Slashdot Mirror


GENI To Replace Internet, Gets $12M Funding

Postglobalism writes "A massive project to redesign and rebuild the Internet from scratch is inching along with $12 million in government funding and donations of network capacity by two major research organizations. Many researchers want to rethink the Internet's underlying architecture, saying a 'clean-slate' approach is the only way to truly address security and other challenges that have cropped up since the Internet's birth in 1969."

37 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Do we have enough...? by oahazmatt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do we have enough porn for an entirely new Internet?

    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
    1. Re:Do we have enough...? by argent · · Score: 5, Funny

      Porn is not a problem. We have the technology. We can rebuild it.

    2. Re:Do we have enough...? by Palidase · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do we have enough porn for an entirely new Internet?

      If you build it, they will.... It's just too easy.

    3. Re:Do we have enough...? by strelitsa · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not rebuild it - erect it.

      (snicker, snort)

      --
      No mod points, no meta-moderating/Firehose/all the other free work Slashdot wants me to do.
    4. Re:Do we have enough...? by NJVil · · Score: 4, Funny

      How about some e-mail enhancement?

  2. Other challenges? by JonTurner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Other challenges, indeed. Such as surveillance, "trusted" computing, IP "protection", etc.

    The new internet will be locked down much tighter, I am certain.

    1. Re:Other challenges? by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep, that is *all* this is about; control. The existing Internet is just a big huge classic WAN. They want to replace it with something they can lockdown, enforce DRM, and control.

    2. Re:Other challenges? by Blue+Stone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They (big media corps & their state accomplices) want to replace the internet with cable TV.

      Cable TV to which we will be allowed to contribute by supplying 'user content' for them to exploit (subject to the content being approved).

      They want to replace the internet with something where they have control and the only control we have is the remote.

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  3. Translation: by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They need to ditch this open, uncontrollable Internet for something the governments have more control over.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:Translation: by PlatyPaul · · Score: 4, Informative
      --
      Misery loves company. Online misery loves unsuspecting random strangers.
    2. Re:Translation: by crescente · · Score: 5, Funny

      New internet has DRM built in! It's for your own protection. Really.

  4. Inertia by Sancho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For better or worse, I think that we're stuck with what we've got. We'd really be better off improving the Internet we have (DNSSEC, end-to-end encryption on all protocols by default, PKI for the masses) than redesigning it from the ground up.

  5. 12 Million? by Hyppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even if they had 12 billion dollars, it wouldn't scratch the surface of the cost of recreating the Internet.

  6. Won't ever happen by dlgeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    First off, once you read past the sensationalist headlines, the article just says that they are establishing a very high capacity research network to study new protocols, not trying to create a parallel infrastructure. However, that being said, trying to redesign the Internet's protocols from scratch isn't necessarily a bad idea, the current model is definitely showing its age. For example, TCP has a lot of issues on links with large bandwidth-delay products, resulting in lots of extensions and forks to support these links.

    The real problem is getting a critical mass to switch. Just look at the state of IPv6 support in home networking gear and the lack of implementation all over the web. My guess is that this will lead to some new standards that will maybe be used by people doing experiments with tons of data and nobody else. Don't expect to see this work coming to a router near you.

    1. Re:Won't ever happen by dlgeek · · Score: 5, Informative

      The grant is from the NSF, not the DoD which implies it is more scientific in nature.

      However, even if it was from the DoD or NSA, the government has a strong interest in improving US users' security, so as to protect US companies from foreign espionage. Look at the NSA's contribution to various crypto algorithms (agreed upon by the security community as positive) or to SELinux.

  7. Wheels 2.0 by janeuner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This new version of the wheel offers an anti-bubblegum coating, side curtain airbags to protect it from damage during a crash, and laser-etched tread for maximum efficiency. Seriously, why use tires when you can have a shiny new set Wheels 2.0?

  8. Think of the rainforests by AsciiNaut · · Score: 5, Funny

    Typical. I've only just finished printing out the current Internet.

