Re: [gaia] Blog on AFRINIC proposal

the problem with witholding a resource as a lever to try to reduce
censorship
(witholding of access to the net) is that its
a) an implicitly negative message to counter a negative message,
which takes the risk of accusations of hypocrisy
b) it risks collective punishment
i.e. hurts victims of governments' misguided policy,
as well as government agency, which is over-reach
c) the proposal is the opposite of basic internet philosophy, as per
Gilmore :
*"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."*
which means that the proposal risks undermining citizen/peer actions

intentions are good, but advocacy, support, solidarity seems like a better
road

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Nicolas Pace <nico@libre.ws> wrote:

> Thanks Vint for sharing your point of view.
> If I may give my two cents, through advocacy is that, in the summit here
> in nayrobi the community all together wrote the proposal.
>
> There needs to be stronger efforts to make internet less country-dependant
> and more resilient... But these are urgent matters. While we get to that
> resilient future, we need to support our communities on their decisions
> regarding their own problematics.
>
> I understand that IP address may seem to be a technical thing, but
> governments are hijacking them into a political standpoint.
>
> Instead of making this a specific action, I would suggest that we could
> work out a regulation that requires IP tenants not to shutdown connectivity
> as a condition to receive their ranges... Or some sort of agreement on
> openness.
>
> Could it be possible, and would it be useful to tackle this issue? What do
> you think?
>
>
> On June 3, 2017 4:41:04 PM GMT+03:00, Vint Cerf <vint@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> I implied it: advocacy
>>
>> v
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Nicolas Pace <nico@libre.ws> wrote:
>>
>>> What would be your approach on this matter then? I'm curious to know
>>>
>>>
>>> On June 3, 2017 4:36:36 PM GMT+03:00, Vint Cerf <vint@google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My reaction: politicizing IP address allocation is a mistake and could
>>>> have enormous, negative consequences including a wide range of
>>>> fragmentation and legal intimidation of the RIRs.  Advocacy is fine but
>>>> withholding IP addresses for political reasons is not wise.
>>>>
>>>> v
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Corinne Cath <corinnecath@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> CFR invited me to write a blog about the recent AFRINIC proposal to
>>>>> deny IP addresses to governments mandating Internet shutdowns. Might be of
>>>>> interest.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.cfr.org/article/should-technical-actors-play-pol
>>>>> itical-role-internet-age
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Corinne J.N. Cath
>>>>> Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing Institute
>>>>>
>>>>> Web: www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath
>>>>> Email: ccath@turing.ac.uk & corinnecath@gmail.com
>>>>> Twitter: @C_Cath
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> gaia mailing list
>>>>> gaia@irtf.org
>>>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> New postal address:
>>>> Google
>>>> 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor
>>>> Reston, VA 20190
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> New postal address:
>> Google
>> 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor
>> Reston, VA 20190
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gaia mailing list
> gaia@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
>
>