W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credentials@w3.org > November 2015

Re: Solutions to the NASCAR problem?

From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:31:56 -0800
To: "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Cc: public-credentials@w3.org
Message-ID: <56533F7C.20407@sunshine.net>
On 11/23/15 7:02 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
>
>> On 23 Nov 2015, at 14:41, Steven Rowat
>> <steven_rowat@sunshine.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/23/15 3:01 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
>>>
>> Some published rationales (ie, by Van Jacobson, who is now
>> working at PARC) [5,6] made the assertion that the problems of
>> ineffective web publishing and money transfer and security and
>> scalability would remain essentially insoluble until a CCN or NDN
>> system is implemented throughout the Internet.
>
> It is good that people are researching that. When it is stable, and
> our work is stable it will be very interesting to integrate that
> too.

At risk of over-simplifying, I find I'm still intrigued by how 
WebAccessControl and the CCN/NDN are related.

I remember a description, I think by Jacobson -- though he may not 
have been the first to say this -- that the Internet is really nothing 
more than a huge copying machine: it copies bits.

The questions for all of us, IMO, then resolve to two:

1. How are the bits copied most efficiently (in money, electricity, 
bandwidth, or any other numerical measure.)

2. Who decides which bits can be copied by who (with subsets of when, 
where, how many times, etc.)

I see that WebAccessControl is addressing #2, and doing so by naming a 
package of bits (a 'resource').

I see that CCN/NDN is addressing #2 and #1 both: it names a package of 
bits, and then provides a ledger system similar to Bitcoin, in which 
each node can copy the package.

According to this analysis (admittedly simplified, but maybe useful in 
some way), the "integration" of WebAccessControl with CCN/NDN would 
require that the package of bits identified by WAC be allowed to be 
recopied by nodes throughout the Internet by some ledger system that 
is understood by the CCN ledger system.

Since CCN is working on both parts -- the naming of the package and 
the copying nodes -- it's hard for me to see how the two systems could 
be integrated without a huge overlap and waste of effort somewhere, 
unless there's a detailed cross-fertilisation of the creators of the 
two systems.

But possibly that's too pessimistic. Maybe all that will be required 
will be a simple translator of the name of one kind of package into 
the name of the other kind of package. :-)

Steven Rowat
Received on Monday, 23 November 2015 16:32:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 July 2018 21:19:26 UTC