Re: [At-Large] [AfrICANN-discuss] Conférence ICANN : se protéger du phishing - Briefing session on Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks
It's really a nice initiative that ICANN is doing here. It's an interesting and very important subject. I recommend that ICANN repeat such capacity building actions for other issues related to our work. Khaled Anne-Rachel Inné a écrit :
Conférence ICANN : se protéger du phishing
Demain 26 août, l'ICANN organise une web conférence d'information sur les cas d'usurpation d'identité des bureaux d'enregistrement lors d'attaques de phishing.
De quoi s'agit-il ? Un pirate usurpe l'identité d'un registrar et envoie à un client de ce dernier un faux message au sujet de ses noms de domaine. Un avis d'expiration par exemple.
C'est ni plus, ni moins du phishing. Le pirate a créé un site frauduleux, similaire à celui du bureau d'enregistrement, pour inciter le client à accéder à son compte de gestion du domaine concerné et à révéler involontairement ses informations d'identification.
Cette technique surtout connue dans le milieu bancaire sera expliquée de manière préventive par Dave Piscitello de la division Sécurité et Stabilité du Comité Consultatif de l'ICANN, lors d'une web conférence (en français et en anglais) dont vous trouverez ici tous les détails.
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta... ENGLISH VERSION --
As announced at the last policy unit call on Monday, At-Large is going to have a briefing session with Dave Piscitello this coming week on Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks and other stakeholder communities are most welcome to join.
The SSAC Advisory on Registrar Impersonation has recently been translated into French and Spanish. They have not been uploaded to the SSAC website yet but we have it linked to the meeting page for the briefing session:
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta...
You can find the English, French and Spanish versions of the briefing invitations attached to this email for your use. If you have questions regarding this Briefing, please get in contact with somebody from the At-Large staff. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta... _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann
spanish version? sergio salinas porto Asociacion Internauta usuarios de Internet Republica Argentina ----- Original Message ----- From: "Khaled KOUBAA" <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> To: <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [At-Large] [AfrICANN-discuss] Conférence ICANN : se protéger du phishing - Briefing session on Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks It's really a nice initiative that ICANN is doing here. It's an interesting and very important subject. I recommend that ICANN repeat such capacity building actions for other issues related to our work. Khaled Anne-Rachel Inné a écrit :
Conférence ICANN : se protéger du phishing
Demain 26 août, l'ICANN organise une web conférence d'information sur les cas d'usurpation d'identité des bureaux d'enregistrement lors d'attaques de phishing.
De quoi s'agit-il ? Un pirate usurpe l'identité d'un registrar et envoie à un client de ce dernier un faux message au sujet de ses noms de domaine. Un avis d'expiration par exemple.
C'est ni plus, ni moins du phishing. Le pirate a créé un site frauduleux, similaire à celui du bureau d'enregistrement, pour inciter le client à accéder à son compte de gestion du domaine concerné et à révéler involontairement ses informations d'identification.
Cette technique surtout connue dans le milieu bancaire sera expliquée de manière préventive par Dave Piscitello de la division Sécurité et Stabilité du Comité Consultatif de l'ICANN, lors d'une web conférence (en français et en anglais) dont vous trouverez ici tous les détails.
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta... ENGLISH VERSION --
As announced at the last policy unit call on Monday, At-Large is going to have a briefing session with Dave Piscitello this coming week on Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks and other stakeholder communities are most welcome to join.
The SSAC Advisory on Registrar Impersonation has recently been translated into French and Spanish. They have not been uploaded to the SSAC website yet but we have it linked to the meeting page for the briefing session:
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta...
You can find the English, French and Spanish versions of the briefing invitations attached to this email for your use. If you have questions regarding this Briefing, please get in contact with somebody from the At-Large staff. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta... _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3385 (20080825) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
Estimados, La versión española de la invitación para esta reunión informativa fue enviada el día 19 de Agosto a las listas ALAC Announce y LACRALO Discuss. Véase por favor la página web de la reunión para revisar la presentación Powerpoint. También encontrará un enlace para escuchar la grabación del canal español de esta reunión. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta cks Dear all, The Spanish invitation to the briefing session was sent to the ALAC Announce and the LACRALO discuss lists on August 19th. You may find a link on the meeting page to listen to the Spanish audio recording and review the Powerpoint presentation of this meeting. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_atta cks Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff@atlarge.icann.org On 26/08/2008 15:34, "presidencia@internauta.org.ar" <presidencia@internauta.org.ar> wrote:
spanish version? sergio salinas porto Asociacion Internauta usuarios de Internet Republica Argentina
----- Original Message ----- From: "Khaled KOUBAA" <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> To: <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [At-Large] [AfrICANN-discuss] Conférence ICANN : se protéger du phishing - Briefing session on Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks
It's really a nice initiative that ICANN is doing here. It's an interesting and very important subject. I recommend that ICANN repeat such capacity building actions for other issues related to our work. Khaled
Anne-Rachel Inné a écrit :
Conférence ICANN : se protéger du phishing
Demain 26 août, l'ICANN organise une web conférence d'information sur les cas d'usurpation d'identité des bureaux d'enregistrement lors d'attaques de phishing.
De quoi s'agit-il ? Un pirate usurpe l'identité d'un registrar et envoie à un client de ce dernier un faux message au sujet de ses noms de domaine. Un avis d'expiration par exemple.
C'est ni plus, ni moins du phishing. Le pirate a créé un site frauduleux, similaire à celui du bureau d'enregistrement, pour inciter le client à accéder à son compte de gestion du domaine concerné et à révéler involontairement ses informations d'identification.
