China Rebrands Proposal on Internet Governance, Targeting Developing Countries (euractiv.com) 41
The Chinese government made another attempt in promoting its vision of the internet, in a repackaging intended to lure lagging regions. From a report: Throughout the years, China has made several attempts at changing the current internet architecture, mostly in the context of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the United Nation's agency for ICT technologies. Contrarily to other standardisation organisations that are dominated by private companies, in ITU governments play a leading role. Thus, Beijing has been using this forum to attract countries that might have similar interests in asserting stronger governmental control over the internet. In September 2019, the delegate of Chinese telecom juggernaut Huawei presented a proposal for a new IP (Internet Protocol). In February, EURACTIV anticipated that more proposals were expected in the context of the World Telecommunication Standardisation Assembly.
Beijing's new proposal took the form of a modification of a resolution set to be adopted at the World Telecommunication Development Conference, the ITU's conference dedicated to telecom development that takes place in Rwanda from 6 to 16 June. Two weeks ago, the Chinese government circulated a modification of a resolution that in a footnote introduced the concept of IPv6+, presented as an enhanced version of the latest version of the internet protocol, known as IPv6. At around the same time, IPv6+ was promoted by Huawei. "IPv6+ can realize more open and active technology and service innovation, more efficient and flexible networking and service provision, more excellent performance and user experience," the footnote reads. According to the document, seen by EURACTIV, IPv6+ would have three crucial advantages. A more efficient allocation of information across the network; integration of other technologies that allow for an organisation of network resources; integration of innovative solutions.
Beijing's new proposal took the form of a modification of a resolution set to be adopted at the World Telecommunication Development Conference, the ITU's conference dedicated to telecom development that takes place in Rwanda from 6 to 16 June. Two weeks ago, the Chinese government circulated a modification of a resolution that in a footnote introduced the concept of IPv6+, presented as an enhanced version of the latest version of the internet protocol, known as IPv6. At around the same time, IPv6+ was promoted by Huawei. "IPv6+ can realize more open and active technology and service innovation, more efficient and flexible networking and service provision, more excellent performance and user experience," the footnote reads. According to the document, seen by EURACTIV, IPv6+ would have three crucial advantages. A more efficient allocation of information across the network; integration of other technologies that allow for an organisation of network resources; integration of innovative solutions.
It took nearly decades for IPV6 to come into being (Score:4, Insightful)
It was developed in an open process, with some of the best industry resources and computer scientists in the world contributing.
Now suddenly China comes up with a better IPV6?
"IPv6+ can realize more open and active technology and service innovation, more efficient and flexible networking and service provision, more excellent performance and user experience"
#Bullshit #Marketechture #Propaganda
Re: (Score:2)
It was developed in an open process, with some of the best industry resources and computer scientists in the world contributing.
Now suddenly China comes up with a better IPV6?
China's IP crap revolves around the rather quaint concept of "source routing". Everyone knows the Internet would be way better off with source routing.
Re: (Score:2)
Source routing has some serious good points.
None of which survive the crossing of an administrative domain.
Re:It took nearly decades for IPV6 to come into be (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone knows they aren't for open and free flow of ideas and communication.
Re: (Score:2)
Why isn't a country of over a billion people not allowed a seat at the table?
When they come to the table in good faith, they can have a seat. If their purpose is to be trolling shitlords who destroy the internet as we know it so they can lock down their population harder we should not assist them. And... it is. So... we shouldn't.
Re: It took nearly decades for IPV6 to come into b (Score:2)
China is always making big claims about Internet protocol. During the 00s they were supposedly moving to IPv9.
https://www.telecomasia.net/co... [telecomasia.net]
It's just stupid propaganda shit for their own people to consume. Think like how most Russians actually believe there is a big fascist movement in Ukraine, and they really have no idea just how shit their military is.
Re:It took nearly decades for IPV6 to come into be (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Now suddenly China comes up with a better IPV6?
Says right there in the summary, it's about "asserting stronger governmental control over the internet".
China is envious protocol (Score:2)
This is the first I heard of "IPv6+" (plus) and I was WTF enough that
Doing web searches to try to find out more, you get a lot of news stories going back a decade or more about how China is going to run singe-stack IPv6 country wide. To me that is not a bad thing in itself, but there is always this lurking background miasma that this is being done not to improve engineering the network, but to make it easier for the government (CCP) to control and monitor it.
So does anyone have a bullet-point listing o
Re: (Score:3)
Re:China is envious protocol (Score:5, Informative)
I found this "IPv6+ is IPv6 Enhanced Innovation for the 5G and cloud era. Itâ(TM)s characterized by protocol innovations such as SRv6 and BIER6,
Well, that's clearly bullshit, because SRv6 is a routing system for IPv6 [segment-routing.net], so that's just IPv6 with SRv6, and BIER [ietf.org] is also implemented at the host or router, and requires no protocol changes.
combined with AI capabilities such as network analytics and intelligent tuning
That also has literally nothing to do with the protocol.
I glanced at your cite and also noticed this:
In the healthcare industry, IPv6+ slicing technology can isolate multiple planes on a physical network
No, that is also part of SRv6 [ipv6plus.net], which again requires zero protocol changes.
