[discuss] governments and rule of law (was: Possible approaches to solving...)

[Jefsey]

At 16:32 28/02/2014, John Curran wrote:
>There may be some important value in helping governments maintain a 
>high-level awareness of various policy development efforts underway 
>_across_ the entire    Internet identifier space (names, numbers, 
>protocols) and suspect that the GAC could serve an important role in 
>that process.  Also, when it comes to sharing of other high-level 
>information with governments (e.g. reports generated by the various 
>review/accountability processes), having a single place to do it 
>might be beneficial, as long as it is recognized as an information 
>sharing venue and not part of the formal policy development process.

You are right. But the GAC is only meant to help an US contractor to 
maintain the stability of the internet IN class and of the IP 
addresses of fixed hosts. The cyber space is now the 5th economic, 
military, economic, etc. environment or battle/competition field: its 
management at Gov level belongs to the UN GA. ICANN has tried to 
replace the UN, the WTO, the WIPO, etc. for the digisphere. It does not work.

Now, it tries to become something like the UN General Secretary 
Delegation for the Internet through globalization. Why not. It is 
something we should discuss here. But it should be openly presened 
and ICANN should reorganize itself not to be a competitor for other 
private and public existing or coming NICs, for example the EPCglobal 
Network (another big VGN in preparation). The main issue is that some 
citizens do not belong to the ICANN community. How many GAC will they 
have to deal with?

jfc