Dear all,<br><br>On Thursday, 17 April 2014, Brian E Carpenter <<a href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
In a word, none of those issues are Internet governance.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is precisely the subject of debate in netmundial and other forums like the igf. If there was universal agreement with your definition, then the igf agenda would be more than somewhat different.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I try and think of governance of, and governance on. I think Bertrand de la Chapelle was the first I heard coin this but it may well have been around for ages.</div><div><br></div><div>Maybe it's just 'Internet issues' but it's something.�</div>
<div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div>Jordan�<span></span></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
How, for example, is the USA bugging Angela Merkel's cell phone<br>
anything to do with Internet governance? How is the NSA snagging<br>
and analysing billions of email headers a defect in Internet governance?<br>
Sounds like a problem with NSA governance to me. Was it an error in<br>
telegraph cable governance that led to the Zimmermann telegram incident<br>
in 1917?<br>
<br>
I could continue but I won't. This business is complex enough without<br>
dragging in irrelevant problems.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
� �Brian<br>
<br>
On 17/04/2014 11:43, Andrew Sullivan wrote:<br>
> Apologies for the top post, but this will be illegible if I try to interleave from my phone.<br>
><br>
> I would like to know why "governance" in particular is the answer to even one of these problems.<br>
><br>
> The OpenSSL case is a good example. �People have freeloaded on that project for years, offering it precious little support while leaving security auditing and cryptanalysis for "someone else". �If you think that trash in your neighborhood park is a problem, the answer is not to form a committee. The answer is to make like Pete Seeger and pick up some trash.<br>
><br>
> Yahoo's DMARC decision is another good example. �That is a service supported mostly by advertising. Don't like what they're doing? �Organize a boycott. �That'll change things. Ask Mozilla.<br>
><br>
> IPv6 is indeed a problem, and I will not defend the series of decisions that got us here (though it's trickier than many seem to imagine). But actually, in my experience, v6 just works now. �I use it all the time. �It's not a "governance" problem, but an economics problem.<br>
><br>
> And it seems to me that there we arrive at the issue: this is about who's going to pay. That's very well, but I don't see why it's "Internet governance".<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
><br>
> A<br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'discuss@1net.org')">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</blockquote><br><br>-- <br>-- <br>Jordan Carter<br>Chief Executive, InternetNZ<p>+64-21-442-649 | <a href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a><p>Sent on the run, apologies for brevity<br></p></p>