[governance] follow-up on my RFC 6852 appeal

Sat Jul 27 14:38:54 EDT 2013

+1 to polycracy.
The way forward.

Sonigitu Ekpe Aji :-@ SEA

"Life becomes more meaningful; when we think of others, positively."

+234 8027510179
On Jul 27, 2013 6:42 PM, "JFC Morfin" <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:

>  This is the "intermediary" report I sent to Russ Housley, IAB Chair.
> Situation of the debate is maintained on http://architf.org by the IUCG
> (English documents are listed, the French debate will progressively be).
> The ball is now in our field, the ISOC/IAB/IETF playing (well) for the
> private sector together with W3C and IEEE. The stability of the internet
> calls for us and governements to complete equally. I hope we can?
> jfc
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Russ,
>
> FYI, I conducted a few debates (in French) over the RFC 6852 appeal.
>
>
> *I. general obsevations
>
> *They led me so far to observe some hints of rough consensus on:
>
> 1. concerns about the sovereignty concepts: how should they
> multinationally articulate among different kinds of relational spaces.
>
> 2. parallel between the economy and cyberspace, money and data, value
> and information. Same fundamental errors/achievements. Solutions for
> one should benefit the other.
>
> 3. when faced with architectonic considerations, people more or less
> concur that,
>
> - they are common fundamentals for cyberspace with different possible
> architectures, the leading ones being Internet (OSI layers 1,2,3,4)
> and Internet+ (OSI upper layers + services).
>
> - a common "esthetic" (as a targeted ideal) should be phrased for the
> digisphere, i.e. our thinking and living in the world human + bots
> ecosystem.
>
> - they never thought about it really, as they took the internet
> options as the only ones possible and thought that the IAB was in charge.
>
> - RFC 6852 shows that the IAB is not, except for internet
> architectural consistency, and that consistency results from a
> compromise (no longer an absolute) "agreement [that] can be found
> across a range of interests".
>
> - the different ranges of interests should be documented by each
> stakeholder, in mutually comprehensible terms. Identifying these terms
> is the first purpose of an architectonical debate.
>
> - no one has a real suggestion about preparing and holding such a
> debate. It should be "democratic" but everyone fails to explain how it
> could actually be held.
>
> - the right thing to target and carry out may not necessarily be
> (multi)consensual.
>
>
> *II. My personnal conclusions
>
> *My personal, general (convoluted!) feeling is that we are in:
>
> - an “n-bodies” dynamic universe,
>
> - hence in a timed n-logic context,
>
> - where money remains the main metric of reference for ordered exchanges,
>
> - only limited by sovereignty that may legitimately oppose strength
> (law) and violence (war).
>
> 2.1.  *fundamental issue*.
>
> The points above make something new,
> - to integrate in technology,
> - calling for an attractor (esthetic),
> - and a technical development ethic (ethitechnic).
>
> 2.2. *way of addressing it
>
> *I call “agoric” the confluence of logics that, at the
> probabilistically quantified layer that our environment is now daily
> rooted in, no longer results in “*conclusions*” but rather in more or
> less stable “*emergences*”.
>
> I presented in a preceding appeal the systemic topology that I
> currently associate with the agoric polycentric space. I must also
> note that I observe an apparent slow convergence of most scientists
> and sciences over a century that one might reproduce through
> artificial life like multiagent systems throughout the networks.
>
> 2.3. *the internet part
>
> *In the virtual cyberspace, of which our mental digisphere has to live
> with, the internet is to:
>
> - provide data transport,
>
> - permit informational interoperability,
>
> - and support “body to body” communication.
>
> So far, through the IETF work on the Internet test-bed, we have identified:
>
> - that everything may change (RFC 1958) at any time,
>
> - coopetition among the different n-bodies may result in effillient
> (efficient + resilient) synergy, in being stable in sending and open
> in receiving (RFC 1122),
>
> - things work if they are simple (RFC 3439),
>
> - hence diversity is dealt with by subsidiarity (RFC 5895).
>
> 2.4. *Personal bias
>
> *I am most probably biased since:
>
> - the “agoric” concerns were at the root of the Tymshare/Tymnet
> architecture, technology, and deployment,
>
> - as the communications layers’ pile concept was initiated by Michel
> Elie (office mate of Jon Postel), rooted in the 1970s INRIA/CII, in my
> local neighborhood,
>
> - my Tymnet’s job was to extend them into services matching the
> international reality.
>
> - I further integrated these concepts in my R&D, experimentations, and
> operations.
>
> This probably also explains why I am very strict against layer
> violations by double constraints affecting the intelligence layers
> that I have identified above the ISO model, which are out of the end
> to end boundaries (in the fringe to fringe and up to the psy to psy areas).
>
>
> *III. Conclusion?
>
> *This means that starting by way of an open, joint effort to explore
> the architectonic of what I call polycracy might be worth considering.
> For example as an IAB IRTF/IUTF/ITU/ISO/IGF/ISOC etc. oriented
> initiative for a coherent digital esthetic and the way to ethically get at
> it.
>
>
> For what it is worth.
> jfc
>
> _______________________________________________
> iutf mailing list
> iutf at iutf.org
>  http://iutf.org/mailman/listinfo/iutf_iutf.org
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130727/d0d72018/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