[bestbits] [JNC - Forum] PP: India wants to abolish BGP and introduce national routing and IP management

[parminder]

For a long time I have believed, and in fact still do, that a 
transnational system of naming, numbering, and routing of Internet 
traffic, which does not fully map on to sovereign boundaries, is an 
excellent check on the national state's inherent tendency to use 
possible controls on a nation's informational space for illegitimate 
purposes. However, for this purpose, that particular transnational 
system has to be fair and just, and democratic. And since nothing is 
perfect, it should at least show marked tendencies in the direction of 
becoming fair, just and democratic. The problem however is that the 
current transnational system - managed by the ICANN family of 
institutions - and of course under significant US control - shows no 
such signs of becoming what it needs to become, ie fair, just and 
democratic.

Developing countries, including India, have for decades been crying 
hoarse, pleading, 'please, become more fair and democratic...'. Such 
appeals get the most humiliating responses - from a  stony silence, to, 
well, 'we made the Internet, and so have some regard and patience'. 
India, and some others like Brazil, at least must be credited for being 
extremely patient and conciliatory. (I sometime marvel how they have 
been so patient .) But all this to no avail. The hegemony stays 
unshaken, just gets more and more strengthened by the day.... 
(Unfortunately, most of, what goes in the name of, civil society in the 
IG space has consistently supported this hegemony, *for all practical 
purposes* but let me not digress.)

In the circumstances, I think that any self respecting country has no 
other option but to say, ok, if you just refuse to budge on the 
international regime, let the sovereign countries do these things 
themselves - meaning, naming, numbering, and routing processes. The rule 
of democratic law must apply, and if it cannot apply through 
international regimes, then let it be through separate national ones. 
That is what the India proposal is about. As I said, I still think that 
a positive tension between a (fair and democratic) transnational system 
and a more close-to-things and implementable national one is the best 
thing in this space, is best for the Internet, generally, speaking. But 
if those who squat in the positions of power and control over the 
current global regime (see Just Net Coalition's latest statement 
<http://www.itu.int/en/plenipotentiary/2014/Documents/ITU_PP_2014_Stmt2.pdf> 
) simply refuse to hear, I think that it is absolutely fair for a 
country like India to bring such a resolution to any appropriate global 
governance forum, as it has to the ITU Plenipotentiary. In fact it wont 
be doing its duty if it were not to so such a thing.

I hope more countries back this resolution, and it serves to create 
positive tension vis a vis the current unacceptable global regime, out 
of which contestation something good, which is the best for the global 
public interest comes out..

parminder

On Monday 27 October 2014 03:28 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> */[MG>] this one seems to be causing a fair amount of controversy with 
> many of the Status Quo-ists going apoplectic… /*
>
> instructs the Secretary General
> 1 to collaborate with all stakeholders including International and 
> intergovernmental organizations, involved in IP addresses management 
> to develop an IP address plan from which IP addresses of different 
> countries are easily discernible and coordinate to ensure distribution 
> of IP addresses accordingly;
> 2 to collaborate with all the concerned stakeholders including 
> International and intergovernmental organizations to develop policies 
> for allocation, assignment and management of IP resources including 
> naming, numbering and addressing which is systematic, equitable, fair, 
> just, democratic and transparent and need to be adhered to by entities 
> designated with the responsibilities of allocating or assigning 
> resources and dealing with day-to-day technical and operational matters;
> 3 to prepare reference plan for current and future telecom networks 
> that addresses concerns of Member States including safety, robustness, 
> resilience, routing in normal and exceptional cases and provide 
> guidance on technical capabilities to developing countries;
> 4 to develop and recommend public telecom network architecture which 
> ensures effectively that address resolution for the traffic meant for 
> the country, traffic originating and terminating in the country/region 
> takes place within the country;
> 5 to develop and recommend public telecom network architecture which 
> ensures that effectively the traffic meant for the country, traffic 
> originating and terminating in the country remains within the country;
> 6 to develop and recommend a routing plan of traffic for optimizing 
> the network resources that could effectively ensure the traceability 
> of communication;
> 7 to collaborate with all stakeholders involved in studying the 
> weaknesses of present protocols used in telecom networks and develop 
> and recommend secure, robust and tamper proof protocols to meet the 
> requirements of future networks in view of the envisaged manifold 
> increase in traffic and end devices in near future in the light of IoT 
> and M2M needs;
> 8 to submit an annual report on above to the ITU council.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum mailing list
> Forum at justnetcoalition.org
> http://justnetcoalition.org/mailman/listinfo/forum_justnetcoalition.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20141029/f2cd0211/attachment.htm>