[governance] Re: SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Lee W McKnight]

Jovan,

I beg to differ with you and CERN about whether 'grids' must be well-ordered or can be ad hoc and dynamic.

To elaborate:

 In fact I've spent the past 8 years differing on this : ) Frankly the high energy physicists...no offense to them, but they have a kind of constrained view of grids, based on their reasonable preoccupation with massive data files. We're not talking movie-download massive, we're talking Comet Hartley massive or subatomic particles colliding massive...very very small things can generate reams and reams of data.

Anyway, those are not the typical preoccupation of web or grid or whatever other class of Internet users. Who care mainly about dynamic things like reaching people who tend to move around.

The National Science Foundation Partnerships for Innovation 'Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed' (WiGiT) is developing open specifications or 'sharing protocol' for such dynamic and flexible grids of people, and their resources, including their services, and software, and content. I'm pleased to say NSF considers my re-definition (and the architecture underlying it) a 'transformative innovation' - though it is still early in the process of reeducating folks on the meaning of the word grid.

Especially given the resource and bandwidth constraints of rural areas, a more flexible and dynamic grid offers significant benefits, and can run transparently across available Internet networks. We're also very green since we don't send stuff back and forth unnecessarily as traditional nets do.

Basically, think of the Grid as where the 'Internet of Things' gets socially coordinated with Internet users. 

But yes 'grid' contradicts - or rather -complements and expands the Internet, as I made reasonably clear in my 'Future of the Internet is Not the Internet' presentation to NSF and OECD in 2007...to Vint Cerf among others. So they can't say they weren't warned. : ) 

An initial release of WiGiT open specs will be available in 2011, as may early versions of software implementing various pieces...until then all I can say is we're already going international...to Portugal and Seneca Nation of Indians...and we're already incorporating the latest 802.15.x specs for low power ad hoc wireless mesh networks (CCNY)  and cognitive radios (Virginia Tech)...and we'll be offering wireless grid music services for students with disabilities (BOCES).  To name a few examples of users comig onto the grid in 2011.

The article 'Squeezing a Grid onto a Widget' summarizes reasonably clearly the issues between the (old-fashioned) definition of grids, and their future. http://wglab.net see publications por news releases

Folks interested in our physical/virtual WiGiT meetings - and interested in joining the Virtual Organization which is the WiGiT testbed - feel free to send me an email.

I have already intro'd the 'Social Grid' concept into UN-GAID, and hope my IGC virtual pals are up for considering being early movers and creators of their own grid apps and services....

But if this is all too bleeding edge for IGC I'll not take offense, though I also won't stop developing WiGiT. Whose open specs should make it relatively trivial to create a global social grid for enhanced cooperation among other things.

Lee
________________________________________
From: Jovan Kurbalija [jovank at diplomacy.edu]
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 11:14 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Lee W McKnight
Cc: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Avri Doria
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

Lee,

I suggest caution with the use of the word "grid" for a few reasons...

Semantically, 'grid' implies a well-ordered structure (rows/columns). IG is far from being so well-organised.

Technically, 'grid' contradicts some of the basic premises of the Internet. I recently participated in a discussion on CERN's Worldwide LHC Computing Grid (which provides data support for the "big-bang" experiment at CERN). It is clear that CERN's grid, which is a principal deployment of the grid model, is hierarchical, location-aware and centrally planned. It does not provide for a decoupling of layers, which was achieved in the very early days of the Internet. The lack of decoupling of layers leads to a problem with robustness, development of new applications, etc. All in all, CERN is considering some sort of merger or even evolution towards cloud computing, which is much better in virtualisation of resources (mainly by decoupling layers). Business abandoned the grid concept and moved to the cloud a few years ago.

Interestingly enough, both of the terms 'web' and 'grid' were coined within the CERN project, although for different purposes. I still think that 'web' both reflects better what occurs in the IG-field, and has better future than grid. Given the fuzziness, sometimes confusion of IG, 'cloud' could be even better. This would also help speechwriters a lot - so many possible metaphors with clouds, blue sky, etc.

Marilia mentioned 'IG ecology', which is probably the best description. However, there are two possible confusions. One is with ISOC's Internet ecology. The other is with the most frequent connotation of ecology with environment and climate change.

What about "IG sphere"? Other suggestions?

Jovan


On 11/7/10 1:58 AM, Lee W McKnight wrote:

Wolfgang,

Agreed the ITU PP is a step in the right direction. Though in practice ITU & IETF have been - practicing - enhanced cooperation for years as was discussed a while back on the list.

Extending that more formally to a broader group of orgs is a good thing, but more of an incremental step than radical break with past practice. And it still leaves civil society in the cheap seats/as spectators at (most) ITU events, typically.

On another note - and no offense - but can we stop talking about at an 'IG Web' - that sounds so 1990s.

IG Cloud would be trendier but even vaguer.

I suppose IG Grid would be my preference, connoting simultaneous info and resource sharing across..the grid.

Lee


________________________________________
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de<mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>]
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 1:19 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Avri Doria; IGC
Subject: AW: [governance] Re: SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

Hi all

It makes little sense to continue a theoretical discussion on "enhanced cooperation" when the practical process is moving forward and is creating new facts and opportunities. Do not underestimate the outcome of the ITU PP in Guadalajara with regard to "enhanced cooperation". In my eyes this is really a door opener and a breakthorugh towards a new more issue related "enhanced cooperation" among all players. The fact that the ITU calls in a resolution, adopted by all its 193 member states, for greater "collaboration and coordination" (remember our EC³ definition of enhanced cooperation from 2007) between the ITU on the one hand and ICANN, RIR, W3C, IETF and ISOC (on a reciprocity basis) on the other hand is very remarkable. If you take it seriously what Toure told Kieran Mc Carthy in his interview and look into Beckstroms letter to the ITU from June (published only recently) than you can see that "enhanced cooperation" is moving forward in the right way and gets substance.


We did not discuss here the idea to create a network of formal arrangements, something like an "IG Web", among all these governmental and non-governmental players. UNESCO (an intergovernmental organisation) and ICANN (a private corporation) created an interesting model of a formalized IG oriented mutual bilateral relationship. The "Letter of Intent" (LOI), signed in Vilnjus, is a good source of inspiration, also for a formalization of the ICANN-ITU relationship. Will we see more of them, also with other players? Probably we will see the emergence of a network of fomalized bilatertal relationship in a very multilateral/multistakeholder environment. I called this previously the IG "Spaghetti Ball". So enhanced cooperation is moving foreward.

Wolfgang


EC³ was defined - in an expert meeting during following the 2007 Summer School on Internet Governance as follows "Enhanced cooperation in Internet Governance is the enhanced communication, coordination and collaboration (EC³) among non-govenrmental and inter-governmental institutions and organisations in developing norms, principles, programmes and procedures for the governance of the Internet in an informal or, when and where needed, formalized way."


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

____________________________________________________________
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