[governance] Re: IANA and what is to come 10 years hence?

[Carlos A. Afonso]

Hi John, indeed, in most countries there is no idea among policy makers.
journalists, other opinion makers, even some Internet operators, about
how the root works, what is it good for, and what Anycast is and how you
can mirror the root -- among many other aspects of the logical infra of
the Internet.

My view is that this is a promotional task for NICs with the support of
their RIRs (I am not saying there are not doing anything). In our recent
dialogue regarding FBI/IPv6/ICANN I discovered that some top techies
involved with LACNIC discussions do not have a clear idea of what the
governance role of ICANN is -- so we might need to educate our machine
room people too :)

In some countries (I am happy to say this is the case of Brazil) most of
these people do not need to worry -- their NICs or similar organizations
are way ahead in this, both in optimizing their DNS operations and in
going deep in locally interconnecting their networks. But even so we
need to do far more in educating the public on how these things work and
help them in separating sugar from salt.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

On 08/03/2012 10:30 AM, John Curran wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 10:28 PM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 3, 2012 6:29 AM, "John Curran" <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:
>>
>>> After all, the USG has seen the transition from top-down formal contracting for these 
>>> functions to a more open bottom-up multi-stakeholder management of critical Internet 
>>> resources, including the decentralization of IP address management to the RIRs, the
>>> formation of ICANN, and replacement of the JPA with the Affirmation of Commitments. 
>>
>> Who knows this?  Who understands this?  How many people know that it takes no more than $3k to mirror the ICANN root server? A few among the few thousand ICANN / IG / RIR / ISOC participants. In a world of sensational headlines on unilateral control of the root, all these positive goodness is buried in fine print.  The gestures I have talked about would be a visible, graphic answer to the bad headlines.
>>
> If you are suggesting the USG needs some help in doing PR with regards to its positive
> steps in Internet Governance over the last two decades, I would not argue with that...
>>> None of the above would have been possible coming from "a posture of total unwillingness"...
>>
>> So it appears to the common man, or made to appear to the common man in a carefully archestrated propaganda of misleading 'headlines'  that appears to me to be a psychological campaign with carefully calculated omissions. 
>>
> Indeed.  I believe that some actively obscure or misrepresent the USG track record in 
> facilitating decentralization of Internet Governance since inception of the Internet.  Like
> many things in this world, it is not perfect, but I do believe that has been an enabler of
> discussion of open and transparent multi-stakeholder governance which might easily not
> have otherwise occurred.
>>>> As an answer to all these undesirable distractions, why not offer a glimpse of what is to come 10 years or less or more later ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Why should we presume that such a roadmap should come from the USG, as opposed
>>> the Internet community itself?
>>
>> :-)
>>
> Thanks for raising this important topic!
> /John
> 
> Disclaimers:  My views alone.  Email written at higher altitudes may lack coherence;
> use at your own risk.
> 
> 

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

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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