[discuss] P1 version 3: Added detail and a request for useful background information

Thu Jan 23 06:44:41 UTC 2014

That is great read Alejandro, and John answering your question, the later, it will be challenging to get support for any changes if we don't get enough clout (as Alejandro noted by lobbying, etc) to change some minds and attitudes in the USG.

And people (with all due respect particularly the "academics" of IG) should stop putting ICANN at the pinnacle or center of IG and as the object of dispute.

And once and for all finally get the point that IANA is not ICANN nor ICANN it is IANA.

Regards
-Jorge

> On Jan 22, 2014, at 11:42 PM, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> John,
> 
> my read is that Jorge Amodio is making an important point - no matter whether there be a legal mandate or constraints, positions within the US like "they will only take the Internet away if it is from my cold dead fingers" impose a severe constraint on steps toward the different possible scenarios of internationalization, and they need to be taken into account in any (re-) design even if they are not being expressed in this constrained environment.
> 
> Further to that read, i will add the view that many interrnationalization approaches will not be viable if people within the US do not begin to support them. This means to lobby, picket or whatever is the appropriate practice, before the government's executive and legislative branches, not the always close-to-hand ICANN pignata. That would show some real decision to effect change; beating ICANN yet again is improductive if you don't do the other side as well.
> 
> Scenarios for this happening or not are determinant in delimimting the solution space for George's Problem 1 however we finesse its formulation. ARIN, BTW, would be a very credible leader if it chose that course of action and is not otherwise.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Alejandro Pisanty
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Alejandro Pisanty
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:25 PM, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:
>>> On Jan 22, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I don't recall and didn't find any bill enacted as law.
>>> 
>>> But it depends on how much weight we give to particular resolutions approved by the Senate and/or House, like S.323 from the 109th Congress which was passed as a simple resolution which is non-binding but a statement of position. As far as I remember this particular resolution and others quite similar were in reaction to WSIS 2005,
>>> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/sres323
>>> 
>>> While not law, I remember some interesting statements during some hearings like in 2009
>>> http://domainnamewire.com/2009/06/04/congress-beats-up-icann-part-1/
>>> 
>>> Perhaps some investigation to review and summarize how the US Congress has acted overtime about control may be interesting.
>>> 
>>> I believe that the USG position (and I don't think it changed a bit) became quite clear after WCIT12.
>> 
>> Jorge - 
>>  
>>     Are you suggesting that the problem should not be worked on, or that we need to note 
>>     that there may be challenges in getting support for any solution that is produced?
>> 
>> /John
>> 
>> Disclaimer: My views alone.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://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, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
> 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/20140123/edc35290/attachment-0001.html>