[governance] IPv6 address allocations to DOD

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]
> 
> However, I wonder how folks at the IGF would feel if we had a really
> good workshop about the WHOIS issues that the ARIN community is
> debating this week at the next IGF.  I mean a great workshop, everyone
> gained understanding of the issues clearly, aired their views, learned
> a lot, even came up with a consensus of the folk in the room about the
> way forward.  Wouldn't it be a tad frustrating to leave the room after
> such an event knowing that you did it in the wrong place to have any
> impact? 

Hmmm, what you're saying is that frustration is built into the genes of the IGF, because that is precisely what the IGF is supposed to do, nothing more. 

But you overstate your case a bit. The fact that the IGF is nonbinding discussion only doesn't' mean it has no impact. 

I guess the rationale is that if you can build a consensus in the non-binding and non authoritative space of the IGF its results can be carried into other, more authoritative institutional settings. Consensus, trust, and understanding can have strong spillover effects. The real problem with the IGF is that we so rarely get there. I think innocuous, apolitical so-called capacity building stuff is one of the reasons. 

> This is why I support the capacity building approach.

Now THAT's a recipe for frustration imho. In my (admittedly academic and intellectual) view, you build capacity by dealing interactively with real politics, which means real people with real interests expressing their real opinions in real interactions in real situations. That's how people really laearn what is at stake and what the meaning of different positions and issues are. Not by spoon-feeding, patronizing one-way flows of knowledge from the wise to the ignorant.  

> In this thread alone, we have had everything from accusations of
> authoritarianism to suspicions that the US military gets whatever they
> want via political pressure and that they would use these addresses to
> eavesdrop on every device on the planet.  I think we need the
> education first before we can have meaningful policy discussions.

That's where we disagree. If those fears and suspicions exist they should be aired and the people airing them may learn that they are unfounded or the people pooh-poohing them may learn a few things, too. Both sides will change. Maybe. 

I agree however that the problem of specialized expertise is a severe one and there is no easy solution. I myself cannot keep up with ARIN ppml because I am trying to cover a wide swath of IG and the volume of comment, level of expertise and narrowness of the issues makes it difficult even for me to keep up. But this is not a criticism of ARIN - it is built into the nature of a highly complex, differentiated social structure.  

____________________________________________________________
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