[governance] IGC workshops

[Parminder]

NGN of course is an NN issue. And I agree that we should look at NN in 
the broader sense as Bill suggests, which to me is the original sense 
itself.  Parminder

William Drake wrote:
> Hi Milton,
>
> Not sure what the disconnect is here.  NGN is a term used in industry 
> and policy circles world wide to characterize the shift underway from 
> PSTNs to IP-based convergent nets with new architectures and service 
> provisioning models.  An important part of those new models, if the 
> carriers get their way, is to abandon NN, ergo my characterization of 
> the issues as part and parcel of the NGN shift.  Some observers say 
> that NGNs could provide the technical means to monitor and manage 
> traffic in such a manner that all applications are treated on a 
> nondiscriminatory basis, but that doesn't appear the to be preference 
> of the carriers making the investments.  And they're getting their way 
> in various places; governments like the UK's have specifically 
> rejected NN as a barrier to NGN development.  So I was simply 
> suggesting we might want to consider NN in the context of the larger 
> transformation underway.
>
> I've moaned here on and off for years about the apparent aversion to 
> assessing the potential impacts of trends in the telecom industry, 
> including its global governance, on the Internet and IG.  It really 
> puzzles me that we would treat a katrillion dollar industry that 
> controls much of the underlying infrastructure as somehow irrelevant, 
> particularly after all the (semi-coherent) discussions of 
> international interconnection charging and such in WSIS and beyond. 
>  The singular obsession with ICANN---not so much what ICANN actually 
> does, the issues it addresses, but rather what it is or represents 
> institutionally---seems to blot out interest in other issues and 
> leaves the ministries and industry to merrily go there way without any 
> public interest advocacy as a countervailing force beyond purely 
> national discussions.  Since we can't or don't participate in most of 
> the international spaces where this stuff goes on, why would we not 
> want to use the opportunities provided by the IGF to explore these 
> dynamics, especially when they're directly relevant to the focus of 
> the workshop?
>
> Whatever...dead horse duly beaten, back to our regular programming...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Jun 8, 2009, at 6:04 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
>> No, I just misunderstood your statement that Net Neutrality is "part 
>> and parcel" of the NGN trajectory. What you apparently mean is that 
>> phone companies may be using NGN to _avoid_ being neutral, which may 
>> be true, and is certainly important if it is. I still don't know what 
>> you meant by "...of which it is part and parcel."
>>  
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 07, 2009 12:38 PM
>> *To:* Milton L Mueller
>> *Cc:* Governance List
>> *Subject:* Re: [governance] IGC workshops
>>  
>> Hi Milton,
>>  
>> On Jun 7, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>>
>>
>>  
>> I agree.  We might want to consider widening the lens an little and 
>> placing NN in the context of the whole NGN trajectory, of which it is 
>> part and parcel.
>>  
>> It is???? I hope not. That's a peculiarly Geneva-centric view of NN
>>  
>>  
>> Are you saying that carriers around the world are not in fact making 
>> the investments and pursuing the strategies they say they 
>> are---replacing PSTNs with IP core and access nets, trying to move to 
>> QOS and differentiation, etc?  Or that because they adopt the 
>> standards and coordinate on the policies in Geneva, it doesn't matter 
>> that they are doing these things? Or that because in Geneva they use 
>> terminology they may not use as much in the US, it doesn't matter 
>> that they are doing these things? Or that taking note of the global 
>> trends is suspect if one is based in Geneva?  Or...?  Perhaps a 
>> peculiarly US-centric view of NN at work here...:-)
>>  
>> But forget the term, forget the ITU.  The question is, in the IGF 
>> context, would it be optimal to continue talking about NN as a 
>> stand-alone issue, or might it be useful to view it as part of a 
>> larger set of dynamics in the telecom industry that could affect the 
>> net going forward?
>>  
>> Cheers,
>>  
>> Bill
>
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake  
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>   Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch 
> <mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html 
> <http://www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html>
> ***********************************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090608/763c6a80/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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