IETF WAS Re: [governance] Enhanced Cooperation (was Re: reality check on economics)

[Norbert Bollow]

Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
> Norbert suggested -
> >And I'd add that in addition to the right mix of people, we also
> >need processes that ensure a meritocracy of arguments in the sense
> >that when a strong argument comes from a politically and economically
> >weak stakeholder group, this strong argument will have greater weight
> >than any position which is supported only by much weaker arguments,
> >regardless of how economically and politically strong the stakeholder
> >may be who makes those weaker arguments.
> 
> Well, unlikely in the real world or in standards setting.

Ok, here we get to a key point:

Is what I'm asking for achievable, at least to a significant extent
and in the long run, provided that a strategy with this objective is
adopted now and then vigorously pursued?

I assert that yes, this is indeed achievable, and therefore this
objective ought to be pursued.

> My limited IETF experience a few years ago, looking at anti-spam
> measures, put a technically best solution up against the one that
> Microsoft was prepared to go along with - a weaker solution. But
> with the Microsoft monopoly in those days, the only solution likely
> to go anywhere was the one Microsoft was on board with.

Ok, sure, but this is IMO not so much a problem with IETF's decision
making processes but with lack of practical ability to effectively
introduce into the market something that Microsoft did not want.

In my eyes, a major point of this Enhanced Cooperation idea that
we're talking about is that when a number of governments decide to
cooperate in a truly enhanced way, they're not going to be hobbled
by lack of practical ability to actually get implemented whatever is
determined to be the best choice.

In the example of Microsoft signalling that they're not willing to
implement certain ideas, governments that want those ideas implemented
have the power to
(1) fund implementation of the idea as FOSS
(2) get a technical specification of the idea approved as an
    International Standard
(3) insist on conformance to this standard in public procurement, or
    even as a precondition for marketing products in the country

Microsoft would be free to either conform to the standard or withdraw
from those markets. But in either scenario what was determined to be
the best choice from a policy perspective can be ensured to become not
only a theoretical but also de facto standard, regardless of whether
Miccrosoft likes it or not.

> There would be many parallel examples - router standards need Cisco on
> board, search standards need Google on board, etc.

And given that Microsoft, Cisco and Google are all US companies,
nobody should be surprised when a significant part of the rest of the
world considers this concentration of power to be unacceptable.

> And in the governmental arena, moving without some of the powerful
> players is often counter-productive as well.

Yes. That's why I'm not proposing to base the procedures and
institutions of Enhanced Cooperation on what I currently see in the
governmental arena.

> So I think in the real world, the best solutions arent necessarily those
> adopted, and big doses of pragmatism are necessary, as is accepting small
> gains when you had hoped for much larger ones. Meanwhile because this is the
> way the world is the powers that be remain the powers that be. I wish there
> was another way to do things, but apart from disruptive innovation (and
> perhaps something to disrupt the internet status quo is exactly what we
> need!) there is little we can do, except accept compromise in order to make
> some gains.

There is value in both, but IMO the kind of Enhanced Cooperation that
I am proposing is a great opportunity to disrupt thet status quo in a
very positive way.

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- 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