Note to readers: I’m currently at the IETF in Yokohama; each day I’m going to try to post something about the days events y’all might find interesting.
Sunday night — arrived at Yokohama around one in the afternoon after 16+ hours in flight, plus layovers, a one and a half hour bus ride, and then a short taxi ride. The location is really quite nice. We’re right on the bay with a lot of stuff to do, and the hotel is part of a complex that interconnects multiple hotels and malls, so there’s plenty to eat.
The first meeting on Sunday night was an Internet Society meeting with some local representation from Japan. If you don’t know who the ISOC is, you should read this post. The point of the meeting was to listen to the concerns of the Japanese Internet community around Internet Governance, and for the ISOC to highlight some activities we’ve been working on to address various issues the ISOC has been working on. Three areas of discussion ensued.
The first was the IANA transition, and the concerns various folks have around the process and the results. Within the US, there is a lot of concern about the results of the transition of ICAAN’s “ownership” from the management of the US government, which has largely taken a hands off approach to the management of the Internet’s various systems and technologies, to an international body with what may well be little oversight and lots of potential for mischief and meddling by those who would like to rebalance privacy against surveillance. The Japan delegates had a generally positive view of the process; my sense is it’s going to take a big effort on the part of the community to preserve privacy in the long run against the desires of governments who have their own agendas. Several folks from the Japanese group we were meeting with brought up the same point: security and privacy on the Internet is everyone’s responsibility. The only way it’s going to happen is if we take the problems in hand at a personal level.
The second was a presentation of the ISOC’s MANRS effort, which is a set of best common practices around routing security. Thankfully little was said about BGPSEC, which appears to be primarily a fast path to congestive crtypography failure for the BGP default free zone.
One interesting point brought out by the Japanese research community was the draining of funding from Internet related research in recent Japanese budgets. There seems to be a sense in many parts of the world that the Internet is “done” from a technology perspective, so future technology research can be dedicated to things like self driving cars. I’m not certain I agree with the assessement quite yet — maybe in ten years (and maybe even never), but not today.
That’s it for today — I’ll be covering interesting things from Monday in my next post.