<html>
<body>
At 13:52 06/08/2013, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">(b) Mainly ISOC (and other
technical community), </blockquote><br>
Jeremy,<br><br>
This needs to be clarfied :-) - This is a key point.<br><br>
You are talking of ISOC/IEEE/W3C private sector technical network
communities. This is not the case of civil society technical network
communities<br><br>
The former legitimately have their own policy and strategy. If the later
are small, it is only because the civil society does not expose and
support them as the private sector does for their techies, for
decades.And because the network architecture is not the application area
where the FLOSS flourishes.<br><br>
To address this situation is our (civil society network technical
community) priority. However, the risk for us is to be copied/used
by pirates and that our move is deemed as disruptive like in the P2P
case. This is why we need to proceed in a careful way and respect the
private sector technical community formal process, for them to declare
that our area is legitimate but outside of their scope. And hence
cooperate. Takes time.<br><br>
Then we will need help. But we know where we want to go, why and
how.<br><br>
jfc<br><br>
.<br><br>
</body>
</html>