[discuss] Subjects IG other than ICANN, IETF, IPv4-6
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Jan 7 21:56:39 UTC 2014
On 07/01/2014 21:34, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> Inline responses.
> On 7 Jan 2014, at 04:04, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 07/01/2014 05:34, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>> There seems to be a great deal of discussion about the more traditional IG subjects, but not much about the new realities imposed upon the entire field by the Snowden revelations. This seems to me to be a bit of missing the forest for the trees.
>>> IG is now a head-of-state level issue because of surveillance,
>> If you review the Snowden revelations, you can clearly see that
>> this is not by any means exclusively an Internet issue. The topic
>> is Surveillance governance, covering all forms of telecommunications
>> (and for that matter, surveillance of paper correspondence to the
>> extent that it still exists).
> Which is true … but doesn’t get it out of IG either.
>> The link with the issues commonly described as Internet governance
>> is fairly weak; the link with Internet security and privacy technology
>> is strong, of course.
> On the contrary, and the most obvious evidence that your conclusion is incorrect is the Brazil meeting, which we would not be having were it not for Snowden. Secondly, if further evidence is needed, is the WSIS review process, which is now a much more complex and risky one thanks to the same.
No, the meeting demonstrates the confusion of thought that I've been
banging on about. The fact that the NSA and its collaborators have
been conducting surveillance has nothing to do with the administration
of Internet technical resources. If some clarity about that fact
could result from the upcoming meetings, that would be a step forward.
More information about the discuss