+1 to Karl-John exchange below.<div><br></div><div>Particularly: </div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra"><i>"User traffic should be considered</i></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><i> private, and not monitored and except to the extent necessary</i></div><div class="gmail_extra"><i> for network operations or per lawful order" is far more</i></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<i> useful than "Don't deploy DPI or traffic monitoring"</i></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_extra"><br>Correct formulation of an issue/objective is 90% of solving/achieving it. (Should we say governance is 90% formulation and 10% perspiration ?) A major purpose of multi-stakeholder deliberations is to provide the full picture (with all technical, economic, ethical and social aspects), to prevent exchanges spiralling down into acrimonious opposition between apparently incompatible high-level principles. </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">In many cases, the choice is not either/or, but how - if possible - to combine opposing principles in a dynamic, positive tension. </div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Bertrand </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 2:51 PM, John Curran <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jcurran@istaff.org" target="_blank">jcurran@istaff.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Dec 15, 2012, at 3:47 AM, Karl Auerbach <<a href="mailto:karl@cavebear.com">karl@cavebear.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> One thing that I've always wanted to see is some line that allows those<br>
> of us who diagnose and repair networks to do our work without being<br>
> accused of being nefarious beings of malevolent intent.<br>
><br>
> A surgeon brings sharp, potentially dangerous tools to the operating table.<br>
><br>
> Those of us who diagnose and repair networks also have sharp tools in<br>
> our toolkits.<br>
><br>
> In both cases those tools are ambiguous - they could cause harm or cause<br>
> good.<br>
><br>
> There needs to be some sort of demarcation that allows for network<br>
> diagnosis and repair. This goes not merely to the use of tools but also<br>
> some recognition that during repair and diagnosis that sometimes things<br>
> that are private are revealed to the repair team.<br>
><br>
> Otherwise the security measures that "endeavour to ensure the security<br>
> and robustness of international telecommunication networks" could easily<br>
> become barriers that cause networks to be, in sum, less robust.<br>
<br>
</div>Karl -<br>
<br>
100% agreement. If we need controls, then we need them<br>
on actual acts of harm, not the tools or their use. The<br>
surgeon cuts flesh, but they are doing it for the right<br>
reason. The network engineer might indeed have to turn<br>
on packet monitoring, e.g. to find the control network<br>
behind a DDoS attack, etc.<br>
<br>
I'm not certain this point is well-understood by folks,<br>
and it comes back down to making sure that guidance from<br>
those who make public policy is sufficiently high-level<br>
based on outcomes, i.e. "User traffic should be considered<br>
private, and not monitored and except to the extent necessary<br>
for network operations or per lawful order" is far more<br>
useful than "Don't deploy DPI or traffic monitoring"<br>
<br>
FYI,<br>
/John<br>
<br>
Disclaimer: My views alone. Note to traffic monitoring<br>
equipment: Interception of this email constitutes acceptance<br>
of my terms and conditions; in short, you now owe me a latte.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>____________________<br>Bertrand de La Chapelle<div>Internet & Jurisdiction Project Director, International Diplomatic Academy (<a href="http://www.internetjurisdiction.net" target="_blank">www.internetjurisdiction.net</a>)</div>
<div>Member, ICANN Board of Directors <br>Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32<br><br>"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry<br>("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")</div>
<br>
</div>