Cette technique surtout connue dans le milieu bancaire sera expliquée de manière préventive par Dave Piscitello de la division Sécurité et Stabilité du Comité Consultatif de l'ICANN, lors d'une web conférence (en français et en anglais) dont vous trouverez ici tous les détails.
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_attac>> ks
ENGLISH VERSION --
As announced at the last policy unit call on Monday, At-Large is going to have a briefing session with Dave Piscitello this coming week on Registrar Impersonation in Phishing Attacks and other stakeholder communities are most welcome to join.
The SSAC Advisory on Registrar Impersonation has recently been translated into French and Spanish. They have not been uploaded to the SSAC website yet but we have it linked to the meeting page for the briefing session:
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_attac>> ks
You can find the English, French and Spanish versions of the briefing invitations attached to this email for your use. If you have questions regarding this Briefing, please get in contact with somebody from the At-Large staff.
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrar_impersonation_in_phishing_attac>> ks
_______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN@afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... rg
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3385 (20080825) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... rg
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Re-engineering the Internet Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275 During a workshop at IFTF this week, I offered a forecast that there is at least a 50% probability of a fundamental re-engineering of the internet. Here's a bit of detail on this forecast and why I think this last week has been a critical turning point. Domain Name Services, DNS, like most of the Gen One Internet is a system built on cooperation. DNS servers have a narrow function to accurately translate domain names like ABC.com into numerical IP addresses, using an an up to date directory from other -trusted- DNS servers. The problem in simple terms is the length of the encryption key used by DNS servers to authenticate each other is short enough, that using modern high performance CPUs, it's possible to calculate a key to enable access to " poison" the DNS database on the server server with fraudulent routing information to misdirect any query for ABC.com to XXX.com. Dan Kaminsky, a 'white hat' hacker/security expert, has been telling Internet engineering leadership about this exploit for at least four years, and talking publicly, without revealing details, ( I heard him talk about this three years ago.) trying to provoke action. Finally, this last month Dan forced the issue by releasing the details into the wild along with short term patch using a longer encrypted number requiring a lot more computing power to decrypt. The Global Internet Engineering Security and Operations communities scrambled frantically, and deployed his patch in about three days, remaining open, vulnerable until then. Here's a video of the patch being deployed over several days:. Red are vulnerable domains, green are protected http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff5WBDOwueI As we know, we are entering an era where super computing power will be trivially available on local multi-core processors, and on scalable platforms in the cloud. So it is inevitable that the current DNS patch will fall to superior decryption computation. So in the meantime limited software patches will forestall the inevitable crisis, that will occur when the black hat hackers have adequate computing cycles to break the encryption. This week most Internet routing experts agreed that we need a fundamentally more Secure DNS system that will withstand a massive assault. We may need a totally new, more powerful generation of software, computers, servers, routers and switches are necessary along with new operations regimens, and training and education for IT personnel.
Khaled, This is indeed an interesting debate to have. As we know, most of the technology we use today was developed 25 years ago. Since then, there has been no change to the fundamentals, but rather patches designed from the start with backward compatibility. I think most people will agree that the DNS is broken beyond repair. The changes we have seen over the years were all enhancements to the previous standards. DNSSEC and IDNs come to mind. Both were designed to prevent incompatibilities with older software. Punycode is ugly. We would need an 8-bit clean naming system. DNSSEC keys make zone files unreadable by a normal human being. Note also that, over the last 15 years, most of the new developments in Internet standards were developed by the industry, and not by government funded academic research. The goal of the industry is make profits. Hence, technical choices are mostly short or medium term and tend to perpetuate existing economic models. The DNS hierarchical model has been generating an interesting cash flow for the registries and registrars (and ICANN, BTW). See for example the fact that domain names have largely prevented Verisign from going bankrupt. (http://www.domainpulse.com/2008/08/08/verisign-reports-68-million-loss-873-m... ) The net result is that there is no real work done to change the fundamental design to address new concerns. IDN ugliness and security are issues, but so is the "one TLD, one registry" model, which prevents real competition in the TLD space. More distributed models for naming systems, like CoDoNS (http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/beehive/codons.php ) remain purely academic, as there is no willingness from the industry to kill the cash cow. I focused here on the DNS, but similar considerations could apply to other parts of the Internet infrastructure, like traffic routing. This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time. From there, we could articulate work packages and deliverables. This discussion is very relevant to the ALAC also. While it is good that the ALAC provides comments on ICANN processes, it also needs to know where it wants the Internet to go, especially in the naming and numbering area, and articulate its positions according to its own vision. Patrick Vande Walle On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:35:52 +0200, Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> wrote:
Re-engineering the Internet
Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275
During a workshop at IFTF this week, I offered a forecast that there is at least a 50% probability of a fundamental re-engineering of the internet. Here's a bit of detail on this forecast and why I think this last week has been a critical turning point.
Domain Name Services, DNS, like most of the Gen One Internet is a system built on cooperation. DNS servers have a narrow function to accurately translate domain names like ABC.com into numerical IP addresses, using an an up to date directory from other -trusted- DNS servers. The problem in simple terms is the length of the encryption key used by DNS servers to authenticate each other is short enough, that using modern high performance CPUs, it's possible to calculate a key to enable access to " poison" the DNS database on the server server with fraudulent routing information to misdirect any query for ABC.com to XXX.com. Dan Kaminsky, a 'white hat' hacker/security expert, has been telling Internet engineering leadership about this exploit for at least four years, and talking publicly, without revealing details, ( I heard him talk about this three years ago.) trying to provoke action. Finally, this last month Dan forced the issue by releasing the details into the wild along with short term patch using a longer encrypted number requiring a lot more computing power to decrypt. The Global Internet Engineering Security and Operations communities scrambled frantically, and deployed his patch in about three days, remaining open, vulnerable until then. Here's a video of the patch being deployed over several days:. Red are vulnerable domains, green are protected http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff5WBDOwueI
As we know, we are entering an era where super computing power will be trivially available on local multi-core processors, and on scalable platforms in the cloud. So it is inevitable that the current DNS patch will fall to superior decryption computation. So in the meantime limited software patches will forestall the inevitable crisis, that will occur when the black hat hackers have adequate computing cycles to break the encryption. This week most Internet routing experts agreed that we need a fundamentally more Secure DNS system that will withstand a massive assault. We may need a totally new, more powerful generation of software, computers, servers, routers and switches are necessary along with new operations regimens, and training and education for IT personnel.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other). IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc. I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed. O. -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond a écrit :
Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other).
