[governance] [liberationtech] Chinese preparing for a "Autonomous Internet" ?

[parminder]

On Monday 25 June 2012 02:16 AM, David Conrad wrote:
> Parminder,
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 6:36 PM, parminder wrote:
>    
>>>> But even if we were to agree to what you argue, why would the same safe-guards not operate in case of a international oversight mechanism?
>>>>          
>>> They probably would, but hard to say for certain without a concrete example of said "international oversight mechanism". Can you point me at one?
>>>        
>> I have proposed some outlines of such a possible model and I you want I can re state it.
>>      
> I was actually looking for a concrete (ideally peer-reviewed) proposal or, more preferably, an operational example or prototype, not an outline of lofty goals or possible models.  Does such exist?
>    

In socio-political arena, the method of seeking 'solutions' or the 'way 
forward'  normally is that we first try to agree on larger ideas and 
principles,  and then progressively move towards the details. Those 
approaching this debate from the technical side must respect this 
general method as they want their method of deciding on technical issues 
respected. The main broad points of the model that I had proposed are

(1) An international treaty clearly lays out the scope, procedures and 
limits of an international CIR oversight body, as it provides it with 
the required authority

(2) ICANN itself becomes an international technical body under the same 
statute as above, and it enters into a host country agreement with the 
hosting country, which could be the US

(3) The same treaty sanctifies the broad principles of the current 
distributed CIR and tech standards development model (ICANN, RIRs, IETF etc)

(4) The oversight body is a stand-alone body set up under the mentioned 
treaty - outside the UN system but perhaps with some loose coupling with 
it, in a manner that it is not subject to typical UN rules. It would ab 
initio evolve its own rules, procedures etc.

(5) The oversight body can have 15-20 members, with equitable regional 
representation. Within each region the country from which members would 
come will get rotated. ( Here, we will need some degree of innovation to 
ensure that although the member will have some clear relationship/ 
backing of the government, her selection/ affirmation would require a 
broader national process. Some linkages with highest level national 
technical institutions can also be explored. More ideas are welcome here.)

(6) The role of the oversight body will be minimal, clearly constrained 
by the relevant international law, exercised through clearly detailed 
procedures, and based on a sufficiently high majority, if not consensus.

(7) Its decision will be subject to a separate judicial process  (can 
look at a possible role for the International court of justice)

> I'll admit I'm still not clear what you believe the "international oversight mechanism" should do.

More or less what the US gov does in relation to CIR management.
>   You've been talking about how the evil USG will trample the contents of the root zone.  Presumably, the "international oversight mechanism" will be overseeing the operations of root zone modification as the USG does today.

yes
> Since those operations must be based in some country, it isn't clear to me how the "international oversight mechanism" would be able to stop that country's government from going rogue and doing what you believe the evil USG will do.
>    

No, it doesnt happen that way at all. Host country agreement and the 
authorising international law are there precisely to prevent such a 
thing. Today, if the US 'interferes' with root zone operation, it breaks 
no law, neither domestic nor international. To forcibly break into an 
international body's premises which is protected by host country 
agreement and based on international treaty, and interfering in its 
work, will be an extraordinary defiance of international law, the kind 
which even the US doesnt do :). It can be subject to further 
international processes like those from the UN and the international 
court of justice. BTW, the fact that the US is one of the countries with 
the uneasiest of relationships with the international court of justice 
may be  a good reason to seek ICANN's and the oversight body's hosting 
outside the US. However, perhaps for, historical continuity's sake US 
would do as well.

regards, parminder

> Regards,
> -drc
>
>
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120625/278e23b8/attachment.htm>
-------------- 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