[governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards"

[Adam Peake]

Please, just focus.  There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the
IGF (which we missed last year).   Meet that and come back to the RFC.

Adam



On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> [with IGC coordinator hat on]
>
> Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
>
>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother?
>
> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet
> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that
> consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more
> peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the
> next Internet Governance Forum.
>
>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost
>> equal support/opposition for statement.
>
> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as
> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in
> a statement.
>
>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference?
>
> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how
> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in
> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members
> who have the right kind of contacts.
>
>> Could we please focus on core issues.
>
> This is a core issue.
>
> Greetings,
> Norbert
>
>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
>> > [with IGC Coordinator hat on]
>> >
>> > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the
>> > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1].
>> > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852
>> >
>> > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but
>> > I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role.
>> >
>> > Who would like to volunteer?
>> >
>> > Greetings,
>> > Norbert
>> >
>> >
>> > Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at internatif.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > It is a good document.
>> >>
>> >> No, it's not.
>> >>
>> >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet
>> >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment
>> >> by some IETF members
>> >> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iab/trac/ticket/193> but was
>> >> ignored.
>> >>
>> >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is
>> >> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it
>> >> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iab/trac/ticket/213> (ITU, the
>> >> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for
>> >> a few years.)
>> >>
>> >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members
>> >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and
>> >> impossible to modify.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>

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