And G20? Re: [governance] Internet G8 meeting

[Miguel Alcaine]

Hi Avri,

I really liked this part of your answer:
*
The root is after all, just a glorified "phone book", translating one kind
of name into another kind of name (we pretend that IP addresses are numbers,
but they really are just names constructed of digits).*

Both ideas.

I also can read and feel you are a free person!

I agree with you on your evaluation of the political settings and the
importance of participation for netizens in all fora. One thing I find
paradoxical is that Governments and Societies in general are not dedicating
more resources to IG when the Internet and ICTs in general have become even
an always permanent (and then invisible) part of our daily lives.

Keep the good work,

Miguel

Disclaimer
My ideas are those of my own and does not represent any position of my
employer or any other institution

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:

>
> On 12 May 2011, at 09:51, McTim wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12 May 2011, at 09:00, McTim wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> whatever happened to focusing on ACTUAL INTERNET GOVERNANCE
> >>> activities, instead of talking endlessly about shapes of tables for
> >>> potential IG bodies???
> >>
> >>
> >> The so called actual internet governance activities are also political
> affairs and also largely controlled by business interests.   And tell me,
> where is it written that these activities should have a monopoly, especially
> if that monopoly is rigged.
> >
> > As Karl has so often pointed out, you can start your own root.
>
> Sooner or later someone will succeed.
>
> The root is after all, just a glorified "phone book", translating one kind
> of name into another kind of name (we pretend that IP addresses are numbers,
> but they really are just names constructed of digits).
>
> At this point ICANN's root has the trust and the mindshare, but that is a
> fragile thing and ICANN could easily lose the trust/mindshare.  Initiating
> support for another root just requires a bit of energy that  so far, no one
> has managed.  Sooner or later, one will emerge - someone just needs to put
> in the effort.
>
> Count on it.
>
> >
> >>
> >> Civil society needs to participate in any and all activities and needs
> to stand up to the business and government interests in all fora..  Are you
> suggesting that civil society leave certain venues only to business
> interests?
> >
> > I am suggesting that this caucus spends all of its time and energy on
> > "stuff"  that makes zero (or near enough to zero) impact on the
> > Internet.
>
> I think you misjudge the vectors that might have an influence now or in the
> future.    I think civil society has to find a way to participate in all of
> it, and not just the ones who currently seem to be key.
>
> >
> >>
> >> I think civil society must participate in all of it and not limit itself
> to a few venues.
> >
> > Agreed, but we focus on IGF (and now Gs 8 & 20) and not on processes
> > where actual policy is made.
> >
>
> Many of us do focus in ICANN.  And though it sometimes seems like a losing
> proposition for civil society, lots of people keep banging their heads
> against that particular brick wall.
>
> As for the RIRs, they have a self declared control on IP addresses.  One
> that is only partial over IPv4, but will be complete over IPv6 (could this
> be a reason for pushing it so hard?).  Replacing IP addressing is hard, a
> lot harder, than replacing DNS naming.  But also this control is more prone
> to national attack and thus requires more energy to defend.  The policy
> making of these organizations is open, but it is particularistic and takes a
> high degree of energy and expense for people to have an effect on.  So yes,
> it is good that people get involved in RIPE and ARIN etc...  and civil
> society is involved Milton has led the way and as you intimated once, we
> need more Miltons to take on the RIRs.
>
> But even among the RIRs coordination is an iffy thing, and one that
> certainly does not seem to be open to the rest of us.   If we want to have
> any sort of voice at the NRO level, or on its shadow puppet the ASO,  we
> need to apply multistakeholder pressure from outside. Multistakeholder
> pressure requires governement particpation at this point in history and thus
> yes, we need to work with individual governments, G8, G20, ..., the OECD,
> the UN etc.  And we even need to work with business and the internet
> community, we just should not be overtaken by any them, and should not
> assume their good will toward civil society.
>
> a.
>
> ps: if it seems that i have become more outspoken all of a sudden it is
> because i no longer have any role that requires me to be neutral.  as
> someone said, i am free now.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110512/35706cbc/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, 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