Network Working Group                            Jean-Francois C. Morfin
Internet-Draft                                                   Intlnet
Intended status: For information                        January 19, 2012
Expires: July 20, 2012


                    Internet+ Architectural Framework
                     draft-iucg-internet-plus-02.txt

Abstract

   This memo acknowledges the change of scale in network and people
   centricities. It shows how the Internet technology can sustain the
   resulting network and societal effects in scaling itself from the end
   to end Internet to a fringe to fringe fully optional and compatible
   Internet+ which strictly conforms to the Internet architecture and
   RFCs. It introduces the Internet+ framework and the IUTF to document
   it. It explores a transition that can be seamlessly immediate and
   will probably start a complete review and extension of the Internet
   schemas.
   


Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 20, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.




Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.



Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction................................................... 4
   2.  Draft discussion............................................... 5
   3.  Subsidiarity................................................... 5
   4.  IUse Area and Community........................................ 6
   5.  The Internet+ architectural framework.......................... 8
       5.1.  Conventions.............................................. 9
       5.2.  Cybship Supervisor....................................... 9
       5.3.  IGNET.................................................... 9
       5.4.  IUI..................................................... 10
       5.5.  MDRS.................................................... 10
       5.6.  IDNS.................................................... 11
       5.7.  xIP..................................................... 12
       5.8.  Intertest............................................... 12
       5.9.  Test IRN/TLDs........................................... 14
   6.  Centricities scaling.......................................... 14
       6.1.  WDE stewardship......................................... 16
       6.2.  Diktyologic considerations.............................. 16
       6.3.  Multilinguistics........................................ 17
       6.4.  IPv6/IDv6 addressing.................................... 17
       6.5.  The IDNS................................................ 18
           6.5.1.  ICANN............................................. 18
           6.5.2.  Class Root Administrators......................... 18
           6.5.3.  Internet+ framework IDNS.......................... 19
           6.5.4.  Intellectual Property and reserved Root Names..... 20
   7.  Transition.................................................... 22
       7.1.  Priorities.............................................. 22
       7.2.  Detected constraints.................................... 22
       7.3.  IRNs.................................................... 23
   8.  Security considerations....................................... 24
   9.  IANA considerations........................................... 24
   10.  References................................................... 25
       10.1.  Normative References................................... 25
       10.2.  Informative References................................. 25
   11.  Annex A: Acknowledgments..................................... 26
   12.  Annex B: IDNS Classes........................................ 26



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   13.  ANNEX C: external presentation summary....................... 28
       13.1.  Considering the digital globality...................... 28
       13.2.  The need to adapt...................................... 28
       13.3.  The Internet+ response................................. 29


Requirements notation

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].






































Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 3]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012

1.  Introduction
   
   Eight years ago, the World Summit on the Information Society declared
   the common desire and commitment of the people of the world to build
   a people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented Information
   Society in harnessing the potential of information and communication
   technology while upholding the principle of the sovereign equality of
   all States.
   
   This has endorsed a humanity commitment:
   
   *  towards a digital people-centricity,
      
   *  being "centrada en la persona": the person is the core,
      
   *  facilitated by a technology "a caractere humain": man is the
      referent of innovation.
      

   Harnessing the communication technology is a long-term progression:
   
   *  Forty years ago, for the first time, Tymnet applied a published
      packet switch service rate, to bill NLM for their network public
      access.
      
   *  Thirty years ago, the pioneers of the Network Group were
      finalizing the IP protocol and the DNS for them to be operational
      at the year's end.
      
   *  Twenty years ago, the IAB published RFC 1287, considering the
      architectural options to address the growth of the Internet.
      
   *  Ten years ago, ICANN published its ICP-3 document where it claims
      its US delegated control on the CLASS IN root and calls for a
      community experimentation on a DNS that no longer uses a unique
      authoritative DNS root file.
      

   During that progression, three architectural principles emerged:
   
   *  RFC 1958 established the architectural rules of the Internet as we
      know it as having to adapt along the permanent change principle.
      
   *  RFC 3439 completed it in showing why growth in size increasingly
      calls upon the principle of simplicity.
      



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 4]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   *  RFC 5890 to 5895 (IDNA2008) conceptually based the support of
      linguistic diversity in domain names on the principle of
      subsidiarity.
      

   This memo considers the Internet+ framework: it applies these three
   principles to scale the Internet capacity to match the challenges
   resulting from current usage and expected growth, for example in the
   IPv6, multilinguistics, IDNS, and its root areas.
   
   It also explores how the Internet+ IUse community is to test,
   document, validate, and deploy this Internet+ framework,
   
   *  to complete the passive (what you receive is what I sent), active
      (what you receive is what I asked you to receive) and contextual
      (what you receive is what you need to receive in your context)
      content oriented datacoms stratum
      
   *  and to adequately prepare the Intersem (Internet of thoughts -
      what you receive is what will make you comprehend what I mean)
      semacoms stratum above.
      
2.  Draft discussion
   
   This memo is the first version of an IETF Draft of which the
   completion, enhancements, and revisions are to be freely discussed on
   the iutf@uitf.org or on the iucg@ietf.org mailing lists.
   
   This part should be removed from the final version.
   
3.  Subsidiarity
   
   The principle of subsidiarity means that the end to end network job
   is subsidiary to the fringe to fringe network requirements but can
   still support them in a limited mode. This means that end to end
   network layers only have to perform those tasks that cannot be
   performed more effectively, under nominal or assisted conditions, at
   the fringe to fringe layers.
   
   This is intrinsic to the Internet "general terms" as documented by
   RFC 1958: "the goal is connectivity, the tool is the Internet
   Protocol, and the intelligence is end to end rather than hidden in
   the network".
   
   End to end intelligence carries "the network's job [which] is to
   transmit datagrams as efficiently and flexibly as possible.



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 5]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   Everything else should be done at the fringes". This end to end
   intelligence has made the network's job a core premise, facilitator,
   and accelerator for a rapid, sustained, cost-effective, and managed
   improvement through increasingly complex digitally permitted
   interactions in every domain of utilization.
   
