Subject: Fwd: Re: [IAB] WCIT slides

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:57:07 -0400

With apologies for the problems making these slides available, and 
thanks to Bernard for finding a work-around, for now the slides are 
available via links from
http://www.iab.org/2013/03/14/wcit-what-happened-whats-next/

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [IAB] WCIT slides
Date: 	Fri, 15 Mar 2013 13:40:04 +0000
From: 	Bernard Aboba <[email-masked]>

I have created a blog entry on the IAB website that points to
the slides, agenda and session recording:
http://www.iab.org/2013/03/14/wcit-what-happened-whats-next/

---

From: [email-masked] (Dale R. Worley)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:40:32 -0400 (EDT)

> From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
> 

In this mailing list:

- One major component of the WCIT kerfuffle is that governments
(especially those of less-devleoped countries) want to have more
influence in Internet processes.

- Another thread lamenting the lack of people from less-developed
countries who attend the IETF and participate in various of its
leadership activities.

A common solution to these problems would be for the governments in
question to provide long-term sponsorships for their citizens to
attend and participate in the IETF.  This would probably cost less
than many of the activities the WCIT treaty was proposed to enable!

Dale

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 07:04:06 +0100

On 15 mar 2013, at 19:40, Dale R. Worley <[email-masked]> wrote:

> attend and participate in the IETF.

...or other organisations...

Key, I think, is to understand:

- ITU is not the only process out there dealing with Internet related issues

- There are very very few, if any, issues not dealt with anywhere

- We can not afford having the same issue dealt with in two places

- Participation must be inclusive in those processes

- In the UN context, IGF is the only such inclusive process today

...and that is something to pass on to *all* governments.

    Patrik

---

From: Arturo Servin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 17:32:00 -0300

As I mentioned in the mic during the IAB-sponsored Discussion of WCIT,
during the week I had the opportunity to talk and interact to some of
the policy fellows invited by ISOC (in general were people from the
national regulator or from the ministry of telecommunications -AFAIK-).
I also had the opportunity (along with Marcelo Bagnulo) to have
breakfast with them and to present a summary of the Internet ecosystem
and its complexities.

	From my experience during the week and the IAB-sponsored Discussion of
WCIT I have this comments that I said I was going to share in the list:

- It seems that there is not much understanding for governments in how
the Internet ecosystem works.

- Governments believe (or believed) that ITU is/was the common place to
discuss and try to resolve Internet matters.

- The Internet is an open entity with many organizations interacting
with each other and the relationships among them may be very complex. We
need to communicate this to governments and help them to interact with
all the Internet-stake-holders.

- Everyone has a place and a role in the Internet open model. Even
governments. We need to let them play, help them to find their place,
teach them the rules of the game and avoid to step in each others feet
(I used the example of an RIR standardizing protocols or the IETF trying
to mandate national laws)

- To solve many of the today's Internet problems requires interaction at
several layers (technical, policy, government and the separation between
them is very blur) and between a diverse set of actors. It requires
communication and coordination among all parties.

- The communication and dialogue has to be a common effort. Today it is
not enough to say that the IETF or the X forum is open to everybody.
Being open is a must, the next step is going out and create
communication channels, not wait for them.

- The Internet does not have a common API for governments and it may
never have one. Local APIs do not exists or are complex. [1]

- As technical community we need to inform governments which
technological solutions we already have. This minimize or eliminate
their desire to "re-invent the wheel" in closed forums or create
pseudo-standards that contradict ours.

	I think that is all. I hope it helps for future discussion about the topic.

Regards,
as

[1] I borrowed the idea of the "Government API" from John Curran.

---

From: "Monique Morrow (mmorrow)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 22:17:12 +0000

Well stated Arturo!

Monique

Sent from my iPhone

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 08:14:52 +0000

Hi Arturo,

Good points that you have made. However, I would like to just sharpen some
of the things. There are many governments that do not understand how the
Internet works. Well, there are a lot of people even in the IETF that
might not really know how Internet works, and even bigger number outside
the IETF. However, there is a growing number of government that does
understand this at least on some level. This is due to the years of work
that different people, and organizations (including ISOC, RIRs, ICANN,
etc) that have put a lot of effort into this locally and internationally.
So, there is proof even governments can be educated... ;)

Therefore, that work has to continue, as you say, in all levels including
technical and political. The I* organizations have to pull together to
make this happen, and have done it already for a while. However, new
people and new insight for the work is needed, always.

Cheers,

Jonne.