Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IANA developments
JFC Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com> Sat, 22 March 2014 15:58 UTC
Return-Path: <jefsey@jefsey.com>
X-Original-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 937AE1A099D for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Mar 2014 08:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.631
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MISSING_MID=0.497] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hhcqZrBVOeYs for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Mar 2014 08:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from host.presenceweb.org (host.presenceweb.org [67.222.106.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADF731A073F for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Sat, 22 Mar 2014 08:58:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [85.159.233.116] (port=13604 helo=MORFIN-PC.jefsey.com) by host.presenceweb.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <jefsey@jefsey.com>) id 1WROJd-0007Lm-J6; Sat, 22 Mar 2014 08:58:34 -0700
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 16:58:24 +0100
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
From: JFC Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <B80F6D1D-A4B7-4054-8E8B-2F1CE031229F@piuha.net>
References: <CAL02cgSXy-i5P1k0006hsuG0MCaT+6LUNemB3m1RT=9oG+1BDA@mail.gmail.com> <B80F6D1D-A4B7-4054-8E8B-2F1CE031229F@piuha.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host.presenceweb.org
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - iab.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: host.presenceweb.org: authenticated_id: jefsey+jefsey.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/9YYDnx4vjSijcdUASI-GBYIM6AQ
Cc: internetgovtech@iab.org, "discuss@1net.org List" <discuss@1net.org>, iucg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IANA developments
X-BeenThere: internetgovtech@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Governance and IETF technical work <internetgovtech.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.iab.org/mail-archive/web/internetgovtech/>
List-Post: <mailto:internetgovtech@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 15:58:36 -0000
X-Message-ID:
Message-ID: <20140418044908.2560.55280.ARCHIVE@ietfa.amsl.com>
Jari, for historic reasons, the NTIA/DoC/USG's vision of the internet, i.e. their virtual global network information center (INTERNIC), has prevailed in coordinating an accepted convenient reduction of the Internet capacities (particularly in the naming area) where: - the "US ccTLD" was the "elder" of the family - was organized by its government as "ICANN", - that other national ccTLDs joined in the ICANN/GAC to assist it in coordinating the DNS and the IP addressing plan. The NTIA retirement not only removes the USG historic participation, but it also calls for the same retirement by all the other Governments. The NTIA precludes to be replaced by any governmental organization. This is a complete change in the 36 year old nature of the international packet switch naming and addressing spaces. The IETF cannot do anything about it as it is not in the business of deciding who is a State, who is the political authority over a ccTLD, and who can delegate (ICANN or other) national address sets if such a thing exists. We, therefore, are in a situation where the "minority leader" (US), which assumed responsibility until now, quits in refusing the successor that the majority has decided on. Dubai WCIT is supported by nations covering 3.8 billion people, while the non-signatories cover 2.6 billion, and .6 billon had to technically abstain. This is a democratic, market, and political fact that the IETF cannot oppose, but has to consider in order to get it technically addressed. IETF, IAB, ISOC, W3C, and IEEE and IETF, IAB, ISOC, W3C, RIRs, and ICANN have committed to positions that give leadership either to economical and/or political decisions that informed users from the Libre, Institutional and Competitive sectors (IUsers) and other affected parties have not, so far, published that they had understood, or approved. I appealed them, allowing me to appeal to ISOC, what I would not prefer to do as long as other possibilities of consensus have not been proposed, studied, and exhausted. The situation which is likely to develop is the situation that the NTIA's strategy has tried to prevent for 30 years, because it reflects the reality of the world's diversity independence from US interests. This means a multiple class DNS and ISO 3166 structured IPv6 addressing plan and registries. The question is, therefore, who is to provide the necessary documentation, for this to happen in good order, knowing that: - this documentation should be public domain, i.e. not under IETF Trust Copyright and with the capacity to impeach derivative work. - it is very simple to organize from ISO 3166. - neither the NTIA nor the multitude will accept it to be published by a governmental multilateral body, what ISO is not. ICANN, being a member of the ISO 3166/MA (Maintenance Agency), I suggest that: - the necessary documents of reference are written and maintained as a new work intended proposal (NWIP) by this maintenance agency. Such an NWIP could be introduced by ANSI and written by ICANN. It would then be subject to the vote of every nation in terms of participation and contribution. - every affected party (IETF, ICANN, Govs, private sector organizations, JTC1, ITU, civil society organization, the multitude of persons) could then send the ISO 3166/MA recommendations and suggest members for an advisory panel to review and consolidate them. The NWIP could determine the rules governing the selection process of such a panel in such a way that a full MS approach is respected including the Public, Private, Civil, Libre, Technical, and Academic sector. - the maintenance of this list could be assumed within the DNSA framework under the supervision of the ISO 3166/MA agency in order to provide good reactivity and permit a permanent MS multilogue under the auspices of the independent non-Governmental normative leading agency whose standard has ensured the international stability of the international data services since their very inception in full coherence with the whole global standardization process. I note that if the post-NTIA transition is not seamless and this scheme has not been explored, documented and engaged by an IETF/ICANN/DNSA working group, responsibility will lie with IETF and/or ICANN. jfc
- [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IANA de… Jari Arkko
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… Richard Barnes
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… Jari Arkko
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… S Moonesamy
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… John Curran
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… JFC Morfin
- Re: [Internetgovtech] an initial proposal wrt IAN… Alissa Cooper