   In parallel to the emergence of this network-centricity, the
   "everything else" now extends to people-centricity, the need for a
   facilitated capacity to take advantage from the "network effect" and
   intelligently use it (IUse). The "network effect" , by its very
   nature and the reach of the technologies, spreads across the whole
   digital ecosystem (WDE). As a consequence, person-centric social
   effects are broadly observed that can only develop with IPv6
   providing everyone with permanent addresses, a stable, secure,
   consistent, unambiguous and fully multilinguistic Integrated Digital
   Names Systems (IDNS), and a network neutrality that protects privacy
   and guards against spam, excessive commercial influence, and social
   engineering.
   
   The target is therefore to match this network and people
   "centricities scaling" through the "Internet+" framework. This means
   the ability to adequately support the next billions of IPv6 social
   peer to peer users of trillions of intelligent names attached to
   millions of integrated root names (such as the Internet TLDs) of the
   IDNS as ICANN/ICP-3 has proposed to investigate and experiment it.
   
4.  IUse Area and Community
   
   RFC 3935 assigned the IETF its "goal" and mission. It "is to make the
   Internet work better [in producing] high quality, relevant technical
   and engineering documents that influence the way people design, use,
   and manage the Internet in such a way as to make the Internet work
   better. [Because the] IETF community [] believe[s] that the existence
   of the Internet, and its influence on economics, communication, and
   education, will help us to build a better human society."
   
   The IDNA2008 work, RFC 5895, and the exploration carried out within
   the IUCG (iucg@ietf.org non-WG mailing list) and towards an ALFA
   (Architecture Libre/Free Architecture) framework have shown that the
   fringe layers scaling the Internet to the Internet+ had to act as an
   Intelligent Use Interface (IUI) middleware either on the user side,
   or as an OPES.
   
   Such an IUI will interface the Internet as well as any other digital
   technology and service of any nature. It will include direct
   interactions with the local operating system, applications, and user



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 6]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   personal behavior, architecture, and architectonic vision (i.e.
   architectony of reality). It will also be able to interact with IUI
   specialized complementary, allied, or extended network services and
   relational spaces' referential systems.
   
   It has also shown that the Internet+ layers were to further support a
   full new technological upper stratum dedicated to semantic
   communications (semacoms) interested in intercomprehension
   facilitation. The "Intersem" (semiotic Internet) upper stratum will
   probably integrate the network centric work and research that the
   W3C, JTC1/SC32/WG2, etc. have engaged. This "Internet of thoughts" or
   "Internet of Subjects" will therefore consequently lead to major
   parallel extension of the users' expectations and personal
   centricity.
   
   The post-IDNA2008 IETF debate, the IESG qualification of these issues
   as "research", the IAB and ICANN works, etc. have shown that if these
   topics were of concern to the IETF and to the Internet community,
   they had to be documented by a dedicated Intelligent Use Task Force
   (IUTF) entity, liaising with the IETF through the IUCG.
   
   This implies the precise definition of an IUse area and the emergence
   of the IUse community. It calls for an Intelligent Use Group
   (IUGroup) gathering the different endeavors that will share the
   stewardship of the IUse strata (IUI and preparation of the Intersem
   layers) and their concerted representation and expertise through an
   Intelligent Use Steering Group (IUSG).
   
   Architecturally, RFC 1958, RFC 3439, the RFC 5890/95 consensus and
   the post-IDNA2008 positions of IESG, IAB, and ICANN seem to confirm
   that:
   
      (1) the core intelligent job of transmitting datagrams is end to
      end and documented by the IETF for it to work better.
      
      (2) the intelligent job of presenting these datagrams is fringe to
      fringe and documented by the IUTF in order to adequately use the
      WDE resources to answer more users' expectations.
      

   In establishing the IUTF, the IUse community should capitalize on the
   IETF experience at least in two areas:
   
      (1) in copying the IRTF organization.
      
      (2) in proceeding on a multiconsensus basis. IETF rough consensus



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 7]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


      leads to a uniformity which is appropriate to the end to end
      environment. Multiconsensus is necessary to fringe to fringe
      subsidiarity to best support intercompatibility within complex
      diversities.
      
5.  The Internet+ architectural framework
   
   Diktyology (from Greek "diktyos": network) is the scientific and
   philosophical discipline studying networking. By equivalence with
   ontology, which studies the being, and ontologies which document it,
   a diktyology is also a structurally networked ontology [PAUL
   MATHIAS].
   
   The Internet resulted from a diktyologic change from a host-centric
   to a network-centric motivation. The extension from the Internet to
   the Internet+ architectural framework is another diktyologic change
   placing the person at the core.
   
   The Internet+ is based upon a people-centric vision. This change of
   vision does not modify the existing RFCs, software, and hardware; the
   Internet+ is, therefore, 100% compatible with the Internet legacy.
   However, it conceptually and, therefore, progressively and
   practically modifies the digital network global system and enlarges
   its capacities.
   
   A simple way to emphasize the structural "difference-in-continuity"
   between the Internet and the Internet+ is to describe the Internet+
   as "the networks of the network of networks". More precisely, the
   Internet+ are the fringe-to-fringe networks of the end-to-end network
   of plug-to-plug networks.
   
   Each of these Internet+ networks can be categorized as either:
   
   *  a public network: open to everyone without restriction.
      
   *  an intranet: closed network supported by private lines.
      
   *  a VPN (virtual private networks): intranet extension in using
      public network bandwidth.
      
   *  an externet: "open closed garden", network open to everyone but
      limited by some constraints. For example, the Internet is open to
      everyone but restricted to its end to end nature.
      
   *  or more generally a relational space that may be defined by their
      cortege of parameters (data), metadata (data on data) and



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 8]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


      syllodata (the data on the interlinks between the data).
      

   This section further introduces some conventions and terms that are
   to be used in documenting the fringe to fringe layer of the network
   typology. This terminology is necessary to build a mental picture of
   the relational model and functional chains of the Internet+.
   
