- Microsoft Windows chief decries standards grandstanding
- The 5 best, and 5 worst, features of Google Chrome OS
- Federal government using PS3 to crack pedophile passwords
- 10G Ethernet cheat sheet
- Top 10 free Windows tools for IT pros, at a glance
Sounds like a crazy question, in this era of Facebook, Twitter and a "digital millennial" generation that's grown up never not knowing the Internet.
But there are worrying signs that the Internet's architecture may not be able to scale effectively much longer. I've written previously about the crisis in access capacity: Demand for access bandwidth is growing exponentially, while provider investment is growing linearly. The lines cross — demand exceeds capacity — sometime around 2012. And the solution isn't for providers (or even the government) to simply invest more money in access — because Internet access is a break-even business at best, and a money-losing proposition in many cases.
That's just the tip of the iceberg. Noted journalist John Markoff has written about systemic security flaws in the 'Net. And more recently, the folks at the IETF have finally admitted that IPv6 deployment — intended to address addressing and routing scalability in the next-generation Internet — has failed. (That exact word — failure — was used in an IETF presentation last October).
Is it possible there's a fundamental flaw within the Internet itself, that the architecture is simply not sustainable going forward? And more importantly, should the Internet be sustainable? Do we really need an Internet?
Sounds like a crazy question — but it's not. Both content and service providers have seriously questioned the need for an Internet in recent months. Google and Amazon seem to be taking the perspective that so long as users can access their content, it doesn't matter if they can access anyone else's — so they're constructing overlay networks for their own content. And a major telco recently asked me — in all seriousness — why it should bother maintaining the 'Net.
In other words, both content and service providers seem to be advocating a return to the "walled garden" model, where if users want an application, they need to buy the network to get to it.
My view? We absolutely, positively need the Internet. The real value in the 'Net is that it enables anyone, anywhere, to build out an application that everyone can access. That kind of openness is what's driven the amazing productivity increase that's occurred in the 1990s and 2000s. Returning to walled gardens simply won't cut it.
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Partner Content
Simplify Your Branch Infrastructure
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Download the Free Info Kit
Next-Gen Load Balancing
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Download the Free Guide
Accelerate Your Web Apps by up to 5x
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Download the Free Guide
Comments (10)
The Internet Can't Die, Is A Continuously Evolving OrganismBy Viper on April 1, 2009, 7:14 pmIt is interesting conjecture that "The" Internet is doomed. I agree that "The Current State" of the Internet will be different tomorrow and if we declare every...
Reply | Read entire comment
The Internet and Milk DeliveryBy Anon on April 1, 2009, 8:04 pmThere was once a vast network for the on-time delivery of time-sensitive materials, one that delivered to the very door-step of huge numbers of homes in America....
Reply | Read entire comment
POVBy Anonymous on April 2, 2009, 5:34 am An interesting article as it opens up an intrigueing discussion. Having read Neuromancer by William Gibson i felt a chill down my spine. Corporations every inch...
Reply | Read entire comment
The IPv6 deployment has not failedBy Anonymous on April 2, 2009, 9:41 amIPv6 addressing is coming along nicely and more and more network administrators are learning that it is not as difficult as they once thought. It is completely untrue...
Reply | Read entire comment
Fear mongering?By Anonymous on April 2, 2009, 3:20 pm"Demand for access bandwidth is growing exponentially, while provider investment is growing linearly. The lines cross — demand exceeds capacity — sometime around...
Reply | Read entire comment
The Internet - FUDBy Dr. Bob Hacker on April 6, 2009, 1:56 pmI suspect the real truth here is that the monopolies, e.g. ATT, Time-Warner and their ilk, yearn for the good old days when they were kings. The actual backbone...
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments