[discuss] A thought experiment - what follows the 'IANA transition?'

Mon Mar 17 18:00:15 UTC 2014

Dear George,

As usual, a thoughtful and persuasive message.

I think that you have this the right way round: firstly, what is in-scope for IG, and what is not? then, of what is out of scope, what has a compelling 'internet connection' for the reasons you articulate - and of those issues, where is that issue tackled now, or if it is not being tackled by anyone, is there a logical venue for it?

I think it is hard to answer the question below until you have answered the previous questions - unless you simply compile a list of 'good things to deal with' - and then go through the above exercise (which would of course work too).

I do think a key assumption should be "if it is about data, it isn't IG" as otherwise you're off on a road to the hell of trying to define what content is good and what is bad, and we all know that's impossible.

On 17 Mar 2014, at 18:12, George Sadowsky <george.sadowsky at gmail.com> wrote:

> So back to the thought experiment.  If we really do solve the accountability and administrative issues related to ICANN and IANA in a manner that is widely accepted (admittedly a stretch, but it works for a thought experiment), then that is off the agenda.  What’s next on the “Internet governance” agenda, and why?  Do the venues for those discussions change, or not?  Does the label by which we refer o those discussions change, or not?   What is your “to do” list for Internet governance after an IANA final solution: 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140317/92d58538/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140317/92d58538/signature.asc>