Subject: Re: IAB comments on Green Paper

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 98 12:25:06 -0500

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>

    We (the IETF/IESG/IAB) have two choices

    - leave the assignment of protocol numbers with the IANAng,
    get to choose some board members, and have significant influence;

    - do the assignment of protocol numbers ourselves, not get to
    choose any board members of IANAng, and have no influence.
    
    Pick one. Ira doesn't care which; he told me that personally a couple of
    weeks ago.

It sounds like maybe Ira is a relative of the Bourbons: he has learned
nothing, and forgotten nothing, from the health-care fiasco. "We know what's
best for you illiterate peasants, so if you'll just stop your yapping and
whining, and do what you're told, everything will be perfect."

(I note that apparently *nothing* has changed in his plan, between the Green
Paper text, and the Proposed Rule we saw today. Sounds like "comments" on
this version are an even bigger waste of time.)

Perhaps it's time for the *international* network community to tell Ira, and
the US government, that we're picking option three:

- move the root of the whole DNS system offshore (perhaps to Switzerland, or
some similar place), and keep the technical management of the internet
(including things like assignment of addresses and protocol numbers) out of
the paws of the US government, and in the hands of an open, international,
body that understand it.

That way Ira gets to choose between "play with us, and have some influence"
and "try and run your own sandbox, and have no influence".

	Noel

---

From: Sascha Ignjatovic <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 02:45:32 +0100 (MET)

>     We (the IETF/IESG/IAB) have two choices

mr.carpenter i respect very much the sound and cool replay from the iab
to the usg commerce departement gp and found your "two choices" also very 
broath to the point and i would rather take the first choice but 
lets ad the voice and opinion of isoc too befor making any final decision
(maybe isoc hase the same conclusions as yours/iab's conclusion are but 
 i hope that mr.heath is working on behalf on isoc on it and that soon 
 they would release their offcial position wich could give us some
 aditional point of vuew or even aknowledge yours)

> the US government, that we're picking option three:

:-)

> the paws of the US government, and in the hands of an open, international,

usg is very good in starting things-see iraq  but it is complaying than
and cooperates with the international community very well

as the us hase the leadership in the internet matters it should be ablle
to understand that a "america only" solution refelcts not the nature of 
global internet 

the problem was that the internet is for the president of the usa a
"electronic commerce and education thing"-and it is  but those are just
two aspects of the internet  there are also many more -some if them 
maybe more importend 

so in this way  i dont accept the usg commerce department to be the 
ultimate authority for the global internet 

GLOBAL INTERNET IS A HIGHLY POLITICAL MATTER AND IT CAN NOT BE RULED BE
SOMEONES COMMERCE DEPARTEMENT 

SO THEREFOR I PROPOSE TO ESTABLISH OFFICIAL CONTACTS WITH 
VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE 

HE IS THE ONLY MAN WITH NEEDED CAPACITY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTENDS
OF THE GLOBAL INTERNET FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS PLANET

http://www.wired.com/news/news/gore/

                        Gore 2000: The Series
                        30 January - 2 February 1998 

                        Vice President Al Gore, the most wired senior
                        public official in US history, has plotted a
                        path to the 2000 presidential election that
                        begins in Silicon Valley. In this three-part
                        special report, Wired News will examine Gore's
                        courtship of the technology elite, his battles
                        over technology policy, and the high-tech
                        promises of Campaign 2000. 

(as there is some kind of group of technologie people who advices and
 lobys mr.gore on technologie-policy matters we should also build up  
 a group advicing the vice preseident al gore on the internet matters !!!)

I ACCEPT SOME KIND OF USA LEADERSHIP WHERE IT IS NEEDED AND APROPRIAT BUT 
SLOWLY WITH ACTIONC LIKE COMMERCE DEP. GP THEY LOSE CREADIBILITY TO BE THE
TOP LEADER ON EARTH IN INTERNET MATTERS     

SO I REQUEST HUMBLY THE ISOC IAB IETF TO TRY TO ESTABLISH A GOOD AND
LASTING RELATION TO MR.GORE AND BUILD WITH HIM TOGETHER A "PACT FOR THE 
FUTUTRE"

HE COULD BE THE 4TH CHOICE :-)

> and "try and run your own sandbox, and have no influence".

i am sory for mr.ira but the global internet can not be managed
from the point of vuew of the american commerce departement-electronic 
commerce advisor to the president 

internet is not only electronic commerce 
this "vision" of the internet is not the highest one  

we have some greater vision of the global internet

therefor we have to lead the internet 

> 	Noel

thank you
sascha