Subject: Re: ISOC/IETF *ARE* International Bodies[was: PAB nIANA facts]

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:35:04 +0200

At 11:29 AM 6/9/98 -0400, Camillo Pasquariello wrote:
>Masataka Ohta wrote:
>> The next thing to do is to make ISOC/IETF internationalized
>> standardization body like ITU or ISO.
...
>ISOC and IETF are already [and always have been]
>international bodies!!

For some people, the term "international" refers to "between nations" as in
requiring treaties and the like.  That is, the word is a formal term of art
and they do not like having it used in other ways.  The IAHC originally was
tasked to work on iTLDs, where the 'i' meant internaional.  This point of
sensitivity about the word was why we changed to 'generic'.

Similarly, the IETF has consierable global standing, but it is not a formal
treaty organization.

d/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker                Brandenburg Consulting        +1 408 246 8253
[email-masked]      675 Spruce Drive        (f) +1 408 273 6464
www.brandenburg.com        Sunnyvale, CA 94086  USA

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:35:04 +0200

...

d/

---

From: [email-masked] (Network Operations Center)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:03:12 -0400

maybe this helps to settle much:

 1: "anything that is incorporated and/or has its main governing seat
in the US is not considered to be an impartial and international body"

 2: "as long as we all understand and appreciate the consequences of the
US (enforced) protective umbrella, nod the way the US administration 
wants us to nod, and of course bend over backwards to the dominating US
industry (that like to use foreign (non-US) talent to design and complete its
products (as these guys are just cheaper), we're doing not too bad"

 3: "the international network community should take serious initiatives
to ensure that the US is only ONE vote amongst some 100 peers"

 4: "hence a 'Swiss solution' headed by a Swede, and a non-compromised 
staff would be ideal"

--Bert

At 01:19 PM 6/10/98 -0400, Camillo Pasquariello wrote:
>Dave Crocker wrote:
>==========================
>
>DAVE, et al -
>
>Sometimes I think the Internet Community is too darn
>'sensitive' and should be more assertive about it's truly
>international character!
>
>ISO and IEEE are examples of internationally recognized,
>private-sector [ie non-governmental] standards bodies, and
>have no sensitivity at all to the use of the word
>"international" in describing themselves.
>
>/C.Joe P-->
>

---

From: Masataka Ohta <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 98 14:32:12 JST

Dave;

> and they do not like having it used in other ways.

Here, it's enough to say that decisions made by USG or some
organization solely operated by people under US legislation
are US-local, not international, decisions.

> The IAHC originally was

IAHC was not thoroughly international, but it successfully drafted a
truly international framework of POC/PAB/CORE.

> Similarly, the IETF has considerable global standing, but it is not a formal
> treaty organization.

IETF and World Series of baseball games are, in some sense, global.

							Masataka Ohta

---

From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:39:48 +0100

Masataka san and all,

> are US-local, not international, decisions.

  Well yes and no actually.  The White Paper was clear in it's inclusion of
the International Internet community.  Although the new non-profit corporation
will be incorporated in the US.  This doesn't mean that All of the internet
community
is not included.  The White Paper makes this very clear.

> truly international framework of POC/PAB/CORE.

  That IAHC framework was a dismal failure for the stakeholders and the
internet community as a whole.  Both the GP and the white paper pointed that
out quite clearly.  Their framework was not an open and inclusive framework.

> IETF and World Series of baseball games are, in some sense, global.

  Well the World Series of baseball, doesn't include teams from all over the
world.  Only in the US and Canada.

>                                                         Masataka Ohta

 Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:55:33 +0200

>are US-local, not international, decisions.

I agree.  Again, I hope that you and others understand that my point was
only about the use of the word "international" and was not trying to
challenge (or offer) comments about the nature of one place or the nature
of a group.

It happens that I believe the US is a particularly POOR choice for
incorporation because it is too easy to sue.

>IAHC was not thoroughly international, but it successfully drafted a

"thoroughly" international is quite difficult.  at some point, one must
rely on sampling theory to get "close enough".

d/

---

From: herve baudouy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 09:12:56 -0400

unsubscribe