[discuss] BNA article on Internet transition by US Ambassador Sepulveda and US DoC Assistant Secretary Strickling

[joseph alhadeff]

Comments inline.
On 3/24/2014 11:01 AM, Michel Gauthier wrote:
> At 03:51 24/03/2014, joseph alhadeff wrote:
>> How would you deal with the desire of a number of 
>> governments/organizations to internationalize rather than globalize 
>> Internet Governance without the controls that NTIA has placed on the 
>> transition?
>
> Joseph,
> Could you explain which control?

Perhaps conditions of transfer would be a better phrase than controls.  
The need for it to be multistakeholder, continued stability etc.
>
> Some people feel that NTIA only defaulted its inability to address the 
> situation on Steve Crocker. They took the word of ICANN claiming they 
> were an "MS" (whatever it mey means, it is fashionable) proven expert 
> to decide they were mature enough to take over the "Internet CARE" 
> before it becomes too much an International burden. Don't you?
I only see them turning over the consultation process to ICANN to 
convene the groups that may suggest the solution, I wasn't reading this 
as making ICANN the solution to everything.  And I think all of need to 
have role in that process it cannot just be the various stakeholders 
inside ICANN.
>
>> Seems to me that the sense of the list for a solution was what they 
>> have offered...
I understand your mistrust of the system, but this is where I am 
interested in seeing the game play our.  I am usually the cynical one in 
the room, but I admit that on on this list I'm a rosy optimist :-)
>
> My congratulation is about the evaluation that they found a way to 
> transmit the MS (i.e. the lobbying organized oligarchy) hot-potatoe to 
> the Congress. This way they will not have to acclimate the 
> Telecommunications Act to the 2014 technology and neutrality, to 
> create an FIC, to transform ISPs into common carrirers, etc. and to be 
> laughed at for doing in the US, what they refused the world in Dubai.
>
>> You may consider this poker (or perhaps bridge in light of trump 
>> cards..), but an immediate turnover to an as of yet 
>> un-created/identified entity in a vacuum of process would have been 
>> Russian Roulette with live rounds.  I'd prefer to see how the hand 
>> plays out.
>
> That is the beauty of the move. The internet will not be rulled by the 
> White-House anymore (sorry JFC for your file), but by the US Judges. 
> No vacuum. No need for Russians, Chineses, Europeans, Indians, 
> South-Americans, Africans, etc. to be involved. The 1996 Act rules 
> them all. Upto the Telcos now to carry the job with their Congress 
> lobbied friends if they want to revise it
> .
> They are now free to propose a new Datacommunications Deal, based upon 
> second generation secure technology considering datagram transfers 
> layer as a pure commodity they can delegate to the ITU if that pleases 
> the world.
>
> M G
>
>
>> Joe
>> On 3/23/2014 7:09 PM, Michel Gauthier wrote:
>>> At 22:47 23/03/2014, John Curran wrote:
>>>> "Celebrating and Protecting the Global Internet"
>>>> http://www.bna.com/celebrating-protecting-global-b17179889025/
>>>
>>> Brillant, indeed. Playing poker with internet control! Now they are 
>>> committed.
>>> This definitly addresses Vint Cerf's motivation. A job well done!
>>>
>>> We are going to see how they and the world address his second 
>>> motivation.
>>> The NTIA is now free to play their trump cards.
>>>
>>> M G
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at 1net.org
>>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>