[governance] Programme outline and schedule released

[Karl Auerbach]

Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
.
>> In addition, the IEEE, W3C, and even the ITU are also major, and 
>> perhaps actually the dominant in certain regards, sources of internet 
>> protocol numbers.
> 
> If we were to take such a broader view, why not change "name and number 
> resources are administered by" to "technical coordination and standards 
> development takes place through", and then add another couple of your 
> examples such as the IETF and W3C.

Sure - my purpose was only to try to accurately reflect reality.

However, should we not ask of every matter: "Is this something that needs 
governance or oversight as part of *internet* governance?"

For instance: there has not been any problem with protocol numbers (as distinct 
from addresses.)  It is not a contentious subject - nobody really cares whether 
they get protocol option number 345 or 648.  (Well, that's usually they do not 
care - For example I do not mind that I have "enterprise" number 12.  And once, 
way back in the fun days of the net we got IANA to assign his and hers protocol 
numbers as a wedding gift, the value being the date of the wedding.)

So for the most part there really isn't any need for oversight/governance of 
the assignment of protocol numbers.  It just needs somebody to pay for the 
clerical job of doing it.  The IEEE pays its own costs as does the W3C and the 
ITU.  It seems that we simply ought to say "IETF, you can pay for your own 
protocol number assignment services just like every other standards body does."

Remember, the reason why protocol numbers got thrown into the soup was to 
provide some security for Jon Postel (who, if anyone on the net did, most 
certainly deserved it.)

The question that I suggested that we ask, i.e. "Is X something that needs 
governance or oversight as part of *internet* governance?" is a gating question 
we should always ask.

For example, is the relationship of trademarks to domain names something that 
needs *internet* governance?  Certainly it needs governance, but does it need 
*internet* governance or is it something better left to better established 
national and international processes?

The same goes for a recently made suggestion that one of the issues that ought 
to be considered is "Affordability of the access to the Internet" - using my 
proposed gating question, that is certainly an issue, but are price controls 
something that ought to be a subject of *internet* governance.  I can see such 
a topic being an endless black hole with considerable wrestling between north 
and south that distracts us from things we can actually accomplish.

		--karl--


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance