[discuss] A thought experiment - what follows the 'IANA transition?'
davidr.johnson at verizon.net
Thu Apr 3 00:29:10 UTC 2014
Whether the MS model could be applied successfully to other (non-technical) areas of potentially global concern is a question of whether the decisions reached via such a process could be enforced (complied with) on a (generally) global basis.
IETF works because its standards are accepted (thanks to network effects)
ICANN "works" because its control of the root zone file leads to contracts that it can enforce.
Governance grows out of effective force (the barrel of a digital gun, as it were).
It is one thing to say that lots of different entities should sign affirmations of commitments together. (or exchange information and collaborate in various ways)
It is quite a different thing to say that everyone should join a MS process and agree, enforceably, to be bound by the results.
When global rules are needed to keep the net running, maybe that is possible.
When we are talking about how to regulate the content flowing over the net, by electronic force (revocation of domain names, inter alia), more challenging.
We have to be wise about when NOT to try to make global rules (and how NOT to try to enforce them).
On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:40 PM, michael gurstein wrote:
> No, I'm not arguing for that although I think it is a discussion very well
> worth having...
> Rather I am trying to find out what people think is the extent of possible
> application of the MS model for policy decision making. As I noted in my
> blogpost and in several interventions on this list there seems to be
> something of a sleight of hand going on, where the usefulness and
> application of the MS model in quite narrow technical areas as for example
> through the IETF provides a basis for applying the MS model in much broader
> areas of Global (Internet) Governance.
> And I'm curious what advocates of the MS model think about that.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: S Moonesamy [mailto:sm+1net at elandsys.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 3:10 PM
> To: michael gurstein; parminder at itforchange.net; Alejandro Pisanty;
> discuss at 1net.org
> Subject: Re: [discuss] A thought experiment - what follows the 'IANA
> Hi Mike,
> At 12:54 02-04-2014, michael gurstein wrote:
>> So, is it the sense of this discussion that the items mentioned by
>> Moonesamy below are the appropriate extent of application of the
>> "multistakeholder model" for Global (Internet) Policy decision-making
>> and that other strategies for organizing decision making processes are
>> required in the other areas.
> I commented about where some issues have been discussed or are being
> discussed. The above is about something else; it is about decision making
> processes instead of where problems can be solved.
> Are you arguing in the above (see quoted text) for having a Global Internet
> Policy body?
> S. Moonesamy
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
More information about the discuss