DARPA Aims to Redo the Internet Protocol

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DARPA Aims to Redo the Internet Protocol

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Friday March 12, 2004 @04:58AM from the if-it-ain't-broke dept.

Xaleth Nuada writes "The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) is looking to redo the entire Internet Protocol. With the DoD increasingly adopting network-centric warfare the shortcomings in the current IP have become resoundingly clear. Everything works fine for static hardwired networks. But not for dynamic wireless ones. The benefits for your average geek? How about REAL wireless networking? Easier network set-up? Increased wireless security protocol? Increased reliability in sending information?" Don't forget massive incompatibility and upgrade hassles. :)

15 of 389 comments (clear)

DODgy by name and nature ? by Space+cowboy · 2004-03-12 04:58 · Score: 5, Interesting

Given the scale of the re-work proposals (replacing the Von-Nuemann architecture...), I'd be surprised if there wasn't some effort made to embed snooping and tracing into all packets transmitted. This *is* the DoD after all!

On the other hand, given how slowly IPv6 is making its way into the wider world, we probably don't have too much to worry about for the time being!

Simon

--
Physicists get Hadrons!
1. Re:DODgy by name and nature ? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-12 05:02 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  You're right. It's a good thing they weren't involved in setting up our current system.
  
  Seriously, if they are going to rework it they better do something about the SPAM.
2. Re:DODgy by name and nature ? by spreadthememe · 2004-03-12 05:05 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It seems more likely that DARPA would create a protocol free from built-in snooping for fear that such a feature could be used by the enemy.
  
  While governments in general are guided by the will-to-power, militaries (at least the US military) are fairly well driven by readiness and victory. It doesn't seem likely that they would create such a vulnerable technology.
3. Re:DODgy by name and nature ? by beacher · 2004-03-12 05:08 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Heh.. the article is titled "DARPA Takes aim at IT Sacred Cows"... Love it. They rewriting the stack so that India can't connect? Is this the answer to outsourcing?
4. Re:DODgy by name and nature ? by Dravik · 2004-03-12 05:40 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'd like to point out that the internet your using right now came from DARPA doing the same thing in the 70's. If you don't want an internet that runs on protocols initially devised by the US military then you better unplug now.
  
  --
  The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
5. Re:DODgy by name and nature ? by ave19 · 2004-03-12 05:54 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I think you might be wandering into tin-foil-hat land here.
  
  They're talking about creating a networking standard we could all use to build our own networks. The specs will be open, like AES. (Or, do you believe that AES has some backdoor that lets the US military decrypt your private bits?)
  
  I don't see any similiarity with GPS. That's a military controlled network of hardware, on which, we civilians are allowed to tag along. It's not public or commercial in any way. Nobody had any illusions about that, well, except maybe you.
  
  -ave
  
  --
  ...or maybe not.
arf by Renraku · 2004-03-12 05:00 · Score: 5, Funny

"Don't forget massive incompatibility and upgrade hassles."

I read that as:

"Don't forget about the sudden explosion of extended-temp jobs flooding the market as the Internet decides to change over..."

--
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
And I just... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-12 05:00 · Score: 5, Funny

Upgraded to IPv6. Sigh.
Keeps me in work! by IAmTheDave · 2004-03-12 05:01 · Score: 5, Funny

Don't forget massive incompatibility and upgrade hassles. :)

Yeah man, but massive incompatability and upgrade hassles are what keep some of us employed! GO DARPA!

--
Excuse my speling.
Making The Bar Project
Roll out date? by RevDobbs · 2004-03-12 05:01 · Score: 5, Funny

And when will this new Internet Protocol be rolled out...

shortly after IPv6 adoption?

I don't see Satan reaching for his winter parka just yet...
This could be really interesting by HullBreach · 2004-03-12 05:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

Im a former Marine myself, and I fondly remember what a nightmare it was just trying to get everyone to have the same crypto loads for existing voice communications hardware. Im really curious as to how they propose to keep the network secure. On the other hand, the possible benifits are huge. Distributed sensor networks in particular could be revolutionized by this.

--
"Hand me the bullet-shooty-thing and a box of little hurts" -Overheard on a USMC Rifle range
Sounds like a good idea, but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-03-12 05:04 · Score: 5, Funny

Let's just all pray the military dosn't call this SKYNET.
Re:DARPA Aims to Redo.... by e9th · 2004-03-12 05:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

Please, anything that's not encumbered by *anybody's* IP patents.
Err.. by t0shstah · 2004-03-12 05:13 · Score: 5, Informative

Gibson cast some of the blame on the packet-based nature of Internet Protocol, which was not designed for foolproof delivery of messages. The protocol cannot guarantee delivery of e-mail, for instance.

Who is this guy really? Thats not what IP is for - foolproof delivery of packets is handled by connection-orientated protocols like TCP. Sure, it might not get the *right away*, but the flexibility of packet based routing is something that has made networks as reliable as they are today (despite the huge amount of moaning that people do about them).

Mind you, as people have pointed out before, IPv6 has been waiting in the wings for a while now, and a military request for change might be the kind action needed to kick other people into gear.
IP not Internet, stop freaking out! by RogerRamjet98 · 2004-03-12 06:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

I think most of you are missing the point.
DARPA and the military aren't interested in rebuilding the internet, they are interested in rebuilding IP.
They want to rebuild IP because they have a need for a better system. They need secure, reliable, ad hoc networking so that battle groups can communicate with each other.
These are private WANs. Not the Internet! The Military is not going to send real time battlefield data across the public internet, and real time battlefield data is what this thing is all about. The military launches and rents satellites for that sort of thing, they don't send it across uunet.
When they create a WAN, they have to have some mechanism to talk. Right now it might be IP, but in the future they want it to be something else. Something better for THEM.
The US Military couldn't care less if the rest of the world, or the internet itself, started to use whatever they come up with.
As far as those attacking technical limitations, when they started working on the original internet I'm sure everyone was saying, "Fault tolerant distributed networking with dynamic routing? That's impossible, why are they bothering" The point of DARPA is to do science and advance the field beyond current knowledge.
They may succeed, and they may fail. But they shouldn't just not try.