5.1.  Conventions
   
   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119
   [RFC2119]. The key word "IS" and "ARE", mean that the definition is
   to be taken as an absolute fact beyond the specification reach.
   
   This implies that an IETF "MUST" is to be considered as an "IS/ARE"
   by the IUTF. This clearly separates the IETF and IUTF areas.
   
5.2.  Cybship Supervisor
   
   A "cybship" is understood as a stand-alone cyberspace (digital
   ecosystem) organization. It is located on a nano-chip or involves
   hundreds of computers around the world. Its particularity is that its
   static, cinematic, and dynamic organization and behavior are under
   the control of an authoritative supervisory system.
   
   A supervisor can be under the command of a person (Manned Supervisor:
   MSup) or be a stand-alone process. (Unmanned Supervisor: USup).
   
   For resilience purposes, Supervisors can be organized into ranked
   task groups. This means that different Supervisors can be
   simultaneously active in a cybship as long as there is a ranked
   subsidiarity. Every Supervisor, on a "time to sleep" (TTS) basis,
   broadcasts "sleeping pills" bearing its rank. If an active Supervisor
   receives a sleeping pill of a higher rank it goes to sleep for a TTS.
   This means that if a Supervisor does not receive a sleeping pill of a
   higher rank after two TTS periods, it starts taking control of the
   cybship. It is in this way that every server of a cybship can always
   be supervised even if the relation with a higher rank (for a wider
   area) supervisor(s) is lost.
   
5.3.  IGNET
   
   To communicate, a cybship utilizes its Internal and Global Network
   (IGNet) system, which gathers its dedicated, shared, and public



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                  [Page 9]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   networking resources at plug, end, fringe, and noetic levels.
   
   The noetic issues are not a part of the Internet+ but rather of the
   "Intersem" stratum; however, in essence, any networking function when
   it is jointly carried by a group of persons do participate to some
   extent in brainware executions.
   
   The Internet is one of the end to end resources that ignets can use,
   whether with its Internet+ fringe to fringe extension or not.
   
5.4.  IUI
   
   There is the need for an Intelligent Use Interface (IUI) at common
   fringes of the dedicated to shared, shared to public, dedicated to
   public, technology to technology, and stratum to stratum parts of an
   IGNET.
   
   The Internet+ framework does not require any model or technology for
   IUIs, but the initial exploration of an RFC 5895 conformant system
   conceived the IUI as a set of Plugged Layers on the User Side (PLUS).
   
   This permitted to identify at least:
   
   *  a virtual implementation of an overall extended presentation
      layer.
      
   *  an interapplication layer driven by a "Netix" interapplication
      system.
      
   *  a user side network application layer implemented as coherent
      middleware of a networked type of smart local operating tasks
      (slots).
      
5.5.  MDRS
   
   There is a need for concerted and mutual documentation among the
   cybships. These mutual documentation records need to be multilingual
   and to form a fully distributed reference system across the
   Internet+. This is the job of an ISO 11179 conformant MetaData
   Registry System (MDRS). The MDRS is to be an open diktyology
   (structurally networked ontology set) of the whole digital ecosystem
   and further on to make available the facilitation referent
   architectony of the Intersem stratum.
   
   Facilitation is understood as the noetic assistance towards
   intercomprehension based upon a common architectonic referential, or



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   architectony. Semantic facilitation Facilitation is understood as the
   noetic assistance towards intercomprehension based upon a common
   architectonic referential, or architectony. Semantic facilitation
   topics are not supposed to be parts of the Internet+ framework, but
   the Internet+ documentation must permit their exploration, prepare
   their further documentation, and ensure that they can be freely used
   in further innovation.
   
   The MDRS diktyology should distribute to cybships a set of references
   encompassing and extending the IETF IANA, and covering all the
   networking names and parameters of the whole digital ecosystem (WDE).
   
5.6.  IDNS
   
   There is a generic need to name entities that can be accessed or
   referred to throughout the WDE. The response to this need is referred
   to at the international digital names space (IDNS). The Universal
   Resource Identifier (URI) of the IDNS are to be multilinguistically
   usable as:
   
   *  Universal Resource Names (URN) to uniquely identify any resource
      in the Universe.
      
   *  Universal Resource Locators (URL) to uniquely identify the
      location of any resource throughout:
      
      *  the WDE networks [initial contribution of Tymnet],
         
      *  a multiplicity of CLASSes (orthogonal dedicated naming areas
         contributed by IETF [RFC 882, 973, 1035]),
         
      *  an unlimited set of relational "presentations" (contributed by
         the OSI model as its layer 6) to adequately support multiple
         forms of security approaches, script and linguistic
         diversities, etc.
         
   Naming started on international public services in 1976. It was
   managed by Tymnet under FCC control. Its initial root names were the
   ISO 3166 country codes, and then it added the first international
   private systems code, including the Internet, and eventually
   integrated the X.121 addressing scheme numeric names. After the
   connection of the Internet to the International Packet Switch
   Services (in 1984) RFCs 883/884 and further on (1987) RFCs 1034/1035
   documented the Internet DNS. The integration of the DNS as a
   partition of the IDNS was completed in 1994 by RFC 1591. It reflected
   and finalized the initial (1984) and ongoing inter-operator



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   consensus, after the Internet DNS had taken the lead in the IDNS
   area.
   
   Because the end to end Internet model does not include a specific
   presentation layer, the documentation of the IDNA concept to support
   names in every language was delayed until the end of 2010. At that
   date the IETF consensus on the IDNA2008 RFC set (RFC 5890 to RFC
   5895) established rock solid stable IDNS support by the ASCII DNS, on
   the network side.
   
   The subsequent:
   
   *  IDNA2010 project concerns the documentation of the post-IDNA2008
      non-IETF issues on the user side.
      
   *  The IDNA2012 project concerns the resulting IDNA2008/IDNA2010
      related needs.
      

   The Internet+ architectural framework results from these ongoing
   endeavors.
   
