[governance] please read: APC text on Forum function

[Lee McKnight]

Ronda,

Agreed, the Internet is by definition a network of networks (even if no
definition has been formally adopted).

For rhetorical and tactical purposes, as I have explained in much
earlier missives, keeping Karen's language but dropping the 'binding
intl agrrement' aspect is, in my opinion, worthwhile. Longer more
detailed explanations don;t fit into these types of docs well, but I can
imagine future litigation/arbitration/disputes where having the language
in helped the forces of good, whomever they may be in that future
instance, carry the day.      

Lee                  

Prof. Lee W. McKnight
School of Information Studies
Syracuse University
+1-315-443-6891office
+1-315-278-4392 mobile

>>> Ronda Hauben <ronda at panix.com> 09/29/05 9:54 AM >>>

About 'end-to-end' and 'open architecture'

Actually the architectural principle for the internet was 'open 
architecture' which meant that all the info about the the communicating

networks would function as peers of each other,rather than requiring
that any one become a component of another."

A definition of open architecture is "Open architecture...describes the

structure of the Internet, which is built on standard interfaces, 
protocols, a basic data format, and a uniform identifier or addressing

mechanism. All the information needed regarding the interconnection 
aspects is publicly available."

The end to end principle has been promoted as the essence of the
Internet,
but the Internet is not any single network (which goes from one end to
another end.). The Internet is a network of networks.

So it is important that this interconnection of dissimilar networks
be recognized in characterizing the Internet, as this is the
conception
of its origin and what its nature is. This is what makes it possible
for
so many dissimilar networks to be interconnected in today's Internet.

Ronda

http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/birth_tcp.txt 

http://www.circleid.com/article/96_0_1_0_Chttp://www.circleid.com/article/96_0_1_0_C


http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/birth_tcp.txt 


On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Laina Raveendran Greene wrote:

>
> Agreed with you Lee. There is a need to remind people about the
openess of
> the Internet and the spirit in which it was created and spread around
the
> world. In our statement, we tried to remind delegates that the
Internet was
> created by individuals with a high sense of shared responsibility and
trust,
> and any efforts for IG, whether improving the status quo, creating a
forum
> and/or new oversight mechanisms, should all be done within these
same
> spirit.
>
> Currently, as Amb Klarkin pointed out, we are at a unique juncture of
public
> and private international law coming together. It has happened before
from
> the 60s to 90s, with the rise of MNCs and international law moving
towards
> the application of "soft laws" and increase of private international
law
> applications. Now we have the civil society equation, which is new to
some
> agencies especially the likes of ITU. It is a very unique juncture of
the
> creation of a "new form of cooperation" between stakeholders and a
new form
> of "soft law" (even moving beyond what we have in PIL....a term used
in
> public international law vis a vis MOUs e.g. lke the one we had on
GMPCS on
> LEOs etc..).
>
> Laina
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org 
> [mailto:governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Lee McKnight
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 2:21 PM
> To: wdrake at cpsr.org; wdrake at ictsd.ch; governance at lists.cpsr.org 
> Subject: Re: [governance] please read: APC text on Forum function
>
> Karen, Bill,
>
> I appreciate your intent Karen and APC's intent but agree with Bill
that
> 'binding international agreements' on openness is a contradication in
terms
> that will never fly.
>
> Language more along the lines that the forum's efforts should keep in
mind
> the need to preserve the Internet's essential features, such as,
'openness
> etc..' might have the opposite effect of making agreement easier,
since then
> the forum is signalling the techies that it will not muck things up.
>
> Lee
>
> Prof. Lee W. McKnight
> School of Information Studies
> Syracuse University
> +1-315-443-6891office
> +1-315-278-4392 mobile
>
>>>> wdrake at cpsr.org 09/29/05 5:55 AM >>>
> Karen,
>
>>> In the context of the evolving public and technical policy
landscape
> of
>>> the Internet there will be a need to concretize binding
> international
>>> agreements that relate to:
>>>
>>> -        the architectural principles of the Internet, including
>>> interoperability, openness and the end-to-end principle
>
> I am very strongly opposed to putting this in the forum, and believe
it will
> provide the USA and business with a big opening to reject the forum
> outright.  I hope you will reconsider, it's dangerous.
>
> Rest is consistent more or less with IGcaucus etc.
>
> BD
>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org 
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance 
> _______________________________________________
>
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance