Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

tools.ietf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 81 posts

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#11

Post by sern »

sanxiyn wrote: post #4
sern wrote: post #3

It's not an RFC, it's an Internet Draft (which anyone can submit without review), and anyway it's offensive and incoherent enough that nobody will take it seriously, and it certainly won't make it as an actual RFC.

Why is it offensive? How is it incoherent?

Proposals to fragment the Internet generally do not go down well, for obvious reasons.

The proposal is needlessly complicated, notwithstanding the poor quality of writing. The authors' rationale is to "realize autonomy", yet AIP suffixes are globally namespaced and still need IANA assignment, which is really no different to the current situation in relation to TLDs. It breaks backwards compatibility when applications need to cross AIP networks and also introduces the issue of conflicting AIP network-internal names. The authors make no attempt to discuss these obvious issues or any others, and also blindly wave off security considerations, saying "there is no additional security requirement".

Also, the authors are on Yahoo/QQ free webmail addresses, which isn't very professional.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#12

Post by sangnoir »

mtgx wrote: post #6

I wonder if this is just because they would like as much control over their population as possible and they want their own Internet, as they would like their own "Twitter", and own "Facebook" and so on, out of a strong sense of nationalism, or because they are worried that US wants more and more control of the Internet, and could be why they are also support getting the Internet under UN's control (among other things…

This could be one way of getting around an "Internet kill-switch"

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#13

Post by ajitk »

From the draft:

> ...network A, B and ... are AIP networks; Domain node "www.yahoo.com" in network B is expressed as "www.yahoo.com.B" for its external domain name.

It mean that www.yahoo.com can co-exist in AIPs A and B. The "external domain names" will be www.yahoo.com.A abd www.yahoo.com.B. Would HTML documents be linked using local names or external names? Local only names are not going to work across APIs unless www.yahoo.com maintains same document hierarchy in all of them!

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#14

Post by kijin »

"Internet autonomy" = we want to have our own intranet so we can cut off the rest of the world from our population without causing technical trouble.

"Unilateral action" = we're gonna do this whether you like it or not.

But you know what, the Chinese already have the means to do this. Just block anything that doesn't end in ".cn", and block port 53 on all foreign DNS servers. Then what's the point of this internet draft? Just something that somebody can cite later to lend an appearance of support when China does break away from the internet?

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#15

Post by kijin »

ajitk wrote: post #13

From the draft: > ...network A, B and ... are AIP networks; Domain node "www.yahoo.com" in network B is expressed as "www.yahoo.com.B" for its external domain name. It mean that www.yahoo.com can co-exist in AIPs A and B. The "external domain names" will be www.yahoo.com.A abd www.yahoo.com.B. Would HTML documents be linked using local names or external names? Local only names are not going to work across APIs unless…

I don't think China would care at all. If all the links to www.yahoo.com suddenly becomes invalid by default, now the Great Firewall can do whitelisting instead of blacklisting!

On the other hand, they already have access to a ".B" suffix, and it's called ".cn". For exampe, www.yahoo.com.cn.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#16

Post by cocoflunchy »

sern wrote: post #11
sanxiyn wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it offensive? How is it incoherent?

Proposals to fragment the Internet generally do not go down well, for obvious reasons. The proposal is needlessly complicated, notwithstanding the poor quality of writing. The authors' rationale is to "realize autonomy", yet AIP suffixes are globally namespaced and still need IANA assignment, which is really no different to the current situation in relation to TLDs. It breaks backwards compatibility when applications…

The '@qq.com' part seemed more professional to me than the '644247110' part.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#19

Post by culturestate »

sern wrote: post #11
sanxiyn wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it offensive? How is it incoherent?

Proposals to fragment the Internet generally do not go down well, for obvious reasons. The proposal is needlessly complicated, notwithstanding the poor quality of writing. The authors' rationale is to "realize autonomy", yet AIP suffixes are globally namespaced and still need IANA assignment, which is really no different to the current situation in relation to TLDs. It breaks backwards compatibility when applications…

> Also, the authors are on Yahoo/QQ free webmail addresses, which isn't very professional.

Par for the course in China, really. I know very few businesspeople here who don't use a free email service.

Re: Chinese RFC proposes separate, independent, national internets and DNS roots

#20

Post by 02f39nrca »

inportb wrote: post #17
daurnimator wrote: post #7

I can barely read it... the spelling and grammar are terrible. This can NOT be a real effort... can it?

Why do you think this is not a "real effort"?

Because it reads like it was generated by one of those Markov Chain text generators and then run through Google translate a few times.
Post reply on HN