[Discuss] Real internet provider in Victoria?

Burkhard Ott-Langer news2017 at derith.de
Sat Nov 4 16:52:17 PDT 2017

On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 16:19:51 -0700
pw <p.willis at telus.net> wrote:

> On 2017-11-04 02:34 PM, Burkhard Ott-Langer wrote:
> > On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 14:14:52 -0700
> > pw <p.willis-EynCeXvFgoheoWH0uzbU5w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >   
> >> There should just be IP6 address provider companies.  
> > 
> > Well, that would be fatal. How do you transport the electrical
> > signal?  
> Canada has had government owned communications infrastructure before.
> Publicly owned and managed infrastructure with competitive service
> contracts is a known working model. Even for last mile.

We had that too in Germany, 40% are still owned and the Deutsche
Telekom still plays like Bell,Telus,Shaw, Viseotron and the others,
just less successful.

> Global economics are currently suffering because of the anti-taxation
> myth promoted by big business. This has caused governments to get
> on-board with a  race to the bottom on taxation.

No idea, I'm not an economist and have to admit I have no clue about
stuff like that.

> > Right, who pays for the wire?  
> Subscribers and taxes. Just like water and sewer piping.

Interesting idea, in general I also think internet should be a public
service in 2017, however I don't think it would work well.
Can you imagine the tons of different regulations for each Province or
> > You need some type of authority who builds and maintains the
> > infrastructure and I wouldn't have any issue to pay a price for
> > that. What I don't want is to pay 3 times:
> > 
> > 1. for the infrastructure
> > 2. for their forced subscriptions (bandwidth, throtteling etc.)
> > 3. pay more if I want to use certain services
> >   
> >> The network is mal-designed in that it requires intermediaries
> >> to hold a block of addresses from the pool rather than just
> >> having a flat address space where any specific address can exist
> >> at any physical location.  
> > 
> > I don't get that, can you explain it a little more please?
> > Worldwide anycast?  
> My point is that blocks of addresses are treated as a commodity.
> Blocks are also localized (balkanized) although this is a product
> of the routing system (the design).

I get your point, however the problem is not the routing design, the
problem is that not everyone play by the rules and the NICs are to weak
to enforce them.

How would you route? Some endpoint needs at least to feel responsible
for a block or at least a single IP.
If there is no controlled assignment, how to you prevent that blocks
are announced on different pathes?

> >> The IP system is more political than functional.  
> > 
> > Nope, not at all. RIPE is just stricter than ARIN is, ARIN gets a
> > little bribe and all is fine.
> > The official policy for all NICs is to assign the blocks, once the
> > owner is not in need anymore he _has_ to give the block back.
> > That needs to be enforced.
> > 
> > TLDs became political (ICANN) in case you meant that.  
> This is the problem with the network design.
> Why should I need to plug into someone else's router/switch
> to have an IP address?

Because he (ISP) announces your block to the world, unless you get a
block assigned and can announce it yourselves.
You can assign yourself any IP address you want, may happen that no one
can communicate with your since someone else has the same address and
is playing by the rules. Every IP is and has to be uniquely assigned,
there is no way around and there is nothing you can 'design' around it.
Every bussystem works like that and the internet is more or less just a
huge bussystem.

> In addition, IP6 makes IP addresses about as valuable as raisins
> if you look at is from the supply vs. demand perspective. IP6
> addresses should be gratis upon request and should travel with the
> consumer rather than the service provider. The only reason this can't
> be done (maybe it can..??) is because of the protocol design of the
> network.

Nope, you want to read more about routing and how it works.
Once you did, you will agree that if you are an ISP, you don't want
that your customer (every customer) can anycast.

I small charge is ok in my opinion, if your PTR is assigned to you so
you can update it, regardless if IPv4 or 6.
If you get a block registered to you from a NIC, that is the charge
they take, setting up your information and do the maintenance according
to the rules.

> There was some talk of SpaceX doing global Satellite WIFI, but it
> would be better if Canada ran that kind of system as a part of public
> infrastructure. Same with fibre and cable. Less chance of coercion or
> price collusion. The only question is how to keep governments from
> being evil with all that power. We know that corporations are. At
> least with governments each voter has a proxy.

If you meant [1], the background is to sell the product internet
connection, this time via satellite.
So that wouldn't help you at all, since the connection are rented to
Satellite connection are very expensive, in such a case I would
actually go with shaw :D. 

> >> Either that or cap the maximum size of communications companies
> >> and break up Telus/Shaw/Rogers/etc .  
> > 
> > Usually the more, the better.  
> In Canada we don't have  'more' or 'better'.

Correct, and only the customer (you!) can work on that to change it.

> >> Small markets like Canada will never get competition with so few
> >> infrastructure providers because consumers are captive to their
> >> region.  
> > 
> > I disagree. You just see the consumer market, that is peanuts
> > anyway.  
> Why is the consumer market peanuts?
> Because the network is controlled and owned as a commodity rather than
> a resource in the public commons.

You should compare the numbers if you are just in the transit market.
Once you have your infrastructure in place and have your IPX up,  you
can lean back and count the incoming money. Everynow and them you
invest in infrastructure to keep it state of the art, that's it.

If you roll out the wires as well, you need much more money, you need
contracts and other legal stuff (wires crossing private land etc.).
That involves lawyers and many more bloodsuckers before you can even
start your business.

If, like in your example the infrastructure would be public and let's
say as a business I rent a few wires from the Government, I need to pay
for that, that goes directly to the customer bill. 
If something breaks or is unreliable you have the constant
finger pointing game between Government and private company.
That's why I think it won't work.



More information about the Discuss mailing list