This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list. To learn more, visit

[I-coordination] New: How do we dissect Internet governance? [Was: Europe at a tipping point?]

Grigori Saghyan gregor at
Tue Dec 17 09:42:52 CET 2013

Hash: SHA1

Dear George, All,
I see the problem in both two terms - the  "Internet" and the

Internet - if we accept this term as   a network,   this term has its
exact definition: "totality of nodes and connecting lines", this is
pure telecom

If we accept the Internet as a content in the servers - content it is
not a telecom related  term, but  there is a definition for this term,
 "content information", the meaning of this term is pure information,
 without delivery service  related details.

DNS - is a directory, in some cases owned by  third party.

Term "Governance" - this term is very hard to translate. Is some cases
it is "management"or "administration" is some cases even "regulation".

In this situation it is really very hard to understand - which
component of the Internet is under "Governance" - management,
administration, regulation, other meanings.

I think it is possible to use  existing definitions and remember, that
there is an Occam's razor.

Grigori Saghyan

On 17.12.2013 5:18, George Sadowsky wrote:
> I'm suggesting that the WGIG definition conflates too many
> disparate things, and that interferes with delineating issues and
> making progress on resolving them.  A more complete and more
> precise definition, or better, a crisp taxonomy of dimensions of
> that definition, would seem to help us more.
> George
> On Dec 16, 2013, at 8:03 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>> Just recalling that WGIG definition: "Internet governance is the 
>> development and application by Governments, the private sector
>> and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared
>> principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and
>> programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet."
>> Every new definition will involve compromises. Are you suggesting
>> one should restart from zero?
>> --c.a.
>> On 12/16/2013 10:45 PM, George Sadowsky wrote:
>>> The WGIG definition of Internet governance, the result of
>>> meetings in 2004-5, was the result of political compromise.  I
>>> think that it is not helping us here.  AS Brian says below, the
>>> notion of Internet governance mixes up too many things, and
>>> does not seem to be useful for addressing real issues.
>>> Can we come up with a different vocabulary and a somewhat
>>> different structure that is much more consistent with our
>>> problem space, so that these different issues don't get
>>> confused (and yes, I understand that there may well be overlap
>>> between them)?
>>> Brian, can you suggest some appropriate vocabulary and/or
>>> taxonomy?
>>> George
> <<trimmed>>
> _______________________________________________ I-coordination
> mailing list I-coordination at 

- -- 
Grigori Saghyan
PGP Key ID: 0x48E4D5DC
Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -


More information about the I-coordination mailing list