This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list.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?]

Markus Kummer kummer at
Tue Dec 17 17:45:35 CET 2013

Dear all,

To follow-up on George's recommendation for a taxonomy type exercise, I
would like to draw your attention to a similar kind of exercise the
Internet Society started last month. We launched a process soliciting
views and input from the community seeking to map the issues that impact,
or are impacted by, the global Internet. This is work in progress and I
would like to encourage you to visit and contribute to what we call  the
"stewardship framework". This exercise can also assist the discussions
that are taking place on this platform.

The stewardship framework can be found here:

Best regards

On 12/17/13 1:25 AM, "George Sadowsky" <george.sadowsky at> wrote:

>Well said, Ben and Jorge.  How do we go further into a rough taxonomy of
>the issues under both of the IG subdivisions that you have identified
>well?  in particular, how do we define the issue space in a manner that
>could lead to productive dialogue and results to feed into clarifying the
>IG discussion?   I would give the internal technical organizational
>issues priority, but I would not want to neglect the social and legal
>issues that are impacted by the Internet.
>Jorge, you seen rather involved in this activity.  Why not give it a
>shot?  How would you delineate the issues that we should be concentrating
>on to make some progress here?  Do you have suggestions regarding the
>technical tools to make discussion with respect to those issues more
>Ben, by the above, I do not mean to exclude you at all from the
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:26:58 -0600
>> From: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at>
>> Subject: Re: [I-coordination] Europe at a tipping point?
>> To: "Dr. Ben Fuller" <ben at>
>> Cc: "i-coordination at" <i-coordination at>
>> Message-ID: <0E4FCB18-AE49-42B9-8C4F-66DB4F74A8A1 at>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
>>> On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:08 PM, "Dr. Ben Fuller" <ben at> wrote:
>>> The comments here are quite appropriate. The Internet is both a
>>>massive network of networks that requires rigorous technical standards
>>>to operate effectively and a phenomenon of massive socioeconomic impact
>>>that touches on many social and legal issues at global, national and
>>>local levels. These two 'realms' are distinct and at the same time
>>>connected to where they have the potential to impact each other. Each
>>>may require a different way of governing as well as strategies to get
>>>its decisions implemented. Each may require its own set of stakeholders
>>>for a multi stakeholder approach.
>> This is IHMO absolutely correct and the main driver of my previous
>>comments about the need to split the discussions and focus on the
>>specific issues we know exist today, at the macro not micro level, so a
>>viable framework can be developed. There are issues that can and must be
>>regulated, others that require just coordination and cooperation, but
>>one size fits all under the "Governance" word will never work, will
>>never happen.
>> It is like we are trying to make a wall picture of Internet Governance
>>using the pieces of multiple puzzles that we put and mixed together in a
>>common bowl. We may have an idea on how the final picture has to look
>>like but unless we separate the pieces of each puzzle and we put skilled
>>hands to work with them we will get nowhere.
>> Meanwhile the shows goes on and we keep finding creative ways on how to
>>milk from the I* and other organizations coffers.
>> Regards
>> Jorge
>I-coordination mailing list
>I-coordination at

More information about the I-coordination mailing list