  9. Intel tried to get away from x86 three times by peter303 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And all were abysmal, expensive failures. The marketplace can be extremely conservative at times.

  10. Bottom up vs Top Down by lobiusmoop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since the Internet is really just a collection of smaller privately-owned networks connected on common backbones, is it even possible to 'replace' it? I'm not sure what the goal is here. Sounds like herding cats to me.

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
  11. A tip for Stock Exchange players by mynickwastaken · · Score: 4, Funny

    Invest in Tubes Industry.
    They will need a lot of those.

  12. Re:Ok I understand the problems of our current set by Charcharodon · · Score: 4, Funny
    How about we cut the defense spending in half and invest it in alternative fuels?

    How about cutting wellfare in half and have ten times the money. Exactly how many poor people do we really need anyway?

  13. Schedule a switch date now by 4D6963 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Alright, you guys make this whole "new internet" thing, and we're you're done we'll just all switch to it all at the same time OK? We just need to schedule a date for when to switch to that new Internet thing. We should do it during a quiet time of the year, the month of December sounds appropriate, and I reckon it should take you guys quite a few years..

    How does December 21st, 2012 sound? I have nothing in my schedule for *that* day... Too apocalyptic maybe?

    --
    You just got troll'd!
    1. Re:Schedule a switch date now by LaminatorX · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm actually expecting to be pretty busy on the 21st, but my calendar's completely blank thereafter.

  14. Re:Just what I wanted! by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm just surprised that apparently all it takes is $12 million to do it.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  15. Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by wooferhound · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oscar Goldman:
    The Internet, A network barely alive. Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first bionic internet. GENI will be that internet. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, harder, deeper, faster.

    --
    We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    1. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      A new and 'better' internet?

      I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and guess this 'new' more 'secure' internet will not allow for any type of anonymity, and more ease of tracking who says what and when in a more easily searched and archived format...both for government AND corporations.

      After all, the current internet, for some reason, seems not to have been designed with big business commerce nor strict government control. Something that obviously (rolls eyes) needs to be fixed the 2nd time around.

      I mean...the nerve of people getting on a system, where every computer is a peer, and can publish their thoughts willy-nilly and interconnect in ways not expressedly sanctioned by our government officials that obviously know what's better and safer for us.

      Not to mention how it is often used now to closely monitor and poke fun at said officials...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by argent · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well my wife and I have long said that SSN's should be replaced with IP's

      I was just saying that to my good friend ::fe:43:6a:9c:f9!

      [and do you get a thrill clicking "Submit"?]

    3. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by 12AU7A · · Score: 5, Interesting

          It's really easy to talk like that, but look at CB verses Ham Radio. The Internet we have today is like CB radio...anyone can transmit and receive. CB radio has its advantages and disadvantages. More serious radio users got into ham radio where users were more serious about radio communications, you were identified by a license, and it was highly regulated by the government. With the regulation came improved communications.

          CB is good for some, ham radio good for others. So too with this. They should have a general Internet like the noisy CB band, and the other Internet with more regulation and better communications.

    4. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by blahplusplus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "It's really easy to talk like that, but look at CB verses Ham Radio. The Internet we have today is like CB radio...anyone can transmit and receive. CB radio has its advantages and disadvantages"

      While I agree with you in theory, in practice we know corporations are going to do their damnest to lock it down and be able to block and censor and "black out" websites they don't like. They HATE the fact that information is free, they want to enclose the last commons which is infinite (information, ideas, etc), we can't let these pieces of capitalist shit have it. (no offense to other capitalists who genuinely believe in freedom of information)

    5. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by visualight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With the regulation came improved communications

      I don't understand how a regulated internet is going to improve communications.

      --
      Samsung took back my unlocked bootloader because Google wants me to rent movies. They're both evil.
    6. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by Adriax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It will improve approved communications, non-approved communications like P2P, anonymous posting, and exposing the rich and powerful's shortcommings, negative comments about our corporate overlords, ect... will obviously not be allowed. That will free up bandwidth for approved communications, improving their speed and reliability.

