Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

The Next Internet

A leading advocate of radical change in the Internet says research solutions will straddle the twin concepts of replace and revamp.

By David Talbot

Thursday, December 22, 2005

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

As the National Science Foundation (NSF) gears up to fund research into new Internet architectures that will provide a more secure and innovation-friendly network (see the three-part "The Internet is Broken"), it will get a running start from existing research efforts, such as PlanetLab, a collection of 1,000 researchers at 300 institutions around the world developing an "overlay network" of software. This global network runs on routers that allow network operators to do everything from manage traffic more efficiently to detect worms and viruses more quickly.

Larry Peterson is a computer scientist at Princeton University and director of PlanetLab. In an exchange with Technology Review, he explained the rationale behind the NSO project, called Global Environment for Networking Investigations, or GENI.

Technology Review: The problems with the Internet are fairly well understood. What are the basic views of what needs to be done at a technical level?

Larry Peterson: There is universal agreement that creating the "Future Internet," which meets the demands of the 21st century, is both a national priority and ripe with research challenges and opportunities. But there are two general schools of thought as to how to pursue this goal.

One view is that we may be at an inflection point in the societal utility of the Internet, with eroding trust, reduced innovation, and slowing rates of update. This view focuses on assumptions built into today's 30-year-old architecture that limit its ability to cope with emerging threats and opportunities, and argues that it is time for a "clean slate" reconceptualization of the Internet architecture.

The other view takes today's Internet as a given, and argues that future innovation will come in the form of new services and applications running on top of the Internet. Over time, these innovations will likely have a transformational effect on the Internet, but [this argument goes] it is simply not practical to think in terms of replacing all of today's Internet infrastructure.

TR: To the casual reader, "clean slate" sounds like you are arguing for replacing all of today’s Internet infrastructure. Are you?

LP: No. I interpret Future Internet very broadly, to include innovations at any level of the architecture. Research is equally likely to result in alternative protocols and architectures running inside the network, or in new applications and services as overlays on top of today's Internet. Collectively, all these layers will form the Future Internet.

While researchers should employ clean-slate thinking that is not constrained by today's Internet, it does not imply that the outcome will necessarily be an entirely new Internet. In other words, clean slate is a "process," not a "result."

It is likely that different researchers will chose to leverage different aspects of today's Internet, while exploring alternatives to other elements. There will likely be opportunities at the boundary between these two perspectives, that is, in exploring how today's architecture is best evolved over time to better support emerging overlay services.

Comments

  • The begining of the end.
    Well, if every asset was identifiable then the government of say China could find out who the disenters are. Anything that you say against the governement on the internet then, you would be accountable for.

    I agree that the internet has some security holes that we have to deal with as a society, but I cannot agree that everyone has to have an id &quotMARK&quot that their computer and indentity is associated with to implement the security fixes.

    The articles reference to tying in wireless networks on a global scale makes me think of the &quotBEAST&quot.

    You know it is close to the END when they are talking about one big network everyone is tied to!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Joe someone)
    12/22/2005
    Posts:1
  • The begining of the end.
    Well, if every asset was identifiable then the government of say China could find out who the disenters are. Anything that you say against the governement on the internet then, you would be accountable for.

    I agree that the internet has some security holes that we have to deal with as a society, but I cannot agree that everyone has to have an id &quotMARK&quot that their computer and indentity is associated with to implement the security fixes.

    The articles reference to tying in wireless networks on a global scale makes me think of the &quotBEAST&quot.

    You know it is close to the END when they are talking about one big network everyone is tied to!
    Rate this comment: 12345
    Guest (Joe someone)
    12/22/2005
    Posts:1

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review July/August 2009

Current Issue

Search Me
Inside the launch of Stephen Wolfram’s new “computational knowledge engine.”
•  Subscribe
Save 41%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
Advertisement

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

Get Technology Review updates via the web, cellphone, or Instant Messager – Follow techreview on Twitter!

Advertisement
Subscribe to Technology Review's daily e-mail update. Enter your e-mail address

Advertisement
TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.