=> +1 to reinforce liaison between ICANN and Technical side ( IETF, W3C, IEEE, ... ).
IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc.
I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed.
O.
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know. Beau Brendler -----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:43 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other). IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc. I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed. O. -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********
Brendler, Beau wrote:
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.
Agreed. I would like to use the Cairo meeting to refine the topic for use at the Summit, the following meeting in Mexico. - Evan
Nice idea. Can we organize a meeting for the At-large about "ALAC and the Internet Future" during the next Cairo meeting ? It could be very interesting that ALAC draft a report on that. What do you thing ? Brendler, Beau a écrit :
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.
Beau Brendler
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:43 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet
Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other).
IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc.
I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed.
O. -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
*** Scanned
**************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED
**************************************************************************** ********
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
We have the summit coming up, as Evan has noted, so perhaps we could plan something to come out of that, on this topic. -----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Khaled KOUBAA Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 11:12 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet Nice idea. Can we organize a meeting for the At-large about "ALAC and the Internet Future" during the next Cairo meeting ? It could be very interesting that ALAC draft a report on that. What do you thing ? Brendler, Beau a écrit :
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.
Beau Brendler
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:43 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet
Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other).
IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc.
I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed.
O. -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists .icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
*** Scanned
********************************************************************** ****** ******** SCANNED
********************************************************************** ****** ********
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists .icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ********
Brendler, Beau wrote:
We have the summit coming up, as Evan has noted, so perhaps we could plan something to come out of that, on this topic.
My main concern -- and the reason I suggest "refining" the topic in Cairo in advance -- regards potential abuse of the topic at the Summit. I would resist attempts to use this as an excuse to engage in the theoretical and wishful thinking, without concrete direction for subsequent action *possible by ICANN*. IMO it is important to identify ICANN's role in the (re)building of public trust in the DNS system (or whatever may take its place), and not to use the Summit to lecture IETF, ARIN, or other bodies. By all means let's find areas of common interest and co-operation with other bodies, and I do believe that ICANN is in an excellent position to sponsor some genuine R&D in this field. But we also need to stay aware of the limits on ICANN's own mandate and resist using this issue as an excuse for further mission creep. ICANN has a hard enough time executing its existing mandate. - Evan
Let me propose it - I'll revert shortly. On 27/08/2008 17:11, "Khaled KOUBAA" <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> wrote: Nice idea. Can we organize a meeting for the At-large about "ALAC and the Internet Future" during the next Cairo meeting ? It could be very interesting that ALAC draft a report on that. What do you thing ? Brendler, Beau a écrit :
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.
Beau Brendler
-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:43 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet
Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other).
IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc.
I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed.
O. -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
*** Scanned
**************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED
**************************************************************************** ********
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
Excellent idea, I support it. Carlos Dionisio Aguirre abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina - *54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423 www.sitioderecho.com.ar www.densi.com.ar > Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:11:58 +0200> From: khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet> > Nice idea.> Can we organize a meeting for the At-large about "ALAC and the Internet > Future" during the next Cairo meeting ?> It could be very interesting that ALAC draft a report on that.> What do you thing ?> > > Brendler, Beau a écrit :> > I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.> >> > Beau Brendler> >> > -----Original Message-----> > From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond> > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:43 AM> > To: At-Large Worldwide> > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet> >> > Patrick Vande Walle said:> >> > > >> This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in> >> fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new> >> Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations.> >> Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I> >> think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in> >> charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and> >> implementation.> >> There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want> >> the Internet to be in 10 years time.> >> > >> > Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other).> >> > IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc.> >> > I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed.> >> > O.> > --> > Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D.> > E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________> > At-Large mailing list> > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...> >> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org> >> > ***> > Scanned> >> > ****************************************************************************> > ********> > SCANNED> >> > ****************************************************************************> > ********> >> > _______________________________________________> > At-Large mailing list> > At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...> >> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org> >> > > > _______________________________________________> At-Large mailing list> At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _________________________________________________________________ Ingresá ya a MSN Deportes y enterate de las últimas novedades del mundo deportivo. http://msn.foxsports.com/fslasc/
That's maybe too broad I think 'Re-engineering the Internet' says it all. joly At 11:11 AM 8/27/2008, you wrote:
Nice idea. Can we organize a meeting for the At-large about "ALAC and the Internet Future" during the next Cairo meeting ? It could be very interesting that ALAC draft a report on that. What do you thing ?
Brendler, Beau a écrit :
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.