We can conclude that IPv6+ is a completely bullshit buzzword and anyone using it on purpose is a flack, shill, or spectacular dumbfuck. And while we're at it, Fuck Huawei in their propaganda-spreading asses.
Re: (Score:2)
... And while we're at it, Fuck Huawei in their propaganda-spreading asses.
agreed
Re: (Score:2)
What's bullshit is you not following the conversation. This is about IPv6+, and whether it's a thing. And it is not. HTH, HAND, FRO&DBMA.
Re: (Score:2)
The question idiot is whether everyone is using it or not as a standard, and if not, why isn't it so
The answer, my dear chucklefuck, is that IPv6 is a protocol, and what they are calling IPv6+ is not a protocol, it is a bunch of shit designed for IPv6 being used for IPv6. Nobody is calling anything IPv6+ except Huawei, and anyone stupid enough to repeat what dribbles out someplace dark and smelly... their PR department.
Re: China is envious protocol (Score:2)
Did you search Bing? Bing is more pro China so will index their news or ideas better.
It's also called SRv6. As others said, it focuses more on segmented routing. The brief bit I read suggests it in part ties into VPNs but without knowing more about Segmented routing in concept, it sounds like that's just basically how VPNs already work, so something like making services more siloed with maybe less hops.
Note, I live in China. There are a shit ton of people here and even small cities laugh at western urban po
Re: China is envious protocol (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would they be laughing? They live in a communist shithole with 24 hour surveillance and forced labor camps for those who don't tow the party line.
Doesn't sound very fun to me.
Propaganda nonsense and obfuscation (Score:5, Interesting)
"A more efficient allocation of information across the network; integration of other technologies that allow for an organisation of network resources; integration of innovative solutions."
That's just about totally meaningless. Of course they're talking about backdoors and centralized control, but do they have to indulge in such bland doublespeak? Oh wait, I guess they do.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they're talking about backdoors and centralized control, but do they have to indulge in such bland doublespeak?
If they didn't then it would be easy for people to identify and present objects to their insidious scheme. Paper over your scheme with corporate doublespeak and the layman cannot understand the issue but still thinks it has been explained. This is what the rebranding effort is all about, bamboozling those to be subjugated while promoting authoritarianism.
Re: (Score:2)
This is just ICANN and ITU with extra steps. What you are describing is pretty close to what we have already.
No one is asking you to like the government of the US or China but we already have every country on board with these existing orgs and things have been pretty OK so far.
If you come up with some new scheme and the major countries don't buy in then you essentially have accomplished nothing since you need that buy-in, the smaller countries can't go it alone. What's the incentive for the major countrie
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I think we got lucky that the internet developed with the openness it has today, even if its not perfect. Every country agrees on protocol standards, the majority of standards are open source, the working groups operate in a fairly independent manner. Not perfect cooperation but more of a decent stalemate.
It's kinda too late for any large country to exert control outside of their own nations. China simply can't extend their great firewall past their own borders. While there's lots of espionage and unde
Re: (Score:2)
...
I am hesitant to rock the boat now because I really think any big attempt at major change even with the best of intentions is is going to be worse for the users in the end.
I absolutely agree with that statement. I'd add that so much of the world economy is reliant on the internet, that any major changes could cause economic chaos and end up hurting some businesses and business owners disproportionately, not to mention the pain it could cause for John Q Public.
With my previous (poorly expressed) comment, my thinking was comparing the internet of today to the internet of the 90's. There have always been governing bodies, but it seemed the earlier versions of these groups were
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah i can absolutely see that, back in the 90's when it was still kindof novel and smaller they could focus their efforts on what was best for the users. Now as you said, there are billions of dollars at stake with every change they make. The pressure on these governing bodies from both megacorps and state actors is incomparable to those early days.
Re: (Score:2)
China simply can't extend their great firewall past their own borders.
That's what this is actually about. By claiming that their Huawei equipment is somehow more IPv6 than IPv6, they hope to get other nations to install it... where they can use it to spy at best, or even manipulate traffic. And in a way, they can extend the firewall past their borders [sophos.com] as it is... for short, targeted durations.
Re: Having China govern the intertubes is a bad i (Score:2)
Trump put Ajit Pai in as head of the FCC. Neither of those two are your friend.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the internet needs to be its own country, with "extradition" treaties so that everyone can be active on it under local law rather than the laws of whichever country the server happens to sit in. And with independent governance against law enforcement and judicial overreach.
Good luck with that. We can't even get roll out IPV6
China just wants control of the Internet (Score:3)
bullshit from stem to stern (Score:4, Informative)
That is not how any of this works.
The internet, short for internetwork, is as the name implies a network of networks. Every country already controls the internet within their borders. But no country controls "the internet", not even the USA. Every country has always been free to run the parts of the internet within their borders as they see fit. China is the poster child for actually doing so.
IPv6+ is not a real thing, the technologies Huawei claims make up IPv6+ are actually just technologies designed (and already implemented!) for use with IPv6.
Huawei link 404 (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)