5.7.  xIP
   
   Externets may need extended Internet Protocol features. This should
   be explored, tested, and validated together with the IETF because it
   might lead to extensions (not changes) of IETF area concepts.
   
   This may concern the way to qualify traffic as:
   
   *  linguistically extended: for a punyplus algorithm to be used,
      supporting orthotypographic needs through metadata (e.g. Latin and
      French majuscules).
      
   *  the economic status of traffic (private, free, commercial,
      special) in order to better tune the type of transactions.
      
   *  etc.
      
5.8.  Intertest
   
   The ICANN ICP-3 document states: "Experimentation has always been an
   essential component of the Internet's vitality. Working within the
   system does not preclude experimentation" but it must be done "in a
   manner that does not disrupt the ongoing" network operations.
   



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   "It should be noted that the original design of the DNS provides a
   facility that accommodates the possibility of safely deploying
   multiple roots on the public Internet for experimental and other
   purposes. As noted in RFC 1034, the DNS includes a "CLASS" tag on
   each resource record, which allows resource records of different
   CLASSes to be distinguished even though they are commingled on the
   public Internet. For resource records within the authoritative
   root-server system, this CLASS tag is set to "IN"; other values have
   been standardized for particular uses, including 255 possible values
   designated for "private use" that are particularly suited to
   experimentation."
   
   "To take advantage of this facility, it should be noted, requires the
   use of client or applications software" such as the IUI that the IUTF
   is set to document.
   
   Such a testing should aim at:
   
   *  capitalizing on the Tymnet, OSI, and IETF cumulated experience
      together with the other ongoing public, academic, private, and
      open projects for network evolution throughout the world.
      
   *  satisfying the RFC 1287, RFC 1958, and RFC 3439 while respecting
      the RFC 3935 definition of the IETF mission and scope, and the
      definition of the IUTF charter, which includes a specific
      involvement in testing its propositions.
      
   *  protecting RD from the risk of commercial sponsoring bias
      documented by RFC 3869, through grassroots development and
      validations.
      
   *  addressing the WSIS commitment to unleash the full power of the
      communication technology.
      
   *  experiment and validate the Internet+ framework proposed
      solutions.
      

   This should result from a joint "Intertest" charter gathering the
   ICANN ICP-3 and multiple RFC scattered IETF requirements for such
   experimentation. As a result Intertest experiments should at least:
   
   *  be clearly labeled as experiments,
      
   *  make it clearly understood that they may end without establishing
      any prior claims on future directions,



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012

      
   *  be appropriately coordinated within a community-based framework
      (such as the IUTF).
      
   *  commit to adapt to consensus-based standards when they emerge
      through community-based processes.
      

   Actually, such a Charter shall establish the Intertest externet. A
   joint technical committee should be created to assume its stewardship
   and coordinate the multiple projects' experimentation campaigns.
   
5.9.  Test IRN/TLDs
   
   The ICANN Fast-Track project was set-up to test IDNcc/gTLDs. This
   project did not consider the IDNA2008 protocols which still have to
   be tested in a full end to end IDNA2008 and fringe to fringe Intlnet+
   context.
   
   Serveral project will be therefore "intertested", including the
   ".FRA" project for an open francophone diktyology using the ".FRA"
   name space as its open taxonomy and a prototype for the Intersem
   Semantic Adressing System (SAS) exploration. For convenience and
   interaction with other existing sites, the MDRS will document ".FRA"
   both as an IRN in the Intertest CLASS and as an User Level Domain
   (ULD) as an IN CLASS second level zone.
   
6.  Centricities scaling
   
   The introduced "centricities scaling" effect has crossed the end to
   end network limit. The need is to understand how the "Internet+"
   architectural framework can address the new situation and prepare, or
   at least not oppose, the next step towards digitally assisted mutual
   intercomprehension services, when it cannot alone match the
   requirements of the scaling effect.
   
   The scaling effect obviously affects the whole network system of
   which the unicity, as the network of network (there is one and only
   one single network), becomes a limiting rigidity. The principle of
   subsidiarity permits the splitting of the current network
   architecture and service deliveries into three subsequent, but
   unbundled, strata:
   
   *  the common core: what (existing or new) has to remain definitely
      and absolutely stable and simple so that everyone can build on it.
      This is currently associated with the end to end services and
      issues. This is the part of the WSIS Tunis agreement that (1)



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


      acknowledges it as being of American legacy and documented by the
      IETF, and (2) attributes the emerging aspects to the care of the
      International Community in its regalian, civil, private, and
      normative components.
      
   *  the IUI: the initially optional and progressively ubiquitous
      intelligent use interface, to relate and serve network centricity
      and individual centricity. This is the area that this memo
      attributes to the IUse community for it to be documented by the
      IUTF.
      
   *  the scaled level deliveries: transmitted and possibly enhanced
      data are delivered by the IUI at the user side of the fringe.
      

   This Internet+ framework unbundling provides flexibility, which is
   necessary for network centricity to better perform through fringe
   intelligence. However, it is likely that people centricity will in
   turn call for further architectural improvements to facilitate its
   own mastering of the general WDE scaling.
   
   This facilitation will be twofold, in similarity with the RFC 1958
   end to end statement:
   
   *  the goal is to facilitate brain to brain intercomprehension, the
      tool is the Internet+ Framework, and the intelligence is fringe to
      fringe rather than hidden in user applications.
      
   *  The fringe to fringe intelligence caries the network's enhanced
      job that is, on top of transmitting datagrams as efficiently and
      flexibly as possible for better interoperability, to facilitate
      informatics and semantics process to process as much as possible
      for better interintelligibility.
      
   *  Everything else should be done on the user side.
      

   Likewise, this fringe to fringe intelligence should make the extended
   network's job a core premise, facilitator, and accelerator for a
   stable, sustained, pervasive, and facilitated approach of the
   increasingly complex digitally supported human intercomprehension in
   every domain.
   