Beau Brendler
Joly MacFie 212 608 1334 http://wwwhatsup.com http://punkcast.com http://pinstand.com
For me, this raises the larger issue of improving our networking with the ICANN community. Personally, I think we spend far too much time in our meetings and far too little getting to meet and network with key people and other constituencies. So instead of just talking about networking - let me propose a something that would allow both ALAC and those from At-large who will be attending learn first hand what it is like to run a registry. Eberhard Lisse, from the Namibian Network Information Centre (cc) has been running a "ccNSO tech day" during the last couple of ICANN meetings. I believe it takes place the the first monday (or first day?) of each ICANN meeting. It is a whole day session, that get into the practical details of setting up and running a registry. I spoke with Eberhard at Paris meeting, and he's open to have At-large folks also attend - as long as we don't just watch, but actually participate. If there's interest to have some of us participate - then we should get in touch with him, and adjust our meeting schedule accordingly. regards Robert ref - http://icannwiki.org/Eberhard_Lisse On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 2:36 PM, WWWhatsup <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
That's maybe too broad
I think 'Re-engineering the Internet' says it all.
joly
At 11:11 AM 8/27/2008, you wrote:
Nice idea. Can we organize a meeting for the At-large about "ALAC and the Internet Future" during the next Cairo meeting ? It could be very interesting that ALAC draft a report on that. What do you thing ?
Brendler, Beau a écrit :
I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know.
Beau Brendler
Joly MacFie 212 608 1334 http://wwwhatsup.com http://punkcast.com http://pinstand.com
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/index.html This may be an important day as Google (Vint Cerf is the Internet Executive there?) seems to be really innovating, and talking seriously, bout things of real interest to @larges. This is a challenge to us. Actually, it will show if @larges do exist or not: if they are able to use such a tool to develop new things for the users, by the users - including things freeing their fellow users from Google's business plan. What is the next step after Android? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(mobile_device_platform) jfc
This certainly gets my wholesale support... let's ensure there is a proper placeholder in Cairo meeting planning for this... CLO -----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Brendler, Beau Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:59 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet I for one would encourage some sort of meeting/presentation/get-together on this topic in Cairo. I know many people in at-large would rather be discussing big-picture stuff like this than other things that tend to dominate our time. If I can be of any help facilitating such a meeting, or trying to bring in a guest expert to talk about it, or something, please let me know. Beau Brendler -----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 4:43 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Re-engineering the Internet Patrick Vande Walle said:
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time.
Can I also add my voice of support to this point of view? Having attended ICANN Paris & IETF Dublin, I have realised how little cooperation there is between those two constituencies. Worse, there is much distrust from either side, often brought forth by individual feuds as well as misunderstanding of issues (and of each other). IMHO it is time to bridge the gap, especially since challenges that lie ahead of us are somehow far greater than anything we've had to tackle so far and many of those challenges incorporate a mixed technical/political side to them. I'm thinking DNS stability in the face of lots more gTLDs as well as increased brute force hacking capability, IPv4 to IPv6 transition, Network Neutrality, etc. I don't need to list them all here: the ALAC is well informed. O. -- Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond, Ph.D. E-mail:<ocl@gih.com> | http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org *** Scanned **************************************************************************** ******** SCANNED **************************************************************************** ******** _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann .org At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Patrick, Thank you for re-analyzing the issue from another angle. I do agree with in two things : The first is to do not let technicals do everything. Second, ICANN and ALAC in defining the future Internet and specially the "traffic" as this is one the most important part. Addressing system is so simple to define and implement in front of problems that traffic routing will face in the near future. The research component in the ICANN responsibility should become more active and more budget should be allocated to it. Khaled Patrick Vande Walle a écrit :
Khaled,
This is indeed an interesting debate to have. As we know, most of the technology we use today was developed 25 years ago. Since then, there has been no change to the fundamentals, but rather patches designed from the start with backward compatibility.
I think most people will agree that the DNS is broken beyond repair. The changes we have seen over the years were all enhancements to the previous standards. DNSSEC and IDNs come to mind. Both were designed to prevent incompatibilities with older software. Punycode is ugly. We would need an 8-bit clean naming system. DNSSEC keys make zone files unreadable by a normal human being.
Note also that, over the last 15 years, most of the new developments in Internet standards were developed by the industry, and not by government funded academic research. The goal of the industry is make profits. Hence, technical choices are mostly short or medium term and tend to perpetuate existing economic models. The DNS hierarchical model has been generating an interesting cash flow for the registries and registrars (and ICANN, BTW). See for example the fact that domain names have largely prevented Verisign from going bankrupt. (http://www.domainpulse.com/2008/08/08/verisign-reports-68-million-loss-873-m... )
The net result is that there is no real work done to change the fundamental design to address new concerns. IDN ugliness and security are issues, but so is the "one TLD, one registry" model, which prevents real competition in the TLD space. More distributed models for naming systems, like CoDoNS (http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/beehive/codons.php ) remain purely academic, as there is no willingness from the industry to kill the cash cow.
I focused here on the DNS, but similar considerations could apply to other parts of the Internet infrastructure, like traffic routing.
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time. From there, we could articulate work packages and deliverables.
This discussion is very relevant to the ALAC also. While it is good that the ALAC provides comments on ICANN processes, it also needs to know where it wants the Internet to go, especially in the naming and numbering area, and articulate its positions according to its own vision.
Patrick Vande Walle
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:35:52 +0200, Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> wrote:
Re-engineering the Internet
Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275
During a workshop at IFTF this week, I offered a forecast that there is at least a 50% probability of a fundamental re-engineering of the internet. Here's a bit of detail on this forecast and why I think this last week has been a critical turning point.
