[discuss] Subjects IG other than ICANN, IETF, IPv4-6

[Chris Disspain]

Nick and Alx +1


Cheers,

Chris

On 07/01/2014, at 19:44 , Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:

> 
> On 7 Jan 2014, at 04:20, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Brian,
>> 
>> I'll chime in here - I've been calling to dissect Internet governance from #SnoopGovernance for a while.
> 
> We do need to unpack issues - many issues are being conflated together which as Brian notes are not Internet issues per-se (I made this point myself on CircleID recently here).
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> This is not to deny there is some incidence on the Internet and its governance; but little in this field will be solved until engineers have the specs from law and actual practice of surveillance. Nick Ashton-Hart is totally credible re there being an outrage in Geneva; but we all can have a different opinion on how artificial or misguided it is. Also, whatever the level of artificiality you attribute to it, it is happening, and Fadi Chehade and other signatories of the Montevideo statement have made a bold but likely wise move in rising up to the challenge. 
> 
> With respect to the first sentence, I would point out that politics trumps logic every time. We are seeing national responses to surveillance (like local hosting obligations) that will not protect users from surveillance but can screw things up - however, they sound good to legislators that don’t know better. The idea that ‘little in this field will be solved until engineers come up with solutions assumes that a political environment will respond to logic and good arguments when there are elections taking place in so many countries and those running for office need to prove they are doing something about surveillance.
> 
>> So, next step: "Orphan Issues." Let's see a list so that people like you, Andrew Sullivan, David Conrad, Suzanne Woolf, Jorge Amodio and others can start to analyze and design for them. And spend a while away from ICANN discussions, at least to see if there are any fresh ideas out there. Nick has got a really strong point in asking about this.
>> 
> Thank you Alex. I would say that it is possible to do both, for those who want to talk about ICANN and not the newer issues, that’s fine - but if that’s the case, at least some of us need to confront the short-term issues.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss