[discuss] FSP4NET findings and conclusions report

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 
collectively blacklisted.

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 
stand-alone orientation.

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 
smoother because:

* (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.

jfc
FSP4NET bootstrapper