   The support of the scaling effect, through the "network centricity -
   IUI - people centricity" Internet+ framework, will affect many areas,
   ranging from the ecosystem stewardship to the resolution of the IDNS



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   problem. It will provide the network with a better capacity to meet
   the quoted challenge of trillions of IPv6 peer to peer users
   resolving the variants of trillions of digital names, built after
   millions of international root names, throughout a multitechnology
   (including the Internet) and multiservice (including those of the
   Internet+) context.
   
6.1.  WDE stewardship
   
   The IUse Community refers to four levels of system and network
   stewardship:
   
   *  the operance plane concerning the short-term contractual,
      operational, and commercial issues.
      
   *  the governance plane concerning the mid-term rules and laws and
      the societal issues.
      
   *  the "constituance" plane concerning the long-term and civilization
      issues - e.g. the constitution of the Internet is in the code.
      
   *  the adminance plane concerning the administration and the
      maintenance of the technical issues and concerns.
      

   Their organization and open and transparent mechanisms shall be
   documented by the IUTF.
   
6.2.  Diktyologic considerations
   
   The end to end Internet is an integrated core system obeying the
   general system theory. The fringe to fringe Internet+ actually shares
   its IUI with an external unlimited diversity of systems with which it
   relates. RFC 3439 already considered the architectural particulars of
   very large systems. The need is now to consider the particulars of
   the imbrication of very large systems' diversity.
   
   The thinking processes of to facilitate complexity facilitation that
   will be involved precisely belong to the kind of reflection
   resolution that the Intersem layers should provide. This means that
   the very IUTF investigation process towards the Intersem layers might
   also serve as a source of experience to explore, conceive, document,
   and build facilitation solutions.
   
   It is expected that the IUTF multiconsensus agorical (collective
   mutuality of different logics as at an agora) emergencing process may



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   provide an experience of the networked semantics.
   
   (section to be expanded)
   
6.3.  Multilinguistics
   
   Natural languages are humans' brain to brain protocols. Linguistics
   is the study of these protocols. Multilinguistics is the study of
   their cybernetics, i.e. their day to day practical coexistence and
   mutual relations.
   
   There are four main kinds of support for natural languages by the
   digital systems:
   
   *  universalization - languages are replaced by a digital
      codification (ex. EDI, ITU protocols)
      
   *  lingualization - the technology is "biased", in which a natural
      language and its script are embedded to ease software development.
      
   *  globalization - the natural language and script of a biased
      technology are extended and made pivotal through:
      
      *  internationalization of the medium: support of the Unicode
         character set.
         
      *  localization of the ends: translation of some elements, through
         "locale" files. E.g. Unicode CLDR.
         
      *  filtering (RFC 4647) of the traffic according to its linguistic
         characteristics coded through langtags.
         
   *  multilingualization - support of all the natural languages on a
      technical equal footing. This requires the full support of the
      "presentation" layer.
      

   Until IDNA2008 the Internet architecture has no presentation layer,
   nor any way to support it. The Internet+ supports presentations
   thought IDNS label header (e.g. extended name: xn-- header).
   
   (section to be expanded)
   
6.4.  IPv6/IDv6 addressing
   
   IDv6 is the "killing application" that is sought in order to deploy



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   IPv6. Its support via IUI gives it all the flexibility and power to
   dissociate the internal IDs from the IPv6 address (address header).
   
   In particular, IDv6 IDs can be supported as local addresses for
   multiple headers as currently explored by the IETF/WG/NAT66 or even
   under IPv4 as last level label in an IDN.
   
   (section to be expanded)
   
6.5.  The IDNS
   
   As indicated above, the IDNS related issues have proven to be
   complex. Not to increase confusion, this memo on the support of the
   Internet presentation and intelligent services layers, could not be
   introduced prior to the publication of all the post-IDNA2008 IETF and
   ICANN WG provisional Drafts. This is now the case after the ICANN/VIP
   Draft was produced.
   
6.5.1.  ICANN
   
   A preliminary note on the architectural nature of ICANN is essential.
   The ICANN claim is on the stewardship of the Class 1 ("IN") root and
   of all IP addresses:
   
   *  on behalf of a US Government public trust of which it is
      accountable to the Internet community.
      
   *  further to a joint Affirmation of Commitment.
      

   This means that ICANN is not a Standardization and Documentation
   Organization (SDO), except when acting with its own contractors and
   for their clients. Before starting the IUTF, it is was necessary to
   wait for the conclusion of its post-IDNA2008 VIP Working Group on
   Variants if it had specified a technical solution due to
   circumstances making it partly act as an IETF substitute, but hat has
   not been the case.
   
6.5.2.  Class Root Administrators
   
   The Internet+ IDNS framework considers all IDNS CLASSes. This calls
   for a concerted stewardship of all the CLASS roots. This permits
   ICANN (and every other CLASS root administrator and root name
   registry manager):
   
   *  to enter into a similar Affirmation of Commitment with all GAC



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


      members.
      
   *  or to publish open Declarations of Commitment.
      

   These Commitments should include the common respect of the
   registrants' right to see their registrations honestly maintained by
   the Internet/Internet+ communities until an international agreement
   delegates registry registration to an independent international body,
   probably with the WIPO, which will determine the legal conditions of
   the trademarks' rights and protection in the WDE.
   
6.5.3.  Internet+ framework IDNS
   
   The IDNS support in the Internet+ framework is multilayered (ML-DNS).
   
   *  It calls for two MDRS tables:
      
      *  UNISIGN: its purpose is to document the delimiters that are
         used by the IDNS in different scripts.
         
      *  UNIGRAPH: its purpose is to provide a homographic table of
         every UNICODE code point.
         
   *  The IDNS includes international digital names (IDN):
      
      *  of any type,
         
      *  using any script,
         
      *  for any purpose (URN, URL),
         
      *  for a registrant's life or resource need period basis,
         
      *  respecting a common digitally genitive (from the root name to
         the highest label level) sequence of UTF-8 labels,
         
      *  delimited as per the UNISIGN table,
         
      *  supporting any language orthotypography and label polynymy,
         
      *  using its CLASS 0 (UG) UNIGRAPH registration as a protection
         against homographic confusion,
         
      *  originated in the single authoritative matrix of the concerted
         international root names (IRN). Note: Internet DNS TLDs are



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


         IRNs.
         
