Most developed nations are now revisiting their telecoms policies with a view to using telecoms infrastructure as a tool to revive the economy. And when exploring this it quickly becomes clear that open networks are necessary if we are to achieve the economic benefits that the digital economy has to offer. The multiplier effect of open infrastructure is obvious. It stimulates developments in healthcare, education, energy, media and Internet -- this in stark contrast to the closed (vertically-integrated) networks that are currently operated by most incumbent telcos around the world.
Today is a historic day as the first generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) has been signed. Only a few other top level domains, all of which are country code Top-Level Domains (ccTLDs), have been signed to date. This step is part of the first phase of adoption. Authoritative DNS servers need to sign and publish their zones. The second part is for the resolvers on the Internet to validate the keys. Both systems working together will provide security in the DNS.
Paul Stahura published a great report demonstrating that trademark holders have historically not been blocking their names across multiple Top-Level Domains (TLDs). I have always been a fan of number crunching -- "numbers never lie". Since Paul has already done a remarkable job of statistical analysis, I am going to wear my theorist hat and prove a reworded form of the Hypothesis using logical deduction and common sense...
If you visit the new dashboard on ICANN's web site, you see some nice bar charts, including one rather large negative number of $4,462,000. If you click the little arrow at the top of the Financial Performance chart, a footnote window pops open where the last sentence is: "The large variance to budget is due to investment losses of $4.6 mil." Investment losses? Yup, ICANN's been speculating in the stock market...
A Tipping Point for the Internet? Catching the precise moment of a tectonic shift in a global system as large and important as the Internet may be viewed as an exercise in the improbable. However, I point out in this summary that I think we are precisely in the midst of such a shift...
The following is an analysis based on the hypothesis that trademark holders are not, in general, registering their trademarks as domain names across the existing top-level domain namespace. To determine if the hypothesis is true, we examine domain names registered in the popular generic top-level domains ("gTLDs" such as .com, .net and .info), also using other publicly available information such as the USPTO database of trademarks, the English dictionary, DNS entries, UDRP records and whois records.
Yochai Benkler has done a close reading of the broadband portions of both House and Senate stimulus bills. Nice work. To summarize Yochai's summary: House: $6 Billion, split between Commerce and Agriculture Depts., requires adherence to FCC's Four Internet Principles (the Martin FCC Version); Senate: $9 Billion, via Commerce Department's NTIA, requires less specific "interconnection and nondiscrimination." How much broadband can a Billion buy?
At Cisco Networkers in Barcelona earlier this week, some of us saw a dragon try to wiggle out of its shell, provided you connected in IPv6 that is. A smile to Kame, the turtle which only danced under a IPv6 caress. Networkers 2009 saw more than 3000 attendants and a good complement of IPv6 presentations highlighted by a high powered plenary panel on the status of IPv6.
During the sunrise period for .eu domains there was quite a bit of controversy, as a number of high profile names were grabbed by companies that had no legitimate right to them. One of the domains that caught my attention at the time was dublin.eu (see Irish Times article). So what about the .tel sunrise?
Were companies like Lantec, who grabbed the dublin.eu domain, actively seeking high profile names this time round?
In this multipart series I will be presenting some of the leading industry-standard best practices for enterprise network security using Cisco technologies.... "Wisdom consists in being able to distinguish among dangers and make a choice of the least harmful." That quote is quite possibly the most accurate depiction possible of the never-ending struggle between network security and corporate budget. Providing a mechanism to defend the enterprise network from every conceivable threat is impossible in terms of both technology and funding.