[discuss] FSP4NET findings and conclusions report
alliance at fsp4.net
Tue May 6 18:45:22 UTC 2014
Dear VGN stakeholders,
We have honestly tried to play by the ICANN/NTIA Multi-Stakeholder
process game. This consolidates and reports our findings and conclusions.
1. On March 14, 2014 the NTIA has announced its intents to relinquish
the USG executive branch oversight of the internet it exercises
through the FCC and the DoC since 1977.
2. We have exposed on different mailing lists, fora,and private exchanges that:
* our daily experience of the global internet as an aggregation of
billions of Virtual Global Network (VGN), i.e. the individual
optimization of the global internet use (IUse) of each and every
independent user (IUser),
* would perceive it as a structural modification of the US VGN that
would affect every other VGN whatever their embryonic,
semi-developped or developped level due to their architectural,
societal and political intrication.
3. We also have exposed that we did trust the US internet strategy to
be patriotically shaped in the best US citizens, commercial,
operationnal, and diplomatic interests. Our experience of the
internet has tought us that this strategy suffers from what we call
the BUG: it wants to Be Unilaterally Global. This BUG must constantly
be patched in the best common interest (including the US interest)
because the world is multilaterally global (we pay our Govs to deal
with that reality of the world for us). As a result we identified the
precautionary need of a contingency plan in case the NTIA plan would
partly or totally fail.
4. As a result our semi-developped "JFCnet" VGN was hacked, most of
its sites have been silenced, and I was submitted to ad personams. As
a result we announced and started working on an alliance toward a
fail-secure plan for our VGNets. We decided to go by the MS process
rules still to be discovered and to better understand what a VGN
contingency plan meant.
4.1. the first idea was that the fsp4.net alliance was just one
stakeholder among others and that to avoid noise it had to express
itself as a single polycratic multi-brain entity.
4.2. this made us work on the polycratic concept of networked and
open democracy, i.e. a democratic style decision system for the
multitude (i.e. people not bound by a social contract to the
prevailing sovereign entity, or in its absence) in an MS process
framework. We identifed that IUCG extended IETF mantra "We reject
kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus, running
code, and living mode" and Europe's concertation debate for the
emergence of a common doctrine as a convergence of local decision by
subsidiarity seemed adequate to our purpose.
4.3. as a result we wished to experiment an MS process neutral
participation method where:
* our interests would be freely presented for all of us along the
decision of any of us.
* the inputs received in return would be debated in common,
progressively allowing the emergence of a polycratic multi-consensus
through convergence or divergences.
* every of us could experiment their own conclusions on their own
VGN, what lead us to identify the need for a VGN support organization
5. we therefore:
* adopted the formula of a unique alliance at fsp4.net mailbox on the
/1NET and IANAtransition ICANN MS process lists. However, this could
only be temporary since this mailbox could not be easily shared and
obliging me to forward multi-brain mails. We retained the idea of the
"alliance.fsp4net at gmail" as a common VGN experimental resource and
started discussing the technical and legal aspects of a "multi-brain
polycratic mailbox server" project.
* we also engaged a reflexion on the best way to support a VGN
normative documentation, support and servicing. I also decided to
progressively split my JFCnet VGN from a separated local VGN
experimentation (in French ... translators welcome).
* in this process, discovered that we were not alone in identfying
the VGN fundamental reality of independent virtual networks of the
catenetwork of local networks of everyone and that there were
different converging or not (too soon to say) analysis, definitly
calling for a VGNSO creation strategy.
6. we kept reporting this process (watched by telepresse.com) and we
registered on the /1NET and IANAtransition ICANN MS process to answer
the NTIA request. We then confirmed what we had been reported by
some: this mailing list is blacklisted, and someway we were
6.1. In the ICANN (\NTIA?) MS process equal footing incudes the
intrinsic concept of black feet discriminatory filtering. We made the
access to "alliance.fsp4net at gmail.com" available to observers who can
confirm it. We are ready to make it available to the NTIA if they
wish to check how their MS process is biaised.
6.2. We also observed there was an unfair intellectual discrimination
by some leading I*experts (we cannot believe they do not understand
the VGN concept) who a-priori discriminate (despise) against the most
basic internet architecture root principles if they are applied in a
7. As a result we understand that the call for a contingency plan, we
initialy conceived as an individual precautionary reflex, becomes a
general necessity for the world. This is beyond our reach. We
therefore intend to limit ourselves to the following:
7.1. we will structure our own VGN multistakeholder group as
FSP4.NET, keep the current alliance at fsp4.net mailbox on the /1NET and
IANAtransition lists (at least until they are blocked), and port it
on a multi-brain mailbox if we can develop a satsifying architecture.
7.2. we will work through private VGN experimentations muitual
information and IUCG IETF Drafts the content of which will be under CC BY SA.
7.3. we call for a VGN oriented multilogue to structure itself in
order to bootstrap a VGNSO VGN support organization at http://VGNSO.org.
7.4. we call every governement, technical competence, political
party, civil society entity to carefully consider their
constitutional, architectural, legal, societal duties along their
understanding of the human digital environment precautionary principle.
7.5. I confirm my proposition to include my HomeRoot, SuperIANA,
Happy-IP and "mêle-mail" projects in the FSP4.NET considerations
(subject to positive experimentation) and a possible VGNSO test-bed
alon the ICANN/ICP-3 restrictions.
We do not trust the USG (NTIA, NSA) and ICANN MS process to come up
with a fully adequate proposition, but we trust the network
propagation of every VGN oriented good solution, as well as the
mathematic universal self-organization criticality, to adequately
complete or replace it. Our work will only try to make it simpler and
* (1) we believe that good intelligence always prevails (not
necessarily easily), even on big financial interests even (cf. IAB RFC 3869).
* (2) we need it for our own VGNs stability, security, and performances.
More information about the discuss