decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Par for the course | 297 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Par for the course
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, January 20 2013 @ 05:27 PM EST
Why be surprised?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Numbering Schemes
Authored by: Ian Al on Monday, January 21 2013 @ 03:41 AM EST
Actually, a central exchange is not necessary for any internet communication.
The reason we use central exchanges for telephone calls is to implement the
international numbering and address scheme (one of the reasons that America
'funds' the ITU).

We already have the central exchange addressing scheme implemented for the
Internet. Routing does not use the switched hierarchy that used to be used for
telephony (step-by-step routing). The DNS system is the internet equivalent of
the telephone central exchange address translation and the routing is separated
from translation.

Derived internet address schemes, such as email, are proprietary. However,
email, ftp, voip and any other services can be created when the end-points have
static addresses.

For instance, if one has a static, public IP address one can create an ftp
server and allow friends to upload and download files. In the same way, an email
server can be set up that does not depend on proprietary email address schemes.
So can a voip service. Many routers already support Virtual Private (IP)
Networks (VPN) based just on the use of static, public IP addresses.

With IPV4 most users hire a public to private IP routing service via the ISP
using a temporary public IP address. With IPV6, I expect that static, public IP
addresses will be allocated by most ISPs.

Finally, I will be able to ftp files direct to the recipient without having to
use a centralised ftp exchange service at additional cost and delay or attaching
the files to an email communication.

As long as I don't want to use proprietary voip address ranges, international
telephone numbering schemes, proprietary email addresses and the like, I will be
able to share private equivalents with my friends. Whenever I need to use
proprietary or international address schemes, I will need to use a centrally
provided addressing and routing service like email.

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

this walled garden
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 21 2013 @ 12:31 PM EST
"that will simply give people using MS Windows one more reason to install
Firefox or Chrome"

We went through this situation in the early 1990s with AOL, Compuserve, and
Prodigy. JOIN US they all said. I was tempted by Compuserve because they ran
on DEC-10s.

Then I saw the internet where I worked ... Wow! I can talk to anyone, anywhere,
anytime. This is for me!

Skype has a big installed base. It is easy to use. It keeps wanting to
advertise at me. It doesn't cover everyone, all the time. Google can be
cheaper.

--

Bondfire

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )