[governance] RE: below the societal usage layer

Mon Feb 7 11:53:55 EST 2011

John,

Completely agree re early input/co-design by civil society and broader interests is key for effective open specifications. That can be done without requiring everyone wade through ITU-style standards documents.
My one quibble is with your 'short time' phrase re the need for easy co-existence of IPv4 and IPv6, but anyway.

Since we're going all geeky on civil society: In my faculty/research day job, the attached is under construction, some pieces are in beta; and others hypothetical.  

For not-too-techie csers, just note 2 things: wired and wireless are treated the same; also note the 'policy engine' boxes down at the cognitive radio guts level on the lower right. That is kind a blow-up of what is on the lower left. Those policies can be whatever someone constructs, out of open source tools.   Meaning we can write the policies, in all senses of the word.

Likewise, note 'grid/cloud specs' box on lower right of upper left part of left diagram...got it?  

The hypothetical easy IPv4/v6 converter module could connect there; and could be driven by a a policy engine at lower levels If someone can jam it through IETF or anything else too, go for it.

Anyway it is all very early for WiGiT but if folks wish to come up with a spec - the virtual organization of WiGiT which is neither here nor there, and which has no dysfunctional formal rules to undo since - there are no rules - is happy to be of service. And as the diagram illustrates, if something comes from or goes back to IEEE, or IETF, or gasp even a company, it can all feed into the emergent open specifications suite.

In other words: define an open spec and we can have it quickly adopted, virtually, as another mix and match module.

I guess Parminder's already worrying about OECD knowing about this before cs - all I can say is next university in the virtual club is South African which will make their own contributions to the open specs suite. And they knew about it all long  before OECD, as did Brazilian universities...hey I did what I could.  More on that next month.

Anyway, this may all be premature for IGC, but I just wanted to get an early word - and a picture - out to illustrate where we are going, and what we will be defining more precisely in hopefully human-readable documents by next fall, with first draft open specs released about a year from now. If anyone or anything wants to join the virtual club of WiGiT - for now just send me an email, we'll be adding self-service buttons to the website soon.  Admission is of course free, as will be explained on our site http://wglab.net, when my students get around to it. Many of whom are from India, and doing very cool things - happy now Parminder? : )

Lee

'
________________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org [governance-request at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of John Curran [jcurran at arin.net]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 7:10 AM
To: jefsey
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Re: below the societal usage layer

On Feb 7, 2011, at 3:45 AM, jefsey wrote:
> John,
>
> I think we should give more thinking at the way to turn this situation as an advantage. A smart multi-plug could be a blessing for this and other transitions and other services.
>
> Civil society should not only complain and propose at the societal usage layer, but also at the lower technical and human use layers that condition them. It does not make sense to demand things and not to care about their practical feasibility.

Full agreement... In fact, the development of IPv6 has been one
of the strongest influences on my thoughts regarding the need for
multistakeholder involvement in standards and technical policy
setting activities.

It's perfectly reasonable to have the technological constraints
play a major factor in outcome determination, but not without
the proactive solicitation of views from those affected by the
results.  It's incredibly challenging to get done right, since
you really need to interface both early on with requirements,
and then periodically as an outcome is evolving; also, such
interfaces need to be done at a level that is appropriate  (i.e.
it's not reasonable to email a 70 page detailed technical spec
to civil society organizations and ask for input; you have to
prepare briefing materials that explain the current likely
outcome in lay terms)

In IPv6, this did not happen with even with respect to the ISP
& operator community, let along civil society organizations, and
it shows in the outcome.

/John

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WiGiTOpenSpecs10.6.2010.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 383741 bytes
Desc: WiGiTOpenSpecs10.6.2010.pdf
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110207/53d44acc/attachment.pdf>