Re: WCIT outcome?

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 10:19 29-12-2012, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>ICANN is a US corporation and the US government 
>can obviously pass laws that prevent ICANN/IANA 
>from releasing address blocks that would reach 
>certain countries no matter what Crocker et. al. 
>say to the contrary. But absent a deployed BGP security

:-)

At 14:46 29-12-2012, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>In the new world, "governance" is no longer "by 
>decree", "by legislation" or similar. In the new 
>world we use the word "collaboration", and that 
>is done via policy development processes that 
>are multi stakeholder and bottom up. Like in the RIRs (for IP addresses

What people say and what they actually do or mean 
is often a very different matter.  An individual 
may have principles (or beliefs).  A stakeholder 
has interests.  There was an individual who 
mentioned on an IETF mailing list that he/she 
disagreed with his/her company's stance.  It's 
unlikely that a stakeholder would say that.

The collaboration is less about process and more 
about culture.  In some parts of the new world 
"governance" is still by legislation, etc.  That 
could be attributed to cultural or other 
factors.  The WCIT outcome might be highlighting the fracture.

Regards,
-sm