   *  the Internet DNS has been conceived as an interoperable partition
      of the IDNS, and therefore, is a fully compatible partition of the
      IDNS. This interoperation will be strictly enforced as per the
      IDNA2008 RFCs.
      
   *  the support of the IDNS will be ensured by an ML-DNS, multilayer
      architecture where:
      
      *  the resolution engine is the ASCII utilization of the Internet
         DNS, as per IDNA2008.
         
      *  the interface with the End User applications will be provided
         by a unique Point of Resolution (UPR) at the IUI, warranting a
         unique resolution result to every user application and a unique
         place for IDNS parameters' maintenance without any requirement
         for application developers other than transparent UTF-8
         support..
         
      *  a "preDNS" function or service is to analyze the entered URL in
         order to provide the ML-DNS with the CLASS, IDNA2008 UTF-8
         entry, polynym (variant to use), transcription of the correct
         orthotypography (through the introduction of an UNISIGN
         meta-sequence), the presentation to use, possibly the
         relational space, etc.
         
      *  a digital name pile (DNP) is used for the ML-DNS I/O where the
         IDNs are documented in their different consequent format and
         corresponding IP address.
         
   *  every ML-DNS occurrence can act as a root server for its cybship
      and directly question the name server set(s) of its choice for any
      given CLASS/root name zone. This means that authority can be
      granted by the registrant and acknowledged by the user. As an
      example everyone can establish family protected zone directories.
      
6.5.4.  Intellectual Property and reserved Root Names
   
   Note: Root names is the generic term for TLD in the end to end
   Internet context.
   
   Numbers and letters make labels. Labels of genitive constructs from a
   root label make names. The WIPO is the international register of the
   names registered on a national basis in its Class 1 to 34 for goods
   and 35 to 45 for services.



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012

   
   Thus, there exists, on a universal basis, a CLASS 0 by default for
   items of all kinds. It brings together the ASCII alphanumeric labels
   (from 0 to Z) and their polynyms (strict functional synonyms in other
   symbologies - also called "variants" - punycoded in ASCII), along an
   integrated coding based on a non-visual confusability coding
   (UNISIGN).
   
   Its stewardship is insured on a concerted basis within the IUGroup,
   until most probably the WIPO takes it:
   
   *  It classifies all ISO 10646 characters per homograph symbols.
      
   *  It reserves at the root level of the heterarchical IDNs
      (Integrated Digital Name System):
      
      *  alpha only (i.e. without figures) root bigrams from ISO 3166:1
         and their polynyms, for countries.
         
      *  alpha only root trigrams, or their multilinguistic polynyms as
         appropriate, from ISO 639-3 for the main linguistic entities,
         and alpha only root quadrigrams, or their polynyms as
         appropriate, from ISO 639-6 for the remaining language
         entities.
         
      *  "aann" alphanumeric root quadrigrams or their multilinguistic
         polynyms as appropriate of the WIPO classes for use in
         "trade-mark.aann" IDNs by the rights of the trade-make
         registration, where:
         
         *  "aa" is the ISO 3166:1 bigram of the country's WIPO registry
            
         *  "nn" is the number of the WIPO registration CLASS.
            
      *  already established root labels.
         
      *  tri-and quadrigrams of generic interest.
         
      *  any other label pursuant to the ISO 11179 acceptance procedure
         for the creation of registers or to the governance agreement of
         the universal digital ecosystem.
         
   Consistently, in the Internet, the IUTF identifies IDNS Class 0 as
   identical in the Steward and DNS cases.
   
   Consequently:
   



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   *  ownership of root labels should be delegated or acknowledged and
      published by IDNS steward,
      
   *  root zone owner have the full right to delegate digital names
      using their root label in applying the administrative rules they
      decide to publish.
      
   *  for URN stability, digital name delegation should be for unlimited
      durations, as long as they keep being used for what they currently
      designate.
      
   *  in public and private spaces, IDNS operations should be
      structurally dissociated from the registries' administrative
      authoritative functions.
      
7.  Transition
   
   (This part is to be discussed and further expanded)
   
   An externet is an "open closed garden", i.e. an open restriction of
   the common space based upon some well understood legal and/or
   technical criteria.
   
   The goal is to maintain seamless continuity and compatibility between
   the end to end Internet and its fringe to fringe Internet+
   encapsulation. Historically, the end to end Internet was built as a
   US Government and Industry sponsored externet of its fringe to fringe
   Internet+.
   
7.1.  Priorities
   
   The resulting priorities are in regards to:
   
   *  technology and protocols.
      
   *  IPv6 addressing plan and whatever IDv6 oriented help can be
      provided. IDv6 is understood as the global use of IPv6 IIDs.
      
   *  the IDNS support and the need to expand the information of the
      IDNS/DNS CLASSes, implication and limitations of Class IN
      (ICANN/NTIA) TLDs that seem to be ignored by the public, need to
      involve the WIPO to stabilize IP protection, necessary concerted
      agreement over root name registrations, etc.)
      
7.2.  Detected constraints
   



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   Deploying the Internet+ can be done immediately, most of the needed
   software elements being available and time proven. The main
   constraints are:
   
   *  cultural, since most of the Internet mental and economic schemas
      change of perspective.
      
   *  to assemble different software components into IUI architectures.
      
   *  explore, experiment, validate and document a "Netix"
      interoperating command system that can be extremely simple during
      the pilot phase.
      
   *  establish and man the different sites and bootstrap the various
      mailing lists to establish an internal control on the internal
      work.
      

   Experience may be draft from the Internet PLUS preparation work, and
   from the Google+ service.
   
   An IUTF concertation meeting is tentatively proposed in Montpellier
   (France) in June 2012.
   
