<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=WordSection1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I certainly support the idea
that we must agree common definitions before we sally forth. The cleavage
being advocated between the wired and wireless Internet is certainly something
that we must consider, if only because for much of our world, the Internet is
going to be a wireless neighbourhood.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Carlton<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> parminder
[mailto:parminder@itforchange.net] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, August 14, 2010 2:59 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] Net neutrality<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
On Saturday 14 August 2010 03:03 AM, SAMUELS,Carlton A wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Another view on the NN ‘wars”.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><a
href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/12/AR2010081206521.html?wpisrc=nl_cuzhead">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/12/AR2010081206521.html?wpisrc=nl_cuzhead</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Carlton Samuels<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><br>
For some unclear reasons the author of the article has chosen to completely
ignore the most discussed about issue in the verizon-google deal - treating
wireless networks in a manner different than wired ones vis a vis net
neutrality. <br>
<br>
By the way, I am impressed the number of time the term 'public internet' is
being used now. It was almost two years ago in Hyderabad IGF that IT for Change
did a sign on campaign for 'protecting the publicness of the Internet'. A
couple of years earlier when a call was made for submitting possible themes for
the first IGF we had submitted the theme of 'defining and fostering the
publicness of the Internet'.<br>
<br>
When the issues of managed services and a tiered interent are so current, it is
useful to look at possible definitions of what constitutes a public Internet,
or well what constitutes an Internet. (Google has used the term non-Internet
services for managed services). Obviously, it is important to know what is
Internet before we pursue IG. <br>
<br>
Is it possible to work on some of these issues in the IGC? <br>
<br>
Parminder<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>