Distributed Object Architecture versus DNS
Does anyone have any information about DOA versus DNS. Any ideas about security with DOA is better than DNS. Maybe pros and cons of DOA versus DNS? Matt Lewis
On 7 Jan 2017, at 4:15, Stephenson, Ryan M CIV DISA IE (US) wrote:
Does anyone have any information about DOA versus DNS.
My understanding of 'DOA' is that it's a general category of software architecture (think CORBA) and nothing to do with name resolution or any sort of directory services, per se. Can you provide more context? ----------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net>
Oops, just replied to this on the wrong thread. Here it is again: ISOC released an info paper, back in October ahead of the ITU WTSA https://www.internetsociety.org/doc/overview-digital-object-architecture-doa They are worried (as I understand it) 1) that it could be an ITU end run to grab back numbering, 2) it could be abused by bad actors such as repressive governments who want to use it for digital id. Post WTSA there was this <https://www.internetsociety.org/doc/itu-wtsa-2016-outcomes-internet-society-perspective> : Digital Object Architecture (DOA) WTSA-16 received 10 (ten) resolutions ranging from smart cities, combating counterfeit devices and cybersecurity to e-health, IoT that explicitly and implicitly referenced the DOA. Political momentum quickly grew around the DOA as some member states appeared to seek to alter the ITU’s technology neutral stance by selecting the DOA as the solution for a number of issues, including IoT. Agreement was reached to either replace DOA references with Recommendation ITU-T X.1255 <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.1255-201309-I> (which is based on the DOA) or remove them entirely from the relevant resolutions if agreed text on identity management would be reflected in the summary record of the proceedings. The compromise text was a follows: “*the Plenary recognized that identity management plays an important role in many telecommunications/ICT services and that it can be implemented using a range of technologies and solutions.*” We should expect prolonged debates as DOA has survived with a variety of hooks in Resolutions and Recommendations that will carry into Plenipotentiary 2018. It will be important for governments to consider interoperability, stability, security and scalability (at Internet scale) capabilities of any technologies that are deployed on the Internet to ensure that the Internet continues to remain secure and stable. -- Joly MacFie President - Internet Society New York Chapter (ISOC-NY) http://isoc-ny.org 218 565 9365
On 7 Jan 2017, at 10:15, Joly MacFie wrote:
They are worried (as I understand it) 1) that it could be an ITU end run to grab back numbering, 2) it could be abused by bad actors such as repressive governments who want to use it for digital id.
Based on seemingly cyclical statements of this nature, I've been waiting for the ITU to impose GOSIP or whatever on us for the last ~30 years or so - but so far, nothing much has happened in that regard. Is there actually a reason to suspect that this time it will be any different? ----------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net>
On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> wrote:
Is there actually a reason to suspect that this time it will be any different?
Blind backlash from IoT DDoS? Looming billions of rf tagged items? -- Joly MacFie President - Internet Society New York Chapter (ISOC-NY) http://isoc-ny.org 218 565 9365
participants (3)
-
Joly MacFie -
Roland Dobbins -
Stephenson, Ryan M CIV DISA IE (US)