[discuss] surveillance governance, was Re: [governance] NTIA statement
nigel.hickson at icann.org
Wed Mar 19 06:02:59 UTC 2014
Just to say how useful and instructive I found the overview presented by Mike. Certainly helps in discussions of future
Sent from my iPhone
On 18 Mar 2014, at 18:24, "Nick Ashton-Hart" <nashton at ccianet.org<mailto:nashton at ccianet.org>> wrote:
+1: but the key to ensuring that happens is to think about where the political needs for action on other issues like surveillance can be met, and to socialize where those spaces exist. This is why I, among others, are keen to see an understanding that issues primarily about something other than IG remain so.
On 18 Mar 2014, at 18:04, Mike Roberts <mmr at darwin.ptvy.ca.us<mailto:mmr at darwin.ptvy.ca.us>> wrote:
Too many of the submissions on this thread are building sandcastles. Admittedly, the geopolitical space surrounding the Internet is a vacuum and has many power brokers or wannabe power brokers circling around. So be it. Some people have more time on their hands than others.
But as George suggests, let’s leave IANA out of it.
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org<mailto:discuss at 1net.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss