<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#333333" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Dear Ian<br>
<br>
I am willing to discuss your proposal, if we can put some flesh over it.<br>
<br>
So the baseline is; ICANN, both in its DNS and IANA roles, becomes an
international organisation, through an express agreement among all
actors, which includes US and other govs, and it gets into a host
country agreement which gives it various immunities. Right?<br>
<br>
Beyond that you seem to want ICANN to self-regulate and self-oversee,
without any separate oversight body. Which means that the ICANN board
is the final authority for everything. <br>
<br>
Dont you think that having a body that can check possible abuse of
power by the ICANN board, and hold it accountable to some basic
parametres and general law/policies, would be useful/ necessary? Do you
think that such institutional separation of roles and power can be done
within ICANN? If so, how do you suggest to go about it? <br>
<br>
(The international oversight body that I suggested can be considered a
part of ICANN, that isnt a big issue. The issue is whether to have such
a body as different from the board as the executive body, for basic
law/policy compliance related accountability, or not. And if so, how to
populate it, and how to structure its relationship with other parts of
ICANN, especially its board. And of course, how to ensure that it
itself does not abuse its power.)<br>
<br>
Another issue is, how does ICANN define its mandate. Is it narrowly
defined as technical policy development, or is it indeed mandated to
take up wider <big>'</big></font><font size="2" face="Verdana"><font
size="2" face="Verdana"><span style="font-weight: 400;"><big>public
policy issues associated with the coordination and management of
critical Internet resources'</big> </span></font></font><font
face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">(to quote Tunis agenda). If not so
mandated, is it now your proposal that it now takes up such a role.
That is an important issue to clarify. <br>
<br>
I have read numerous statements by NCUC (one of the civil society
constituencies within the ICANN) that ICANN should employ only
technical, financial and operational criteria in arriving at its
decisions, and not go into public policy considerations? Are you now
opposed to any such assertion? What is the current stand of NCUC in
this regard?<br>
<br>
Regards, parminder <br>
<br>
</font><br>
On Tuesday 26 June 2012 09:31 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:CC0F7139.25A59%25ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
type="cite">
<title>Re: [governance] [liberationtech] Chinese preparing for a
"Autonomous Internet" ?</title>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">Parminder suggests a structure to take over
the unilateral USG role in root zone management (among other things).<br>
<br>
I have a different proposal altogether – just strike it. The oversight
function is completely unnecessary, and there enough checks and
balances in current procedures to not need such a role.<br>
<br>
Just get rid of it. Make a decision that it is in the best interests of
the internet not to have the perception of unilateral control of any
functions. <br>
<br>
If the USG insists on maintaining a role, sign a similarly worded
agreement with GAC. <br>
<br>
If nothing is done, the default solutions governments will come up with
are likely to be far worse.<br>
<br>
Which is why we should act. I get frustrated by those organisations and
individuals who are in a position to take a lead on such matters but
instead do nothing. A pro-active stance is needed!<br>
<br>
This is just part of the DNS, as Louis Pouzin points out. The current
appropriate forum for governance in DNS matters is ICANN. Improvement
of ICANN is another matter, but we do not need another body- or another
function or an anachronistic agreement or set of agreements - to get in
the way of sensible internet governance. <br>
<br>
The Internet has grown up, some old procedures are now not only
unneccessary but unhealthy. For the health of the Internet, we should
get rid of them. <br>
<br>
Ian Peter<br>
<br>
<br>
<hr size="3" width="95%" align="CENTER"><b>From: </b>parminder <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>>,
parminder <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:25:12 +0530<br>
<b>To: </b><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>>,
David Conrad <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="drc@virtualized.org">drc@virtualized.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [governance] [liberationtech] Chinese preparing
for a "Autonomous Internet" ?<br>
<br>
<font color="#333333"><br>
On Monday 25 June 2012 02:16 AM, David Conrad wrote: <br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
Parminder,<br>
<br>
On Jun 21, 2012, at 6:36 PM, parminder wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
But even if we were to agree to what you argue, why would the same
safe-guards not operate in case of a international oversight mechanism?
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
They probably would, but hard to say for certain without a concrete
example of said "international oversight mechanism". Can you point me
at one?<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
I have proposed some outlines of such a possible model and I you want I
can re state it.<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
<br>
I was actually looking for a concrete (ideally peer-reviewed) proposal
or, more preferably, an operational example or prototype, not an
outline of lofty goals or possible models. Does such exist?<br>
<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"><br>
In socio-political arena, the method of seeking 'solutions' or the 'way
forward' normally is that we first try to agree on larger ideas and
principles, and then progressively move towards the details. Those
approaching this debate from the technical side must respect this
general method as they want their method of deciding on technical
issues respected. The main broad points of the model that I had
proposed are<br>
<br>
(1) An international treaty clearly lays out the scope, procedures and
limits of an international CIR oversight body, as it provides it with
the required authority<br>
<br>
(2) ICANN itself becomes an international technical body under the same
statute as above, and it enters into a host country agreement with the
hosting country, which could be the US<br>
<br>
(3) The same treaty sanctifies the broad principles of the current
distributed CIR and tech standards development model (ICANN, RIRs, IETF
etc)<br>
<br>
(4) The oversight body is a stand-alone body set up under the mentioned
treaty - outside the UN system but perhaps with some loose coupling
with it, in a manner that it is not subject to typical UN rules. It
would ab initio evolve its own rules, procedures etc. <br>
<br>
(5) The oversight body can have 15-20 members, with equitable regional
representation. Within each region the country from which members would
come will get rotated. ( Here, we will need some degree of innovation
to ensure that although the member will have some clear relationship/
backing of the government, her selection/ affirmation would require a
broader national process. Some linkages with highest level national
technical institutions can also be explored. More ideas are welcome
here.)<br>
<br>
(6) The role of the oversight body will be minimal, clearly constrained
by the relevant international law, exercised through clearly detailed
procedures, and based on a sufficiently high majority, if not
consensus. <br>
<br>
(7) Its decision will be subject to a separate judicial process (can
look at a possible role for the International court of justice)<br>
<br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
I'll admit I'm still not clear what you believe the "international
oversight mechanism" should do.<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"><br>
More or less what the US gov does in relation to CIR management. <br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
You've been talking about how the evil USG will trample the contents
of the root zone. Presumably, the "international oversight mechanism"
will be overseeing the operations of root zone modification as the USG
does today. <br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"><br>
yes<br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
Since those operations must be based in some country, it isn't clear to
me how the "international oversight mechanism" would be able to stop
that country's government from going rogue and doing what you believe
the evil USG will do.<br>
<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"><br>
No, it doesnt happen that way at all. Host country agreement and the
authorising international law are there precisely to prevent such a
thing. Today, if the US 'interferes' with root zone operation, it
breaks no law, neither domestic nor international. To forcibly break
into an international body's premises which is protected by host
country agreement and based on international treaty, and interfering in
its work, will be an extraordinary defiance of international law, the
kind which even the US doesnt do :). It can be subject to further
international processes like those from the UN and the international
court of justice. BTW, the fact that the US is one of the countries
with the uneasiest of relationships with the international court of
justice may be a good reason to seek ICANN's and the oversight body's
hosting outside the US. However, perhaps for, historical continuity's
sake US would do as well. <br>
<br>
regards, parminder <br>
<br>
</font></span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"> <br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
-drc<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><font color="#333333"><br>
<hr size="3" width="95%" align="CENTER"></font></span></font><font
size="2"><font face="Consolas, Courier New, Courier"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;">____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
</span></font></font>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>