Distributed Object Architecture versus DNS

Joly MacFie president at isoc-ny.org
Sat Jan 7 03:15:04 UTC 2017

​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

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

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

More information about the NANOG mailing list