[governance] IPv6 address allocations to DOD

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
> > Wouldn't an IGF main session on IPv6 sub-netting and architecture be
> > more useful than human rights and a development agenda for IG if we
> > really want to put out these fires?
> 
> If by useful you mean inducing hundreds of people to 
> simultaneously get up for a coffee break or try to check 
> their mail, sure.  Otherwise, no.  Not the purpose of an IGF 
> main session.
> 
> What would be useful though would be for there to be a 
> regularized stream of properly calibrated techie tutorial 
> sessions available alongside the workshops, open forums, etc 
> for people who want to know more.  I've never understood why 

Problem is, Bill, the politics are deeply embedded in the technology. You have to know both. Compare McTim's description of "needs-based allocations" to mine in my last message. No, the last thing we need are the RIRs and ISOC lecturing about how IP address allocation is all based on rational technical criteria and couldn't possibly be done any other way. If you want a real glimpse into the political issues and problems posed in this area, you have to go onto their policy lists and (yes) sink or swim in the techno-jargon until you figure out what is really going on. The RIRs' policy lists have truly fascinating, honest, bare-all, bare-knuckled policy fights where the real stakes come out on display. Put the same people in front of an IGF main session or tutorial, on the other hand, and suddenly it's a bland, mainstreamed session delivering the party line and pretending there's nothing contentious about any of it....zzzzz.

Actually at ICANN meetings there are some pretty darn good tutorials. That's because the audience at ICANN is more heterogeneous and includes business people, lawyers, governments and NGOs as well as techies. If you wanted to catch up on dnssec issues or IDN policy issues or other vexatious intersections between tech standards and policies, some of the icann workshops have been good. They, too have their party line to promote but typically there's a clueful enough audience to afford the opportunity for some debate and dialogue.

--MM
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t