RE: WCIT outcome?

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 16:59 03-01-2013, Tony Hain wrote:
>other. How long the IETF gets to stay independent of that will depend on how
>responsive it is to meeting the needs of governments. If short-sighted
>attempts at political maneuvering are exposed in the IETF, it will lose its
>independence and finally bring that process under 'proper control'.

The IAB has a nominated a representative to the European 
Multi-Stakeholder Platform on ICT Standardisation.  It also commented 
on the (U.S) Federal Participation in the Development and Use of 
Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment 
Activities.  The government interaction is basically between the IETF 
and the E.U. or the U.S.  I do not recall any cases (in recent times) 
where the E.U. or the U.S. has pressured the IETF to support or 
oppose a decision.

The IETF used to be set up in such a way that putting it under 
"proper control" would be quite an effort.

>It would be wise for the IETF participants to look at the countries that did
>sign, and why. What is it that they are not getting that they need, and how
>can that be resolved? To echo Day's point, it is the capability they
>want/need, not the historical implementation. Some things that are business

Yes.

At 09:24 04-01-2013, Ted Hardie wrote:
>In this new effort at a multilateral framework, we are seeing a 
>clash between a desire for sovereign control of the Internet and a 
>desire to reap the benefits of open participation.  I think our role 
>in that is to make sure all involved understand:  the benefits of 
>the Internet's network effect; the risks in allowing nations through 
>which traffic passes to assert sovereignty over the flows, 
>especially given both the pace and chance of topological change; and 
>the reality that entities outside of governments control the paths 
>that packets actual traverse.

A few years ago sourceforge.net blocked all users from a specific 
country from downloading files hosted on their site.  There was a 
case where a country had its say on one or more domain names through 
unusual means.  Some of that can be perceived as assertions of sovereignty.

Regards,
-sm