[governance] US Congrerss & JPA

[Eric Dierker]

Well said Karl,
 
I was too absolute in stating that nothing was black and white.  Clearly there are degrees here.  I think that you eventually get to that point. The mechanics do not require the politics (kind of). Certainly we do not need glassy office buildings over looking the Marina in Del Rey. A hobble in Kabul would work.  Well not really, would it?  It would not be stable. It would not be secure. It would not attract investment. It would not attract the best and brightest or the best of breed. It would not endear itself to trust and confidence. And it could have the crap taxed out of it.

But your final point about what attracts users is totally off the mark.  I will go out on a limb and say you do not like marketing and you do not watch std commercial TV. That is a bit head in the sand, don't you think.  How could most IGF guys understand what drives a kid to use Itunes to download rap, or a Japanese teeneybopper to bootleg bubble gum Indy.  Can you say you get twitter and face -- not how it technically works by why it is so popular? How many texts can you do in four minutes?
Believe me -- 90-95 percent of the internet net could give a rats ---- about your stability and security. But they do want accessability at a cheap price to whatever is Hot!
Internet Governance has more to do with the flow of what is currently popular than the flow of electrical current. Or did I miss something and the term governance is now relegated to the speed of mechanisms.

--- On Thu, 8/6/09, Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:


From: Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] US Congrerss & JPA
To: "Eric Dierker" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Vanda Scartezini" <vanda at uol.com.br>, wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de, igf_members at intgovforum.org
Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 9:44 PM


On 08/06/2009 04:08 AM, Eric Dierker wrote:
> I like this Karl.  I only wish the jobs to be done were nice and black
> and white. They are not.

I disagree.  Years ago I started to enumerate the jobs that we need to have performed.  Take a look at: http://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/apfi.htm

There is another formulation at http://www.cavebear.com/archive/public/ntia-july-7-2006-statement.html (Scan down for "Answering the Specific Questions" and then either search (or better yet, read) your way down to "Form follows function"

As I see it there are many jobs (e.g. protocol parameter assignment, TLD record updates, root zone file preparation and dissemination, etc) that could be handed over to several clerical bodies.

Then there are some policy jobs (that are might be addressed by the kind of notice-and-comment process used by many administrative bodies when the make rules.

Then there are the very highly policy loaded jobs - such as IP address allocation policy, whois, and TLD policy - that might be worth more elaborate structure - with one entity for each problem (*not* one entity that handles multiple problems.)

By-the-way, there is a subtle point about my metric i.e. that DNS name query packets are quickly, efficiently, and accurately translated into DNS name response packets without prejudice against any query source or query subject.

That subtle point is this: That I don't think we ought to care very much about the performance and quality of the system through which registrars and registries do their front office business of selling names - there are customers enough, and money enough behind those customers, to drive good standards of performance.

But from the perspective of internet governance that reflects the concerns of internet users the quality of the process of resolving names, i.e. the back-office operations of registries, is what is critical.


        --karl--








-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090806/a4a8b610/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance