NSF Ponders New And Improved Internet

diorcc wrote to mention a Wired article about a NSF Project that could completely rebuild the Internet as we know it. From the article: "The National Science Foundation is backing a major initiative that could lead to a completely new internet architecture, with built-in security measures and support for ubiquitous sensors and wireless communications devices, among other things. The Global Environment for Networking Investigations, or GENI, will include a research grant program to fund new architectures and an experimental facility, which has not yet been planned in detail."

Comments

NII2

[Doc Ruby]

Didn't we already give them hundreds of millions of dollars, and trust that they'd deliver the "New and Improved Internet" to us with Internet2? I know I2 is doing a lot of good for a bunch of universities, medical centers and corporations, all of which therefore are getting their N&INet (NII) to contribute to their hugely profitable enterprises, subsidized at taxpayer expense. Where is the delivery of I2 to the rest of us, who pay for it, who need it, who represent most of the American economy (foreigners are welcome to ride for free, as usual ;)? Why should we give them even more money, when they just got paid to learn they can get paid not to share it with us?

Re:NII2

[Anonymous Coward]

I know the research done in medical centers never benefits me. Tell us what you absolutley *NEED* it for.

Re:NII2

[Doc Ruby]

It's true that the government's NGI is actually independent from Internet2, though they work closely together. The NSF funds organizations to connect to Internet2 with tax money. And the I2 is about 80% funded by universities, which are largely funded by public money, government and otherwise. Where's the return to the public?

I don't know why expecting public money to return products of its investment is "stretching it". We're buying R&D, we should get the R&D. Except where secrecy is important to, say, national security (tiny percentage of research), or the results would be premature to release, of course we should get access to what we bought. Why not?

If an org wants to keep its research products private, it should use only private money. Perhaps there's a case to be made for proportional return on proportional investment (eg. publishing 80% of I2), but that's surely balanced by 1> the critical enabling support of the public money; 2> the vast public research predecessors on which all this new research depends; and 3> the essential role of publishing research results anyway, to science, culture and business. Otherwise, siphoning off all the oxygen produced will leave the system stagnant, and the private systems will wilt and die also.

Re:NII2

[guet]

And the I2 is about 80% funded by universities, which are largely funded by public money, government and otherwise. Where's the return to the public?

The return to the public is in research and education (which is what universities do). Where else would you expect it? Serving inane comments on Slashdot quicker? Supporting the latest dot.com fad? When the industry is ready to embrace new standards (hint, this is not a rational or controllable process) they will come to the mass-market. Not before.

I'm afraid your free market ideology is blinding you to the benefits of public research and public funding. The 'all power to the poeple' line is very seductive, but research takes time, and the best research is not calibrated, and is not predictable. It does not obey the laws of the market and will never do so.

(foreigners are welcome to ride for free, as usual ;)
What a tired old canard. Where did the tags your writing is surrounded with come from? (hint, not the USA).

Re:NII2

[Doc Ruby]

Universities don't teach the return on their R&D. They productize it. Before you talk about economics, and university research's role in it, learn something about it first. Especially if you call my demand for better managed public funding for public research a "free market". It's a demand for a "free market" only in ideas: government subsidies aren't free marketing. Therefore your complaints are irrelevant. When the results are ready, they're currently privatized into university patents and thinktanks. They should, on the same schedule, be published and indeed taught the way you wrongly believe they are currently.

Then there's your ducktalk about HTML tags. I didn't say the US invented everything. But we did invent the Internet. And until an American invented the IMG tag, the Web wasn't useable by most people. So take a hint, and show some gratitude, instead of your jealous spite. We're not cranking out this tech for your thanks, but you could at least show some dignity when you accept our gifts.

Mod Parent Redundant

[Moth7]

Grandparent poster was joking. The Gore internet quote has been discussed to death and no-one brings it up with any degree of sincerity anymore.

Sensors? Intelligence? This could lead to...

[Wonderkid]

...SkyNet. The living net.

Human, may I surf your mind?

IPv6?

[slavemowgli]

a completely new internet architecture, with built-in security measures and support for ubiquitous sensors and wireless communications devices

In other words... IPv6?

Re:If it's not broken, don't fix it.

[cazbar]

However it does need to upgrade to ipv6. No idea when that'll happen though.

New and Improved

[k4_pacific]

Maybe I'm drifting off topic here, but how can this internet thing simultaneously be new and improved? If it's improved, it existed before. If it's new, it didn't.

this is easy to do...

[3seas]

simply track every transaction on the internet and allow law enforcement to invade and abuse it whever they will it...

Considering we can break anything we make, no matter what is done, it comes down to this.

giving access to personal and private information to other humans...

May as well just start installing gps tracking and personal data recording chips in all humans...
Then it really won't matter what internet or other future tech we make use of.

Of course included is a punishment system of shock therapy and AI second guessing what you do to stop you from doing anything on the list of things not to do..... A list created by a few faulty humans of course....

The point is, there is nothing we can build that we cannot break.

Making this whole "better internet" just a carrot to get the donkey to move...... in circles.

Re:Trusted Network Connect

[griffjon]

Especially given the paranoia/security/centralized control mode we're in with the current regi^H^H^H^Hadministration. I wouldn't be surprised to see a new attempt to enforce key escrow, and for all the "trusted" computer to have "secure" backdoors into their crypto systems that "only" the govt can access with "a warrant"

(I also hear that there's a movement for a sarcasm tax per-double-quote in the house committee, so I'm tryin' to use 'em while they're free!)

This all being said, the concept of a mesh network and the work of the guys at DefCon WiFi Shoot-out might be very, very valuable sooner rather than later. Man, wouldn't that be fantastic? A geek-run national wifi mesh... It's be just like 1990s Internet again, until the FCC started raids...