7.3.  IRNs
   
   An important issue is the ICANN NewgTLDs Program that has been
   established, documented, and proposed without taking care of the DNS
   CLASSes, while the Internet architecture, technologies, protocols,
   implementations, user rights, and innovations are all based upon the
   existing 65,536 CLASSes, including 256 that are immediately usable or
   that are already currently used by private projects.
   
   It is likely that the Internet community will allow ICANN to
   introduce a limited number of new root-names in the IDNSpace CLASS
   IN. However, no one can guarantee that there will not be a legitimate
   use of the same character sequence in other CLASSes (as this is
   documented and suggested to alt-root developers in the ICANN's
   Internet Coordination Policy no. 3).
   
   *  In the end to end Internet case, most of these CLASSes are subject
      to the IETF decision (except those reserved for private use). In
      the fringe to fringe Internet+ case, the allocation of these
      CLASSes (and possible sub-CLASSes) is subject to the concerted
      goodwill of the IUse community end-users.
      



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   *  Several (7) IRNs will be implemented for experimentation and will
      then be reported to the Internet+ community, as per ICANN/ICP-3,
      including:
      
      *  ".blog" as an experimentation area for the Blog types of
         network services.
         
      *  ".ediki" as an experimentation area for a special type of new
         network services.
         
      *  ".fra" for an experimental francophone open diktyology using
         its namespace as its taxonomy.
         
      *  ".nic" for an experimental IRN manager name space ("irn.nic")
         
      *  ".test" as a test-bed name space.
         
      *  ".wde" as an experimentation area for all whole digital
         ecosystem issues.
         
      *  ".wiki" as an experimentation area for the Wiki type of network
         services.
         
8.  Security considerations
   
   The proposed architectural scaling does not concern the end to end
   security context which stays totally unchanged. The user perspective
   is drastically extended and will certainly call for new
   considerations by the IUTF.
   
   The architectural and R&D exploration consider the implementation of
   the IUI as a separate virtual machine possibly under a different
   operating system.
   
9.  IANA considerations
   
   The proposed architectural scaling does not affect the IANA content,
   of which the data are to be ported and integrated into the MDRS
   distribution. Updates from the IANA source will be carried daily.
   
   Users will be able to supersede the IANA data with their own values
   in order to better organize their own externet.
   
   (to be further documented)
   
10.  References



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012

   
10.1.  Normative References
   
   [RFC0882]   Mockapetris, P., "Domain names: Concepts and facilities",
               RFC 882, November 1983
   [RFC0973]   Mockapetris, P., "Domain names: Implementation
               specification", RFC 883, November 1983.
   [RFC1035]   Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
               specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
   [RFC1287]   Clark, D., Chapin, L., Cerf, V., Braden, R., and R.
               Hobby, "Towards the Future Internet Architecture", RFC
               1287, December 1991.
   [RFC1591]   Postel, J., "Domain Name System Structure and
               Delegation", RFC 1591, March 1994.
   [RFC1958]   Carpenter, B., Ed., "Architectural Principles of the
               Internet", RFC 1958,June 1996.
   [RFC2119]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
               Requirement Levels",BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
   [RFC2136]   Vixie, P., Ed., Thomson, S., Rekhter, Y., and J. Bound,
               "Dynamic Updatesin the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE)",
               RFC 2136, April 1997.
   [RFC3439]   Bush, R. and D. Meyer, "Some Internet Architectural
               Guidelines and Philosophy", RFC 3439, December 2002.
   [RFC5890]   Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
               Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
               RFC 5890, August 2010.
   [RFC5891]   Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in
               Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891, August 2010.
   [RFC5892]   Faltstrom, P., Ed., "The Unicode Code Points and
               Internationalized DomainNames for Applications (IDNA)",
               RFC 5892, August 2010.
   [RFC5893]   Alvestrand, H., Ed., and C. Karp, "Right-to-Left Scripts
               for Internationalized Domain Names for Applications
               (IDNA)", RFC 5893, August 2010.
   [RFC5894]   Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
               Applications (IDNA): Background, Explanation, and
               Rationale", RFC 5894, August 2010.
   
10.2.  Informative References
   
   [PAULMATHIAS]
   
               L'Internet, un objet philosophique ?
               
               
               
               



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


               
               
               
               www2.cndp.fr/archivage/valid/92617/92617-15222-19172.pdf,
               2008.
   [RFC3467]   Klensin, J., "Role of the Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC
               3467, February 2003.
   [RFC3697]   Rajahalme, J., Conta, A., Carpenter, B., and S. Deering,
               "IPv6 Flow LabelSpecification", RFC 3697, March 2004.
   [RFC3869]   Atkinson, R., Ed., Floyd, S., Ed., and Internet
               Architecture Board, "IABConcerns and Recommendations
               Regarding Internet Research and Evolution", RFC 3869,
               August 2004.
   [RFC3933]   Klensin, J. and S. Dawkins, "A Model for IETF Process
               Experiments", BCP 93, RFC 3933, November 2004.
   [RFC3935]   Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", BCP
               95, RFC 3935, October 2004.
   [RFC4290]   Klensin, J., "Suggested Practices for Registration of
               Internationalized Domain Names (IDN)", RFC 4290, December
               2005.
   [RFC4690]   Klensin, J., Faltstrom, P., Karp, C., and IAB, "Review
               and Recommendations for Internationalized Domain Names
               (IDNs)", RFC 4690, September 2006
   [RFC5895]   Resnick, P. and P. Hoffman, "Mapping Characters for
               Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)
               2008", RFC 5895, September 2010.
   [RFC6055]   Thaler, D., Klensin, J., and S. Cheshire, "IAB Thoughts
               on Encodings for Internationalized Domain Names", RFC
               6055, February 2011.
   [RFC6365]   Hoffman, P. and J. Klensin, "Terminology Used in
               Internationalization inthe IETF", BCP 166, RFC 6365,
               September 2011.
   [Moon1981]
   
   [Dyer1987]
   
11.  Annex A: Acknowledgments
   
   The whole IETF is to be thanked for its contributions, help, and
   working model. As are the Tymnet and CCITT people, and many others.
   
