[discuss] NETmundial / Neelie Kroes: My thoughts on NETmundial and the Future of Internet Governance

Alejandro Pisanty apisanty at gmail.com
Sun Apr 13 21:29:41 UTC 2014


while unable to attend the Singapore meeting I did take part remotely in
one public meeting in which Milton and two more people from the US engaged
in conversation with Larry Strickling. If there is any transparency that
must be the one Milton refers to. It is on record, of course. I also heard
the part in the "NCUC conference" he mentions. (BTW one wonders why this
conversation among US citizens and officials, which took away chances from
other people present and from remote participation, required flights to
Singapore instead of a train ride to DC.)

Larry was put in the position of stating he and NTIA are open to all
options as long as they conform to their known official position and have
community backing. That is not quite the stamp of approval he seems to

So you are right, once again. Double points for not accepting the rhetoric

Alejandro Pisanty

On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Mike Roberts <mmr at darwin.ptvy.ca.us>wrote:

> Milton - you were in Singapore and I was not.  A first hand account is
> superior to a second hand account, but I was relying in my comments on the
> K. McCarthy summary on Circle ID, where he says:
> ---------------
> Both Strickling and Alexander repeatedly used the word "clerical" to
> describe the role that the US
> government plays in the IANA contract.
> "Our role today is fairly clerical," said Strickling. Alexander reiterated
> the message: "What's on the table
> is the US government's role. That role is clerically administering the
> contract."
> --------------------
> Obviously, there is room for interpretation as to whether
> removing "clerically administering the contract" affects the operational
> role of IANA.  I think mostly not.
> Sorry for the confusion.
> - Mike
> On Apr 12, 2014, at 6:54 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at SYR.EDU> wrote:
> *From:* discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org<discuss-bounces at 1net.org>
> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike Roberts
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 12, 2014 2:50 PM
> > Neither NTIA nor anyone with any responsibility within the operational
> side
> > of Internet infrastructure has suggested that there be a change to the
> > operational status of IANA.  Indeed, there have been
> > strong statements that, for a number of important reasons, including
> stability
> > of the DNS, it should not be changed.
> Depends on what you mean by "the operational status of IANA." If you mean
> there is no consideration of structural separation of IANA from ICANN's
> policy making process by people with operational responsibility, you are
> completely wrong. Verisign, for example, has stated that it favors
> separation and opposes moving its current functions into ICANN. If you mean
> simply that IANA should remain operational during and after the transition,
> sure. But who or what is IANA remains open.
> There was, and is, plenty of discussion whether ICANN or someone else
> should take over the role now performed by Verisign, or whether those roles
> should be parsed and bundled in different ways. If this means a change in
> "operational status," then everyone is discussing IANA's operational
> status. Indeed, as David Conrad said, one cannot avoid changing the
> operational status of the DNS root, because removing NTIA from the loop is
> a change in operational status.
> > Larry Strickling's statements in
> > Singapore were certainly clear on the matter.
> This is not true. I was in Singapore, I do not recall seeing you there. I
> had a direct conversation with Strickling in which he showed me the IGP
> paper and said "nothing in the NTIA instructions prevents this from
> happening is it has community support." I listened to his speech at the end
> of the NCUC conference and he did not say what you attribute to him. I
> listened to his discussion at the GAC and he did not say what you attribute
> to him. I watched his testimony before Congress and he did not say that
> there would be no change in the
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140413/928b7590/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list