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

Wed Oct 29 02:37:32 EDT 2014

On 29 Oct 2014, at 12:41 pm, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> 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.

	Well, it is great when we can agree. 

> 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.

	Do you believe that allocation based on need for IPv4 was not fair and just?

	I'd add that I, personally, would have to add 'objective and rational' to the list of desirable characteristics, because India seems to be proposing something that seems on the face of it to approach what seems to satisfy some of its principles, yet is poorly though out and probably unimplementable... 

> 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...'.

	Well, crying some variant of 'please give more power to national governments', and claiming it's all about democracy while sitting next to China and Russia and the KSA etc... 

> Such appeals get the most humiliating responses - from a  stony silence, to, well, 'we made the Internet, and so have some regard and patience'.

	Or the observation that claiming it is all about democracy while enlisting the support of China and Russia against a system backed by a wide range of democratic nations looks a bit suspicious..... 

> 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.)

	Cries to become more democratic aside (I've already observed that JNC rhetoric about democracy seems to frequently end up calling for solutions that seem somewhat un-democratic to me, so we are unlikely to agree unless you are willing to break with the JNC general push towards the ITU), do you have an issue with the current process or result? 
	So, do you have a problem with the actual allocation of IP#s followed by the RIRs? You would have proposed a different principle than allocation via need, so slowing internet deployment in early adopting areas?

> 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.

	Ah, yes, the ever popular JNC line of  'in order to make it more democratic, it is important to empower state based governance even when its undemocratic'. I'm still not able to reconcile the rhetoric with the result. 

	Cheers

		David

> 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 ) 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
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20141029/f7822d2e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20141029/f7822d2e/attachment.sig>