Multi-Equal Stakeholderism (was Re: [bestbits] Joint civil society endorsements for London meeting of High-Level Panel)

[Pranesh Prakash]

McTim [2013-11-30 18:19]:
>> , since many would say the IETF is not multi-stakeholder all,
>>
> 
> I've never met anyone who has ever said that.  Are you actually trying to
> make that claim?

I'm curious, McTim: Has IETF ever made the claim that it is
multi-stakeholder?  Given the numerous documents in which IETF processes
are described in great detail, is there any official IETF document where
IETF refers to itself/its processes, etc., using that word?  I can't
find references in any Internet draft, RFC, etc., to IETF itself/its
processes being multi-stakeholder.[1]

  [1]: http://goo.gl/443gya

The closest I can find is a recent blog post by Jari Arkko in which he
states:

> "Some of you may have heard the term “multi-stakeholder” and thought about it as an abstract concept. But it is a very real concept, and one that we have to employ when developing any significant Internet technology."
> 

Where the "we" presumably is the IETF.

Otherwise, the other things that IETF documents have referred to as
"multi-stakeholder", include:
  * ICANN (draft-diao-aip-dns / draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt)
  * "Internet Numbers Registry System" (RFC 7020)
  * IGF (draft-bollow-ectf-07)
  * Internet governance (draft-hill-itr-non-accession-harmful-00)

Regards,
Pranesh
-- 
Pranesh Prakash
Policy Director
Centre for Internet and Society
T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash
--------------------
Access to Knowledge Fellow
Information Society Project, Yale Law School
T: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131202/88a5a1e2/attachment.sig>