the protocol, really can not be adapted smoothly. Trying to convert the existing IPv4 based Internet to an IPv6 base just smacks of major overtime expenses from conflicts and downtime. The only solution is to develop the IPv6 network independently, just like the Internet was from Telenet, and then start moving systems over.

If done right over a long enough period of time, most people won't even notice.

Originally posted by danx
Actually you don't have to shut down every server. If they change or shut down the routers, what does it matter if you have your computer/server on, if the information doesn't get routed to your network/computers?

What if administrators and companies would blackhole all IPv4/IPv6/"old Internet" traffic?

Got to agree with you here.

I also posted earlier that who controls the wires also has a similar control. If ATT and the others get inline with the gov or whoever, what is a person to do? Satellite and tower owners could also be controlled. Thousands of computers are useless without the connectivity.

It's not about IP address and other high tech jardon. A dumb ass like me can tell you that. It's about control. Don't underestimate what is possible. Look at what is possible, and estimate the outcome. In the wrong hands, this could be some scary stuff. How do we stop this?

Yea I get your point without ISP's using exchanges to route data the internet could I guess be shut down. Apart from:

WAN's/Man's using leased lines.

But yes long distance communication could be shut down.

Originally posted by AbuMusaab
Can you imagine the bombs the "l337" boys will begin dropping if something like that was to take place. I believe you would have nerd terrorism if the internet was ever "scrapped."

ROFLMFAO!!!!

i can picture it now... Huge glasses, duct taped in the middle, with a pocket protector, and a blue ink stained button up shirt Hunch backed from all the hours bent over the keyboard... "Terrorist Leader and Mastermind Bill Gates was cornered and assassinated in his Seattle compound. His years of slowing your computers with delayed internet connections are over.By not allowing the government his source code he risked all of our lives. President Barbara Bush Slurred " Wee's gotttss the bastag... noww back tooo yer *hick* porn-a-gra-fa america...*whispers drunkenly before the feed ends* did i do good daddy?*hick*"


oh god I think I'm gonna cry... I may have peed a little.



Coven
*woot I'm posting up a storm tonight*

IPV6 has been underdevelopment since it was first proposed in 1994. It is not an entirely new technology, it is the next generation internet.

Currently, there are a possible 4.3 billion addresses available for IP's. I'm surprised we haven't already run out of usable addresses. Using a 64-bit address increases that number dramatically.

Growth is the main thrust behind IPV6. Read this:

Growth is the basic issue which caused there to be a need for a next generation IP. If anything is to be learned from our experience with IPv4 it is that the addressing and routing must be capable of handling reasonable scenarios of future growth. It is important that we have an understanding of the past growth and where the future growth will come from.

Currently IPv4 serves what could be called the computer market. The computer market has been the driver of the growth of the Internet. It comprises the current Internet and countless other smaller internets which are not connected to the Internet. Its focus is to connect computers together in the large business, government, and university education markets. This market has been growing at an exponential rate. One measure of this is that the number of networks in current Internet (40,073 as of 10/4/94) is doubling approximately every 12 months. The computers which are used at the endpoints of internet communications range from PC's to Supercomputers. Most are attached to Local Area Networks (LANs) and the vast majority are not mobile.

The next phase of growth will probably not be driven by the computer market. While the computer market will continue to grow at significant rates due to expansion into other areas such as schools (elementary through high school) and small businesses, it is doubtful it will continue to grow at an exponential rate. What is likely to happen is that other kinds of markets will develop. These markets will fall into several areas. They all have the characteristic that they are extremely large. They also bring with them a new set of requirements which were not as evident in the early stages of IPv4 deployment. The new markets are also likely to happen in parallel with one another. It may turn out that we will look back on the last ten years of Internet growth as the time when the Internet was small and only doubling every year. The challenge for an IPng is to provide a solution which solves todays problems and is attractive in these emerging markets.

Nomadic personal computing devices seem certain to become ubiquitous as their prices drop and their capabilities increase. A key capability is that they will be networked. Unlike the majority of todays networked computers they will support a variety of types of network attachments. When disconnected they will use RF wireless networks, when used in networked facilities they will use infrared attachment, and when docked they will use physical wires. This makes them an ideal candidate for internetworking technology as they will need a common protocol which can work over a variety of physical networks. These types of devices will become consumer devices and will replace the current generation of cellular phones, pagers, and personal digital assistants. In addition to the obvious requirement of an internet protocol which can support large scale routing and addressing, they will require an internet protocol which imposes a low overhead and supports auto configuration and mobility as a basic element. The nature of nomadic computing requires an internet protocol to have built in authentication and confidentiality. It also goes without saying that these devices will need to communicate with the current generation of computers. The requirement for low overhead comes from the wireless media. Unlike LAN's which will be very high speed, the wireless media will be several orders of magnitude slower due to constraints on available frequencies, spectrum allocation, error rates, and power consumption.
playground.sun.com...

So, IPng is necessary, if we want to grow and develop our technology. It is not a gov't conspiracy that cropped up overnight. It is necessary and prudent planning - the way things should be done.

[edit on 29-4-2007 by jsobecky]

Ya know jsobecky, that was probably one of the best posts I've seen you make. It took the point home, which is something that even I missed when reading this for the first time. As a computer scientist, that actually scares me, as I should have seen that before most anyone else. Anyway, it IS true, everything that you've said about IPv6.

Only problem for those that are afraid of change is that they're afraid of more government oversight against our wishes. In light of recent events though, can you really blame people for being a little apprehensive of this new technology, knowing that those at the top are most likely just going to go ahead and abuse it, whether we like it or not?

TheBorg

What a bunch of feeble-minded self-proclaimed "experts". Yeah, sure, they could set up a replacement, but to outright replace the Internet is impossible since the infrastructure required to run it is not beyond the reach of a well-educated system. If the Internet "officially" goes down, pirate servers could easily be established.