Re: WCIT outcome?

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

 



At 10:19 29-12-2012, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
ICANN is a US corporation and the US government can obviously pass laws that prevent ICANN/IANA from releasing address blocks that would reach certain countries no matter what Crocker et. al. say to the contrary. But absent a deployed BGP security

:-)

At 14:46 29-12-2012, Patrik Fältström wrote:
In the new world, "governance" is no longer "by decree", "by legislation" or similar. In the new world we use the word "collaboration", and that is done via policy development processes that are multi stakeholder and bottom up. Like in the RIRs (for IP addresses

What people say and what they actually do or mean is often a very different matter. An individual may have principles (or beliefs). A stakeholder has interests. There was an individual who mentioned on an IETF mailing list that he/she disagreed with his/her company's stance. It's unlikely that a stakeholder would say that.

The collaboration is less about process and more about culture. In some parts of the new world "governance" is still by legislation, etc. That could be attributed to cultural or other factors. The WCIT outcome might be highlighting the fracture.

Regards,
-sm



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