Thank you for your frank and honest response John. -Jorge > On Oct 11, 2013, at 3:18 PM, John Curran <jcurran@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Oct 11, 2013, at 9:32 AM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Just to start, there is no clear consensus of what "Internet Governance" means and entails. > > You are correct. The term "Internet Governance" is a term of art, and a poor one > at that. It is the term that governments like to use, and in fact, in 2005 several of > them got together at the United Nations-initiated World Summit on the Information > Society (WSIS) and came up with the following definition: > > "Internet governance is the development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet." > <http://www.wgig.org/docs/WGIGREPORT.pdf> > > I happen to hate the term "Internet Governance", but its use has become a common > as shorthand for the discussions of governments expressing their needs and desires > with respect to the Internet, its related institutions, and civil society. > > It might not be necessary for the IETF to be involved (if it so chooses), but I'm not > certain that leaving it to ISOC would make sense if/when the discussion moves into > areas such as structures for managing delegated registries of IETF-defined protocols > (i.e. protocols, names, numbers) > >> In your particular case as President and CEO of ARIN, clearly you "lead" that organization but it does not make you representative of the Internet or its users. I can't find anywhere in the Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation of ARIN the word "Governance." >> >> Nobody will deny any of the alleged "leaders" to participate in any meeting, conference, event, in their individual capacities, but NONE has any representation of the whole Internet. > > Full agreement there... No one has any representation of the entire Internet, and > we should oppose the establishment of any structures that might aspire to such. > >> Do we really want to create a "government" for the Internet ? How do you propose to select people to be representatives for all the sectors ? > > I do not, and expect others on this list feel the same. However, it is likely that more > folks need to participate to make sure that such things don't happen. > >> And in particular how do you propose to select an IETF representative and who/how it's going to give her/him its mandate to represent the organization on other forums ? > > That is the essential question of this discussion, and hence the reason for my email. > > I'd recommend that the IETF select leaders whose integrity you trust, you provide them > with documents of whatever principles the IETF considers important and how it views > it relations with other Internet institutions (could be developed via Internet Drafts) and > ask them to report back as frequently as possible. Alternatively, the IETF could opt > to not participate in such discussions at all, and deal with any developments after the > fact (an option only if there is sufficient faith that the current models, structures, and > relationships of the IETF are inviolate.) > > FYI, > /John