12.  Annex B: IDNS Classes
   
   In order to preserve total compatibility of the Internet with the
   IDNS the IDNS CLASSes are the DNS CLASSes and adheres to the IETF
   RFCs which document them.



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012

   
   RFC 882 states:
   
   A CLASS field identifies the format of the resource data, such as the
   ARPA Internet format (IN) or the Computer Science Network format
   (CSNET), for certain RR types (such as address data). Note that while
   the CLASS may separate different protocol families, networks, etc. it
   does not do so in all cases. For example, the IN CLASS uses 32 bit IP
   addresses exclusively, but the CSNET CLASS uses 32 bit IP addresses,
   X.25 addresses, and phone numbers. Thus the CLASS field should be
   used as a guide for interpreting the resource data. The CLASS field
   is two octets long and uses an encoding that is standard throughout
   the domain name system.
   
   RFC 5395 states:
   
   "DNS CLASSes have been little used but constitute another dimension
   of the DNS distributed database. In particular, there is no necessary
   relationship between the name space or root servers for one data
   CLASS and those for another data CLASS. The same DNS NAME can have
   completely different meanings in different CLASSes. The label types
   are the same, and the null label is usable only as root in every
   CLASS. As global networking and DNS have evolved, the IN, or
   Internet, CLASS has dominated DNS use. [] The current CLASS
   assignments [] are as follows:
   
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |      0        |    0x0000     |  UNIGRAPH (UG) cf. annex C   |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |      1        |    0x0001     |  Internet (IN) (ICANN/NTIA)  |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |      2        |    0x0002     |  Internet (FA) Family IN     |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |      3        |    0x0003     |  Chaos (CH) [Moon1981]       |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |      4        |    0x0004     |  Hesiod (HS) [Dyer1987]      |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |      7        |    0x0007     |  Intertest (IT) cf. annex C  |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |     254       |    0x00FE     |  QCLASS NONE [RFC2136]       |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      |     255       |    0x00FF     |  QCLASS * (ANY) [RFC1035]    |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
      | 65,280-65,534 | 0xFF00-0xFFFE |  Private Use                 |
      +---------------+---------------+------------------------------+
   
13.  ANNEX C: external presentation summary



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012

   
   This annex provides a presentation framework to introduce the
   Internet+ to the public.
   
13.1.  Considering the digital globality
   
   The whole digital ecosystem (WDE) is made of many objects: systems,
   network, files, links, programs, protocols, parameters, passwords,
   etc. Therefore, you may consider the Internet:
   
   *  either as a stand-alone set: system, technology, protocol set,
      community, etc. This is what we are most used to.
      
   *  or as a component of the WDE interactability. This is how we have
      to consider it from now on.
      
13.2.  The need to adapt
   
   This new perspective is necessary for three main reasons:
   
   *  usage: the WDE has to be people centered (cf. World Summit on the
      Information Society). To that end, billions of peers' hosts are to
      be weaved together by giving a permanent address and domain names.
      
   *  architectural: RFC 3935 (mission of the IETF) and RFC 1958
      (architectural rules of the Internet) state that the Internet job
      is to be defined by the IETF and is end to end. The rest has to be
      carried out at the fringe. However, the IETF consensus on IDNA2008
      was only to be found on the "unusual" basis (RFC 5895) of
      documenting actions at the fringe, i.e. outside of the Internet,
      and outside of the IETF area.
      
   *  political: from early 1977 to end 1978, public (ISO 3166:1) and
      private international digital naming was consensually organized
      and further operated under an FCC license as a single, integral,
      and neutral interoperator space based on semantic clarity for the
      users, and administration simplicity for the operators. In 1984,
      Jon Postel interconnected the Internet and accommodated CLASS IN
      according to this consensus (RFC 920) (and X.121 international
      addressing supported through numeric names). In 2012, ICANN
      departs from this consensus with the "New gTLD Program".
      

   These three reasons are the same: the end to end dump Internet cannot
   scale and meet the demand. The necessary scaling is a new
   technological job, hence it has to be carried out at the fringe,
   through new layers, above, and not to disrupt the technology of the



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   legacy layers (protocols, parameters, DNS, etc.). This end to end
   Internet has to scale as the fringe to fringe Internet+, which will
   interface it with the WDE, through an Intelligent Use Interface
   (IUI). This interfacing will respect the WDE integrality principle,
   which suggests that when two fields or systems are intricate and one
   field or system changes, the other changes assuming a similar
   pattern.
   
13.3.  The Internet+ response
   
   The role of the Internet+ is to provide the Intelligent Use Interface
   between the Internet and the rest of the WDE. One of its jobs is to
   provide interoperability between the WDE IDNS and the Internet DNS,
   as per IDNA2008. ICANN has documented the rules for applying for the
   name space repartition in its 2001 ICP-3 document, for it to keep the
   leadership in CLASS IN, via its root file.
   
   New CLASSes are, therefore, proposed to the concerted approbation of
   the Internet+ community:
   
   *  UNIGRAPH CLASS 0 (UG) to uniquely reference IDN labels against
      homographic confusion.
      
   *  family CLASS 2 (FA) to permit operators to support a family
      filtered version of their registries.
      
   *  intertest CLASS 7 (IT) - as suggested by ICANN - to use the
      Internet as its own test-bed without the risk of interfering with
      the real traffic of CLASS IN and FA.
      

   In addition, the 255 private use CLASSes can be used to organize
   community oriented projects.
   
   Several IRNs will be introduced to be used in the Intertest
   framework, such as ".blog", ".ediki", ".fra", ".nic", ".test",
   ".wde", and ".wiki".
   
   (this part is to be further documented)
   


Author's address
   
   Jean-Francois C. Morfin
   INTLNET



Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft            Internet+ Framework               January 2012


   120 chemin des Crouzettes
   Saint-Vincent de Barbeyrargues
   34730 Saint-Vincent de Barbeyrargues
   France

   Phone: (33.9)
   Email: jefsey@jefsey.com
   URI:   http://intlnet.org
$









































Morfin                   Expires July 20, 2012                 [Page 30]