Stéphane Bortzmeyer

Je suis un homme du siècle dernier, j’essaie de m’adapter, mais je n’en ai pas vraiment envie.

    • Super article, merci @stephane ; éclaire notamment le lien entre la norme sur le DPI et le contenu de l’ITR révisé à Dubaï évoqué là http://seenthis.net/messages/101868

      Now watch ITU-phobia turn these drab words into a fearsome threat. A commentator on our blog who was in Dubai as part of the UK delegation writes: “5A needs to be read along with ITU Standard Y.2770 which makes it mandatory to implement deep packet inspection…to all ‘next generation networks’ which could be easily interpreted as the IPv6 network. As a standard it is far from mandatory. But 5A and 5B bring this much closer to make it mandatory – and you’ll notice that the language in Y.2770 is very close to the language of 5A and 5B.”

      There are so many irrational leaps of logic in this statement it is hard to know where to begin. The author of that comment is implying that ITR section 5A must be read in conjunction with an ITU-T standard that he has picked arbitrarily out of the air, a standard not mentioned anywhere in the ITRs and not mentioned in any of the discussions of 5A. The section 5A does not mention the Internet, IPv6, NGNs or DPI, yet this person believes that it could be “easily interpreted” to REQUIRE the use of DPI in IPv6 networks. And when one points out this huge gap between what is actually in the ITRs and what they are contending it would do, the response is filled with dark warnings about “the power of general language” and how the evil demons at the ITU will be able to stretch whatever language is in their to suit their purposes.

      Ah, le pouvoir des grandes « notions générales » ! ça me rappelle des passages de la Démocratie en Amérique de Tocqueville.