This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to discuss@1net.org. Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list. To learn more, visit 1net.org.

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

JFC Morfin jefsey at jefsey.com
Tue Dec 17 20:00:08 CET 2013


Dear Markus,
Sorry the URL does not work for me.

I would be interested (since I was questionned myself about the 
internet+) about some other words.

- what is the "global internet" (rather than the "internet" for you ?).
- ditto about the "stewardship framework": is that the ISOC word for 
an ISOC coordinated IG
- ditto about "ICANN and IANA globalization" when compared with 
"globality" as in 
https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/Classics/globalization_strategy_globality_the_world_beyond_globalization/

I certainly agree with Andrew Sullivan about ICANN. ICANN is not a 
power: it is a metaphor of internet radical monopoly. As such it is a 
piece in the Internet tensegrity.
jfc

At 17:45 17/12/2013, Markus Kummer wrote:
>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:
>http://www.internetsociety.org/doc/internet-collaborative-stewardship-frame
>work-tackling-challenges-­-political-technical
>
>Best regards
>Markus
>
>
>
>
>On 12/17/13 1:25 AM, "George Sadowsky" <george.sadowsky at gmail.com> 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
> >productive?
> >
> >Ben, by the above, I do not mean to exclude you at all from the
> >discussion.
> >
> >George
> >
> >
> >
> >> Message: 4
> >> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:26:58 -0600
> >> From: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [I-coordination] Europe at a tipping point?
> >> To: "Dr. Ben Fuller" <ben at fuller.na>
> >> Cc: "i-coordination at nro.net" <i-coordination at nro.net>
> >> Message-ID: <0E4FCB18-AE49-42B9-8C4F-66DB4F74A8A1 at gmail.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=us-ascii
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:08 PM, "Dr. Ben Fuller" <ben at fuller.na> 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 nro.net
> >https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>I-coordination mailing list
>I-coordination at nro.net
>https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination




More information about the I-coordination mailing list