Domain Name Services, DNS, like most of the Gen One Internet is a system built on cooperation. DNS servers have a narrow function to accurately translate domain names like ABC.com into numerical IP addresses, using an an up to date directory from other -trusted- DNS servers. The problem in simple terms is the length of the encryption key used by DNS servers to authenticate each other is short enough, that using modern high performance CPUs, it's possible to calculate a key to enable access to " poison" the DNS database on the server server with fraudulent routing information to misdirect any query for ABC.com to XXX.com. Dan Kaminsky, a 'white hat' hacker/security expert, has been telling Internet engineering leadership about this exploit for at least four years, and talking publicly, without revealing details, ( I heard him talk about this three years ago.) trying to provoke action. Finally, this last month Dan forced the issue by releasing the details into the wild along with short term patch using a longer encrypted number requiring a lot more computing power to decrypt. The Global Internet Engineering Security and Operations communities scrambled frantically, and deployed his patch in about three days, remaining open, vulnerable until then. Here's a video of the patch being deployed over several days:. Red are vulnerable domains, green are protected http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff5WBDOwueI
As we know, we are entering an era where super computing power will be trivially available on local multi-core processors, and on scalable platforms in the cloud. So it is inevitable that the current DNS patch will fall to superior decryption computation. So in the meantime limited software patches will forestall the inevitable crisis, that will occur when the black hat hackers have adequate computing cycles to break the encryption. This week most Internet routing experts agreed that we need a fundamentally more Secure DNS system that will withstand a massive assault. We may need a totally new, more powerful generation of software, computers, servers, routers and switches are necessary along with new operations regimens, and training and education for IT personnel.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Hello Patrick, as you highlighted the most problem come from Industry which make choices against common interests. I don't understand why there is accusation against engineers or to exclude them from top level vision? Many decision are made by corporate regarding profit logic. there are many engineers and scholars at IETF and IEEE who just want to develop fantastic technolgies for common interests. the problem of DNS is the same with any kind of technology: when we should do the big shift and move to new technology because nobody are willing to pay for it. there is a plenty of dead at born technologies because this reason. in we check in deep we can find that issues are more related to money consideration than technical ones. Regards Rafik On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Patrick Vande Walle <patrick@vande-walle.eu
wrote:
Khaled,
This is indeed an interesting debate to have. As we know, most of the technology we use today was developed 25 years ago. Since then, there has been no change to the fundamentals, but rather patches designed from the start with backward compatibility.
I think most people will agree that the DNS is broken beyond repair. The changes we have seen over the years were all enhancements to the previous standards. DNSSEC and IDNs come to mind. Both were designed to prevent incompatibilities with older software. Punycode is ugly. We would need an 8-bit clean naming system. DNSSEC keys make zone files unreadable by a normal human being.
Note also that, over the last 15 years, most of the new developments in Internet standards were developed by the industry, and not by government funded academic research. The goal of the industry is make profits. Hence, technical choices are mostly short or medium term and tend to perpetuate existing economic models. The DNS hierarchical model has been generating an interesting cash flow for the registries and registrars (and ICANN, BTW). See for example the fact that domain names have largely prevented Verisign from going bankrupt. ( http://www.domainpulse.com/2008/08/08/verisign-reports-68-million-loss-873-m... )
The net result is that there is no real work done to change the fundamental design to address new concerns. IDN ugliness and security are issues, but so is the "one TLD, one registry" model, which prevents real competition in the TLD space. More distributed models for naming systems, like CoDoNS (http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/beehive/codons.php ) remain purely academic, as there is no willingness from the industry to kill the cash cow.
I focused here on the DNS, but similar considerations could apply to other parts of the Internet infrastructure, like traffic routing.
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time. From there, we could articulate work packages and deliverables.
This discussion is very relevant to the ALAC also. While it is good that the ALAC provides comments on ICANN processes, it also needs to know where it wants the Internet to go, especially in the naming and numbering area, and articulate its positions according to its own vision.
Patrick Vande Walle
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:35:52 +0200, Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com
wrote:
Re-engineering the Internet
Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275
During a workshop at IFTF this week, I offered a forecast that there is at least a 50% probability of a fundamental re-engineering of the internet. Here's a bit of detail on this forecast and why I think this last week has been a critical turning point.
Domain Name Services, DNS, like most of the Gen One Internet is a system built on cooperation. DNS servers have a narrow function to accurately translate domain names like ABC.com into numerical IP addresses, using an an up to date directory from other -trusted- DNS servers. The problem in simple terms is the length of the encryption key used by DNS servers to authenticate each other is short enough, that using modern high performance CPUs, it's possible to calculate a key to enable access to " poison" the DNS database on the server server with fraudulent routing information to misdirect any query for ABC.com to XXX.com. Dan Kaminsky, a 'white hat' hacker/security expert, has been telling Internet engineering leadership about this exploit for at least four years, and talking publicly, without revealing details, ( I heard him talk about this three years ago.) trying to provoke action. Finally, this last month Dan forced the issue by releasing the details into the wild along with short term patch using a longer encrypted number requiring a lot more computing power to decrypt. The Global Internet Engineering Security and Operations communities scrambled frantically, and deployed his patch in about three days, remaining open, vulnerable until then. Here's a video of the patch being deployed over several days:. Red are vulnerable domains, green are protected http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff5WBDOwueI
As we know, we are entering an era where super computing power will be trivially available on local multi-core processors, and on scalable platforms in the cloud. So it is inevitable that the current DNS patch will fall to superior decryption computation. So in the meantime limited software patches will forestall the inevitable crisis, that will occur when the black hat hackers have adequate computing cycles to break the encryption. This week most Internet routing experts agreed that we need a fundamentally more Secure DNS system that will withstand a massive assault. We may need a totally new, more powerful generation of software, computers, servers, routers and switches are necessary along with new operations regimens, and training and education for IT personnel.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Evan, I fully agree with you. ALAC is about advising the ICANN BoD on @large concerns and actions, and about their relations with other Internet @large structures that are not participating in the ALAC. I also agree with you about the possible "technical mission creep" that could superpose the existing social and activist mission creeps propositions. At 17:34 27/08/2008, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
My main concern -- and the reason I suggest "refining" the topic in Cairo in advance -- regards potential abuse of the topic at the Summit. I would resist attempts to use this as an excuse to engage in the theoretical and wishful thinking, without concrete direction for subsequent action *possible by ICANN*.