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    7. Re:Stronger, Harder, Deeper, Faster by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bingo! We have a winner! The way I look at it is this: Would YOU trust THIS government,with the FISA dodging,retro immunity,warrantless wiretapping,etc to design ANYTHING that wouldn't log everything you did and everywhere you went?

      That is why we need to hang onto the current Internet with our dying breath,because I can GUARANTEE you that anything that comes along to replace it with be so Big Brother friendly it might as well have the "Big Brother is watching you" logo pop up on connection. The power mad rule the land and there is no way they'll allow any kind of new network that doesn't have their goals in mind.

      Can you imagine if it was easy to find out who posted what and make it(and possibly them) disappear? No Abu Ghraib scandal,no photos or videos out of Iraq that wasn't "The winning of hearts and minds",etc. The Internet would end up like that old joke from Airplane II "Today a 4 alarm fire made way for GLORIOUS new tractor factory!". Because that is all we would get:spin. You might be able to say "Brand X sucks,you should buy Brand Y!" but that is about as far as you would get to dissent. Personally,I'm still waiting for them to pull the "We have to block teh eveil kiddy pr0n and its awful child pr0nograhers!" and give us a great US firewall that just happens to block wikileaks,The Pirate Bay,and lots of other undesirable sites "by accident". But as always this is my 02c based on what I see on our news every day,YMMV

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  16. Re:Ok I understand the problems of our current set by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    2007 US Military spending: $549.2 Billion. Domestic spending: $457.9 Billion. Welfare is a small fraction of domestic spending, so it cannot be 10x defense spending.

  17. security privacy and freedom by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Interesting

    when you begin to address privacy and security at the protocol and architecture level, you also begin to enable governmental control

    one of the biggest philosophical issues that people don't seem to understand is that there is no such thing as centralized privacy, or government-enforced privacy. you constantly see stories on slashdot bemoaning government's inability to protect your privacy. its completely absurd. the only one who can protect your privacy is you

    it is an utter oxymoronic, paradoxical way of thinking to believe government policies and privacy can coexist in the same thought process. people constantly inveigh the government to do more about privacy. no. you don't want to involve the government in privacy, in any way. if you want privacy and security, YOU need to take steps to make that work, on your own. to involve a large controlling entity to do that... what? can we say not getting the concept?

    any system built to ensure "privacy" is essentially a command and control system... that can snoop on anything it wants

    the same with security

    it is GOOD the internet as it is has no internal safeguards for privacy and security. it means it is controlled by no one. get the point?

    the riaa and beijing should fund this GENI project

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  18. TFA doesn't really say anything! by Duncan+Blackthorne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TFA basically boils down to this single statement: "We've got money and some shiny toys to play with, wheee!!!!". It doesn't say anything about what their long-term intentions are specifically. I for one reserve judgement on the issue until I see something more concrete -- with the exception that I agree that nothing of any real substance will come of this for at least a decade.

  19. Re:Ok I understand the problems of our current set by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about cutting wellfare in half and have ten times the money.

    Eh? Spending on welfare (TANF) is a very small part of the budget, $16.5 billion. At a population of 301 million, that's $54.80/year/person, fifteen cents a day per person. The base defense budget - not including war funding - is more than $481 billion, $1598/person/year, $4.38 per day per person. U.S. military spending makes up the bulk of world military spending. We could cut ours in half and still enormously outspend all potential adversaries.

    Conservative politicians like to conflate "entitlements" all together, which includes not just welfare but medical spending (prices for which are driven up by the for-profit model and by drug patents, both of which are made possible by government action), veterans affairs and military retirement payments (which should be properly counted under defense), and Social Security spending.

    The NSF's budget is $6.065 billion, $20.15/year/person, about five and a half cents a day per person.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  20. Re:But but... by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 4, Informative

    DecNET - Never part of the Internet
    Banyan Vines - Never part of the Internet
    uunet - Company is now part of Verizon
    gopher - replaced by http
    telnet - used it this morning ....

    --
    Puteulanus fenestra mortis