from the horse's mouth - ISTF/ISSG

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



To help better understanding the Internet Governance technical context/contest, I started this thread is quotting authoritative positions:
- Europe
http://www.publictechnology.net/article_avantgo.php?sid=3877
- Peace Nobel Price
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2005/10/06/64579.html

I continue with the UN General Secretary.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/04/AR2005110401431.html

The debate so far leads me to think that the appropriate solution is, either the revival within ISOC, or the start outside ISOC (them to decide), of the ISTF/ISSG, as a way to represent the societal demand through a technical language the IETF/IESG can understand and work on. Societal, commercial and political issues are necessary parts of the demand.

They could be discussed on this main IETF list and on WGs lists. But they are no part if the engineering debate itself and could legitimately lead to what IETF participants would consider as DoS (there is no reason to technically discuss the way to implement a societal mistake or a commercial bias). A structural split between the technical debate and the societal/commercial/political debate is therefore advisable.

I note there is a real urgency to this. The aftermath of the Tunis submit may lead to exacerbated positions as some demands, foreign to the usual IETF vision, will have received international backing.

This would represent minor additions to the Internet standard process. They could be:

1. WG charters and RFCs should be commented by ISSG before approval.
2. BCPs should be co-approved by the ISSG
3. ISTF should organise a WG per IETF areas and get a member as a correspondant in each WG for good coordination. 4. there should be a "societal considerations" part in every Internet document. 5. ISTF should one way or another share in the QA of the IETF deliverables, among others via testing and links to running codes. 6. possibility for any IETF entity, group or participant to call on the ISTF for guidance. 7. the publication of societal framework documents on major issues such as IPv6 address allocation, multicultural support, usage architecture, etc.

I am ready to write a Internet standard process BCP Draft on the issue. With who is interested.
Unless Brian would see it as a part of the PESCI process?

jfc


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]