IMO it is important to identify ICANN's role in the (re)building of public trust in the DNS system (or whatever may take its place), and not to use the Summit to lecture IETF, ARIN, or other bodies. By all means let's find areas of common interest and co-operation with other bodies, and I do believe that ICANN is in an excellent position to sponsor some genuine R&D in this field. But we also need to stay aware of the limits on ICANN's own mandate and resist using this issue as an excuse for further mission creep. ICANN has a hard enough time executing its existing mandate.
To help make a clear distinction between what belongs to IETF, ICANN, and @larges, and how to best concentrate on what concerns ICANN and how it can beneficiate from this, I will answer Khaled and Patrick in documenting the france@large/ATLARGE current effort. Due to the Staff's enduring irregular attitude (we still have not received the announced response to our March accreditation file) this effort is now located outside the ICANN @large community. However, it necessarily concerns ICANN (cf. Part 3). .
At 22:08 27/08/2008, rafik dammak wrote: Hello Patrick, as you highlighted the most problem come from Industry which make choices against common interests.
Dear Rafik, We fully agree. However, industry is making choices in the Industry's common interest. This is up to us @large, i.e. informed users, to make choices in the users' best interest. And those of us who are also engineers should work together along those choices. Bear with me and you will see that there is no conflict with IETF, IEEE, or ICANN. On the contrary (even though there is a need for a clarification in common), this was worked out in the WSIS Tunis agreement. However, it has still to be enacted. This is named "enhanced cooperation" and some are reluctant ...
At 09:27 27/08/2008, Patrick Vande Walle wrote: Khaled, This is indeed an interesting debate to have. As we know, most of the technology we use today was developed 25 years ago.
Khaled and Patrick, This is a key issue that france@large has an active position on, in which I think I need to share with you. I apologise for this relatively unstructured post. It should have been a full liaison report, if we would have been accredited Situation evaluation We fully share your evaluation along with IAB's position in RFC 3869, which emphasizes what Patrick stated about industry (they are not motivated by long-term issues), governement (IAB calls for non-commercial and governmental funding), and multilateralism (that RFC lists Internet R&D priorities and does not even quote the first of them: multilingualization). We discussed with several organizations a set of questions that we posed to Vint Cerf. The point was to know if IDNA intended to address our needs or not, now or in the future. These needs were simply expressed, as an ML-DNS solution, to be reliable in every language just as the DNS is today in ASCII English. The formal response was negative. It also advised us, in an IETF legitimate spirit, to develop our own project. Unofficially, we were advised to find another structure and liaise with IAB when we explained that (1) we could not meet the IETF BoF system, WG delays, RFC system, etc. costs and requirements, (2) our target is not to publish standards, but interoperability basics for a diversity of solutions, and (3) to publish a multilingual dictionary of the Internet technical and legal terms, if we want multilingual TLD to make operational sense. I followed the procedure with Vint Cerf (WG-IDNABIS), Lisa Dussault (Applications AD), and Russ Houssley (IESG Chair). I will appeal the IESG in the coming days in order to obtain a formal response, to be confirmed by IAB in order to make it clear that we did not want a split but intend to follow an IAB liaison process if such a split is imposed on us. If this appeal is denied, we will have to create a working framework. This will most probably be an ATLARGE Open Network Standard structure, proposing to foster a specialised IGF ONSEC enhanced cooperation. In such a case, IAB and IESG will have made it clear that every of us fully respect the WSIS Tunis agreement spirit, and their taking care of the Legacy Internet transition, and ATLARGE/ONS being one of the contributors to the technical Internet emergent issues. The "Internet Plus" Since its inception, france@large has followed my 30 year old Intlnet's target (August 22, 1978): to technically and politically support the independent use of the common network resources of the world digital ecosystem (WDE). The complementarity is that Intlnet is interested in daily operations, R&D support, international strategy, while france@large is interested in usage at the national community level (it is presently reviving the ATLARGE organization that icannatlarge.org lead to incorporate in 2004 in order to resume support at the global community level). Upon Vint Cerf's response, we considered the ML-DNS implication and found that we had to actually engage in an "Internet Plus" consideration project. The target is not to re-engineer the Internet, but rather to help users to re-engineer their own global system, through the existing Internet and other resources of the digital convergence, and open themselves to the semantic strata (we call the Intersem). Our plan was confirmed at the end of the World Internet Week de Paris on July 2. The plan is to write a roadmap towards a White Book. The debate over that roadmap (on our supposedly "non-existing mailing list") has been quite active. It currently leads us to: 1. define our target as a "better people-centric Internet for each of the 6.5 billion of us", as diverse as it may have to be. 2. start from a detailing of our needs, considering those already expressed by IAB, ICANN, WSIS, etc. ethical considerations, and a common communication model that is based on the new cultural/scientific paradigm (open vs. closed systems and networked vs.analytic thinking).) in order to consider the backward compatibility with the current propositions rather than the complexity of a transition that IETF is being met with (ROAP, DNS, IPv6, etc. issues). 3. differentiate three main areas of interest: (1) utilization of the Internet Plus/Intersem, (2) social targets of the Internet Plus/Intersem, (3) technical design and testing of the Internet Plus/Intersem. An example: the DNS usage is different in Web.2.0. The main problems that we are facing are our legitimacy, a lack of time, resources, and competence, as well as the need to adjust to the ongoing ICANN and IETF internal conflicts and IGF emergence. The @larges' legitimacy The rationale is as follows. 1. Capitalism is money-centric by nature and has, therefore, a tendency to support and appropriate network-centric (decentralised) visions. This leads to industry attempts to control the IANA and to appropriate local TLDs: the ICANN "Internet for the Rich" strategy. The stability of such a scheme is the Shumpeter's theory. An entrepreneur has an idea, sells it to bankers who act as reasonable filters. Thisresults in an R&D joint-venture, industrial development, and "super-profits" during the time that the idea remains a market monopoly. 