Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "paper"

[Ian Peter <[e-mail]>]

Toerless,

The internetpolicy list in question was dormant for decades, but came to 
life again a few months ago with a substantial discussion on the issues 
surrounding ISOC's proposed sale of Public Internet Registry (PIR) . 
It's fair to say a lot of this discussion was very critical of ISOC's 
position, sometimes quite undiplomatically so. Perhaps some restrictions 
were placed on new memberships in these circumstances? I do not know...

The "new IP" proposal was posted there a couple of days ago. To date it 
has not provoked much discussion, just a couple of comments equating 
this with the OSI battles 30 years ago. Perhaps more substantial comment 
will come in the near future.

Ian Peter







------ Original Message ------
From: "Toerless Eckert" <[e-mail]>
To: "Brian E Carpenter" <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Sent: 29/04/2020 7:17:37 AM
Subject: Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "paper"

>Thanks, Brian, inline
>
>On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 08:34:53AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>  Hi Toerless,
>>
>>  On one point only:
>>
>>  >   [e-mail] does not allow Global ISOC members to
>>  >   join by themselves, nor do i know if it would welcome discussion.
>>  >   In fact it is not even listed on the set of pubic ISOC mailing lists.
>>  >   So the nature of this mailing list seems to be secret to me.
>>
>>  You can join but not in the normal way... you have to go through a
>>  strange procedure in the Member's Portal or some such place, where I
>>  believe it's called a "Community" or some such. Can't remember, but it
>>  was very baroque.
>
>Yes, i tried to exhaust my options in there, but got nowhere,
>this includes going to
>
>https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/internetpolicy/
>
>and attempting to join via that unpublished link.
>
>I don't mind baroque as long as its published, but published information
>is wrong, and the fact that the list is not included in the published
>list of ISOC lists makes me wonder if the list lists that are only
>accessible to ISOC members is even published anywhere...
>
>I did send emails to support.
>
>>  I believe Andrew said that there is work underway to change this.
>
>I did have a bit of discussion about the possibility of
>a list like "[e-mail], but was told in PM
>that getting new mailing lists on elists.isoc.org is a
>process competing with continental drift in speed.
>
>Something like such a list would be a great option IMHO for
>the ISOC society to participate on not only in discussions about
>internet history but also its future.
>
>>  However, I don't see any relevant discussion in the (members only)
>>  archive. Typical subjects recently:
>>
>>  on people not heard (was Re: Language reversion, and an idea)
>>  OneWeb bankruptcy
>>  Interview with Parminder on community ownership of data
>>  Official de-chartering of the Internet Society Ireland Chapter
>>  North-South issues in the Ditigal Economy
>>  European Commission solicits feedback on GDPR's efficiency
>>  Official de-chartering of the Internet Society Ireland Chapter
>
>Given how seemingly non-published internetpolicy mailing list is,
>i wonder who is even subscribed to it. Not sure if it is possible
>to figure that out.  I very much liked Jay Daleys reconfirmation
>that IETF mailing list membership is of public nature. Not sure
>what ISOC's policy is.
>
>Cheers
>     Toerless
>
>>  Regards
>>     Brian
>
>--
>---
>[e-mail]
>
>_______________________________________________
>Architecture-discuss mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss