Re: [ga] lawyers

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

And the idiot who said; "intelligent design is not *a* viable truth" never heard of this list.
  Watch us evolve
  e

"M. Morfin" <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  At 09:12 10/01/2006, Joop Teernstra wrote:
>Maybe I'm naive, but I believe that the Clinton administration, 
>possibly because it did not foresee the speedy growth in 
>importance-for-everything of the Internet, was genuinely interested 
>in devolving things like the IANA function out of its own hands and 
>into the hands of an industry-led cabal in which it would retain 
>sufficient influence. It was both in the Administration's and 
>ICANN's interest to leave the question of where the buck ultimately 
>stops as unanswered as possible.

Joop,
you are not naive. You are not considering the national interests. 
The Internet is the national packet switch network the USA missed. It 
was established after the deregulation and benefited from the removal 
of the national protections offered by the monopolies, as US trade 
first benefited from the drop of customs rights. Because the USA 
were a key piece of the world jigsaw. The difference between the 
Democrat and Republican administration over international relations 
and protectionism is immemorial. They both aim at the best US 
interest in very similar ways under two similar flavors.

Tunis clarified the things. The Internationalized Internet is the US 
Global network, under the control of the USG through ICANN. RFC 3935 
is clear about this which defines the role of the IETF. The Internet 
is defined in the same way as by 47 USC 230 (f)(1) (the digital 
ecosystem) and the role of the IETF is to "influence" those who 
"design, use, manage" it. The Tunis deal gives the world and the USA 
five, and more probably ten, years to converge their vision into a 
Global Multinational System concatenating all the private, national, 
regional, corporate, etc. networks through the International Network 
to be discussed by the IGF. This results from the acknowledgment that 
the US part is not anymore the core of the world jigsaw.

Will this succeed? I do not know. But it has the merit to clearly 
state that ICANN is an US International Agency in charge of an 
International US System. That ICANN is welcome to share into the 
IGF. That we will see progressively the emergence of several 
International National Network Systems. If they merge into a single 
International Network we will have cross-connectivity, otherwise we 
will have balkanization.

IMHO the only way we can avoid balkanization is to accept that the 
core of the network is not anymore the USA, but also not anymore the 
other States, but the user. A really long way to go for the IAB/IETF, 
for ICANN and work ahead for developers.

jfc



  


		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
 Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.