2. This is less and less our societal scheme. Our society is increasingly more based upon the new "lead users" observed behavior. Llead users are persons who adapt the industrial products that they purchase for their own needs. This may represent up to 2% of the customers, and much more in some particular sectors, such as clothing. As a result, increasingly more industries are becoming "lead user driven" (not to be confused with "market driven", which is based on market studies). The lead user is a response to the impossibility to maket study innovation. You innovate yourself or you observe those who innovate. Obviously, FOSS is a typical lead usership example. The france@large definition of an @large person is precisely an Internet lead user. For years I have tried to investigate how IETF could accomodate contributions of that kind of users. Experience has shown that there could not be a fit, for many practical reasons more than conflicting ones. The IETF Internet process is oriented towards industrial co-development of the Internet structures based on rough consensus. Usage is interested in the best way to use the existing resources rather than changing them. This means simplified robust pervasive architecture, the interoperability of multiple forms of usage, and most of all (1) security that the specific Internet infrastructure cannot provide (2) presentation services/layer the Internet architecture does not include (3) multiconsensus based diversity (documentation of multiple interoperable sub-consensuses). Interoperable usage architecture We have committed to remain fully interoperable with IETF solutions when they are clearly defined (we are not going to read 5500 RFCs, it is not our hobby). Our basis is ISO 3166, which is the very structure of the International network since 1978. It has documented the national scripts and languages since its ISO-3166-1:2006 version. We will base ourself on the Open Source LS640 Linguasphere series that served as the basis for the current ISO 639-6 standard preparation of an exhaustive listing of all the language names. We will use (virtual) smart gateways (interbox) to interface the Legacy Internet with Internet Plus user systems (consider a NAT, the other way around). This will enable us to use IPv6 headers, with our own additional parameters and possible services for local, meshed networks and a progressive Internet Plus cloud gathering them all. We call this TCP/IPP (IP Plus). We will use standard DNS software, but in a non-recursive manner, with local roots at every nameserver. These root fileswill be made available through a secured distributed replacement for the IANA (MDRS, Multilingual Distributed Referential System) that will mainly strive to provide the metastructure of the Intersem: supporting the Semantic Addressing (Internet of Ideas), netlocale files (netcentricity documentation), personale files (personal semantics) and the relevant locale files. Project consolidation The plan is to seeds/projects that france@large has identified: - the Intertest - a testing charter for those having to test ("consensus and running code") technical or governance issues in using the real Internet as a test bed. This Charter will fully comply with the published or discussed ICANN ICP-3, IETF, etc. testing constraints. It will be maintained as an IETF I-D that the entire Internet community and IGF can comment on and improve. Among the Governance issues to be tested, there will obviously be a WECANN mailing list to discuss and test a World Enhanced Cooperation for the Administration of Names and Numbers: we expected it to be a part of the ALAC and it will be open to all the ICANNers. - an IPv6 topology centric numbering plan and plug-and-play/translation network grids - the MLTF (Multilingualisation et Technologies de la Facilitation) (Intersem) - Multilinc - to implement geocultural documentation, MDRS, TLD, etc. for each LS640 lingual entity - Netix, network interoperation system and sources - the INTF for those wanting to take advantage of the acquired experience to help the Internet core transition. etc. Context of this plan This plan builds on the propositions that lead to the incorporation of ATLARGE in 2004. It will act as a shell/secretariat structure servicing the international@large community (individuals and national@large structures addressing the national usage specifics, participating in the national and regional Internet Governance Forums, and being Human Rights conformant in discussing their technical contribution in their own language. We would certainly have preferred to engage such a plan with the entire Internet Legacy @large and technical communities. This has not turned out to be possible, however, in spite of a sustained effort over the course of eight years. We cannot wait any more because there are too many risks of seeing the Internet technical deliquescence becoming a commercial/strategic opportunity for some. This is probably an impossible task, but perhaps we are too stupid to understand it. We just hope some open minded common sense people and engineers will rally together and help all of us make it. --- Some comments through your posts:
been no change to the fundamentals, but rather patches designed from the start with backward compatibility.
Yes. Except that ICANN plans to break our 1984 consensus (RFC 920) with its "Internet for the Rich" strategy and its intent to disrespect ISO 3166 along the WSIS resolution on national name spaces sovereignty.
I think most people will agree that the DNS is broken beyond repair. The changes we have seen over the years were all enhancements to the previous standards. DNSSEC and IDNs come to mind. Both were designed to prevent incompatibilities with older software. Punycode is ugly. We would need an 8-bit clean naming system. DNSSEC keys make zone files unreadable by a normal human being.
Yes. There is no technical reason to not develop and deploy such a solution, for example, in using OPES to create the missing presentation layer, except that it represents a dramatic change in Internet architectural and societal values. This is the paradigmatic shift. Our evaluation is that TCP/IP can support it, but this is much more complex for IETF brains.
Note also that, over the last 15 years, most of the new developments in Internet standards were developed by the industry, and not by government funded academic research. The goal of the industry is make profits. Hence, technical choices are mostly short or medium term and tend to perpetuate existing economic models.
RFC 3869.
The DNS hierarchical model has been generating an interesting cash flow for the registries and registrars (and ICANN, BTW). See for example the fact that domain names have largely prevented Verisign from going bankrupt. (http://www.domainpulse.com/2008/08/08/verisign-reports-68-million-loss-873-m...)
Please also note that a heterarchic management of the DNS removes every alibi for the root server system, and hence for its archives along with the international real-time stratetgic intelligence that they collect.
The net result is that there is no real work done to change the fundamental design to address new concerns. IDN ugliness and security are issues, but so is the "one TLD, one registry" model, which prevents real competition in the TLD space. More distributed models for naming systems, like CoDoNS (http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/beehive/codons.php ) remain purely academic, as there is no willingness from the industry to kill the cash cow.
france@large is probably the only organization that has carried out an ICANN ICP-3 compliant project for the DNS test-bed. Its conclusion is that there is no problem in having a multi-root system if there is no TLD label conflict (as seen in the one created by ICANN with ".biz"). Daily operations have shown that there are practical, simple possibilities to manage multi-registry TLDs. However, multi-registry is not much in need if the WIPO issues are addressed for famous names and everyone can join the TLD name community they like or feel they belong to.
I focused here on the DNS, but similar considerations could apply to other parts of the Internet infrastructure, like traffic routing.
Yes. Multilevel and smart IPvX addressing should be addressed seriously. Multicast is also a priority.
This is where I think ICANN could and should be more active in fostering and sponsoring new research aimed at designing a new Internet, targeting the general public good, with no short term economic considerations. Granted, I do not expect ICANN to do the work of the IETF. However, I think it is not necessarily a good thing to let the engineers be in charge of everything, from the general vision to specifications and implementation. There needs to be a top level vision, a master plan of what we want the Internet to be in 10 years time. From there, we could articulate work packages and deliverables.
Objection! The problem is that there is a master ideology by the "Internet leaders" as they are called by RFC 3935 or the "affinity group" as they are called by RFC 3774. The real need is for less standardization and robust interoperability norms. IETF and ICANN are in charge of the "Legacy Internet" management and evolution. They must not prevent the emergence of alternative solutions and technologies through illegal technical exclusion (I have some experience with this :-)) violating WIPO agreement against Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and common innovative sense.
This discussion is very relevant to the ALAC also. While it is good that the ALAC provides comments on ICANN processes, it also needs to know where it wants the Internet to go, especially in the naming and numbering area, and articulate its positions according to its own vision.
This is the core of the ALAC mission: to keep the BoD informed and aware of the impact on ICANN, and liaise with the global @large Internet lead users community.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:35:52 +0200, Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa@gmail.com> wrote:
Re-engineering the Internet Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275
During a workshop at IFTF this week, I offered a forecast that there is at least a 50% probability of a fundamental re-engineering of the internet. Here's a bit of detail on this forecast and why I think this last week has been a critical turning point.
Domain Name Services, DNS, like most of the Gen One Internet is a system built on cooperation. DNS servers have a narrow function to accurately translate domain names like ABC.com into numerical IP addresses, using an an up to date directory from other -trusted- DNS servers. The problem in simple terms is the length of the encryption key used by DNS servers to authenticate each other is short enough, that using modern high performance CPUs, it's possible to calculate a key to enable access to " poison" the DNS database on the server server with fraudulent routing information to misdirect any query for ABC.com to XXX.com.
Another issue of concern with the IDNABIS approach and slowness as well as Unicode inflitration with a different technical background and strategic agenda is the confusion. Unfortunately, there is no way to enforce a confusion limitation and, therefore, it is likely that this confusion will disseminate. This means that one may expect the use of alternative "funycode" algorithms to punycode, supporting in turn other kinds of "IDN", and offering different ASCII labels for the same Unicode Label. There is no legal ground for a ccTLD to not register any "xn--" domain name. ".su" already documented that it was actually necessary to support other algorithms. 50% of the possible "xn--" have no Unicode meaning. Why waste so many possible sales? Mess of the mess. jfc
Khaled KOUBAA wrote:
Re-engineering the Internet
Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275
... Interesting timing ! "Revealed: The Internet's Biggest Security Hole Two security researchers have demonstrated a new technique to stealthily intercept internet traffic on a scale previously presumed to be unavailable to anyone outside of intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency. The tactic exploits the internet routing protocol BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) to let an attacker surreptitiously monitor unencrypted internet traffic anywhere in the world, and even modify it before it reaches its destination." http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/08/revealed-the-in.html http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/08/how-to-intercep.html Regards Derek
Dear Derek, you should have a look at http://whitehouse.gov/pcipb to see what Dick Clarke, as an @large user, thinks of BGP in terms of national security. And what GWB signed, but not enforced yet. france@large members ran a series of national internet security oriented meetings in France a few years ago (including at Research Ministry). This lead them to create an organization (AFRAC) to investigate that kind of threats, DNS archives intelligence leaks, referential (secure extended distributed IANA) pollution risks, root system hijacking, etc. All this has contributed to the Internet Plus project. Not to re-engineer the Internet, but for the inrterested @large Internet lead users to try to commonly re-engineer our usage of the Internet before we all go under with it or be "saved" by an industry consortium. jfc At 18:38 28/08/2008, Derek Smythe wrote:
Khaled KOUBAA wrote:
Re-engineering the Internet
Source : http://iftf.org/node/2275
...
Interesting timing !
"Revealed: The Internet's Biggest Security Hole
Two security researchers have demonstrated a new technique to stealthily intercept internet traffic on a scale previously presumed to be unavailable to anyone outside of intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency.
The tactic exploits the internet routing protocol BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) to let an attacker surreptitiously monitor unencrypted internet traffic anywhere in the world, and even modify it before it reaches its destination."
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/08/revealed-the-in.html http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/08/how-to-intercep.html
Regards
Derek
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
participants (15)
-
At-Large Staff -
Brendler, Beau -
carlos aguirre -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr -
Derek Smythe -
Evan Leibovitch -
JFC Morfin -
Khaled KOUBAA -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Patrick Vande Walle -
presidencia＠internauta.org.ar -
rafik dammak -
Robert Guerra -
WWWhatsup