<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.list-bullet1, li.list-bullet1, div.list-bullet1
{mso-style-name:list-bullet1;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.author-8332150188
{mso-style-name:author-8332150188;}
span.author-7239213814
{mso-style-name:author-7239213814;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1211261372;
mso-list-template-ids:1642622130;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Thank you for this. I apologize for the tardy comments, but I was tied up with other things. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I refer to the full paper, at:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'> <a href="https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Enablers-of-OGST-EN.pdf">https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Enablers-of-OGST-EN.pdf</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Full disclosure: I was asked to comment on an earlier draft of this paper, and I see that many, but not all, of my comments were accommodated. So I reproduce here some of those comments.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>In my view the descriptions and examples don't facilitate understanding how to deal with some known key issues:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>A) Regarding technical security, there should be mandatory standards, as for electrical appliances, cars, airplanes, pharmaceuticals, etc. I like the approach adopted for electricity: industry comes up with standards, which are then made mandatory by regulations.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>B) Regarding trustworthiness (which includes so-called "information security"), censorship (whether by the state or by social media platforms) is not the solution. The solution is better user education, and making platforms liable, just like any other editor. The objection that this infringes freedom of speech is, in my view, not tenable: freedom of speech does not imply a right to publish. Any publisher has the right to decide what and what not to publish, and should be held responsible for its choices.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>C) Regarding surveillance capitalism (which is the antithesis of privacy), the solution involves better anti-trust enforcement (taking into account that having large amounts of data equates to having a dominant position, and prohibiting e-commerce platforms from selling their own products), mandating data interoperability (so that people can easily change social network platforms), equitably taxing electronic transactions and their profits, and (as recently suggested) heavily taxing targeted advertising.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>D) Regarding affordable access, there should be an international version of national universal service funds. I know that this idea has been consistently rejected, but I still think that it is the right idea, albeit tricky to implement.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Here are my detailed comments.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>1) Page 4 states that the aspirational set of goals for the Internet is “a network that is open, globally connected, secure and trustworthy”. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>I agree, and it is unfortunate that the current Internet is not secure, and it is not trustworthy, neither in the technical sense of confidentiality, integrity, and authentication, nor in the broader sense of providing reliable information.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The reasons for the lack of technical security are market failures, see the 2016 ISOC State of Internet report. The reasons for the lack of reliable information are that the current business model favors the publication of unreliable information.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>It is also not open and globally connected, unless you exclude China.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Further, there national regulations on things such as permissible speech and data privacy differ widely around the world, so there are serious limits on regarding "open, global connectivity".<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>2) Page 6 correctly notes that affordable access is a key enabler. It is worth recalling that, at present, access is not affordable in many developing countries, and that there are various initiatives (including in ISOC and in ITU) to favor affordable access.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>3) Page 7: Example 3 could have been expanded to include a reference to Net Neutrality, which is probably the best-known example of a policy that is intended to facilitate affordable access. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>4) Page 7, example 3. Government regulations are not the only reason there is limited competition. The US is a great example of how market failures (natural monopoly effects in low-density areas) have led to a large portion of the population being subject to de facto monopolies for Internet access. That was well documented in the Wheeler Open Access order. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>5) Page 9, Example 1: it might have been worth noting that the Internet’s main naming space (the domain name system) is managed centrally, for very good reasons.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>6) Page 10, Example 1: it might have been worth noting that NATs were developed and deployed because IPv6 is not backwards compatible with IPv4. Since IPv6 is actually a separate (albeit interoperable) network, one could argue that it’s deployment violated the “unrestricted reachability” enabler: it would have been better if IPv6 had been backwards compatible.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>7) Page 10. The description of "unrestricted reachability" could be misunderstood to imply that no national restrictions on illegal content are acceptable. If read literally, the description implies that CSAM and illegal-drug online markets would be permissible.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>It would have been better to formulate as follows "Internet users have access to all legally permitted resources and technologies available on the Internet and are able to make legally permitted resources available themselves".<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>8) Page 10, example 2. What you say is correct, but ignores a fundamental issue. VoIP can be a way of bypassing a form of taxation known as "termination rates". Of course any tax raises prices and distorts the market. But all states need to raise taxes, and, in some cases, a tax on incoming voice calls may be the best way to do it.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>9) Page 11, example 3. The example is not sufficiently sensitive to economic realities: it may be cheaper to deploy CGNAT than to transition to IPv6. Since cost does affect availability, and affordability, CGNAT may actually have a positive effect.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Indeed, if you believe that the market is competitive (which it probably is in this respect), then there is no call to criticize CGNAT.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Carl Gahnberg via Chapter-delegates<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, 8 November 2021 20:51<br><b>To:</b> chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org<br><b>Subject:</b> [Chapter-delegates] Update to the Internet Impact Assessment Toolkit<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>Dear colleagues, </span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#222222'>As you know, we have been hard at work expanding the <a href="https://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-way-of-networking/internet-impact-assessment-toolkit/">Internet Impact Assessment Toolkit (IIAT)</a> this year<span class=author-8332150188>. Last year, the IIAT introduced the Internet Way of Networking (IWN): the critical properties at the foundation of this model and the key to the Internet's successful evolution. The IWN has become </span><span class=author-7239213814>a useful</span><span class=author-8332150188> lens to evaluate </span><span class=author-7239213814>whether </span><span class=author-8332150188>policy and technology proposals</span><span class=author-7239213814> impact what makes the Internet work for everyone</span><span class=author-8332150188>. </span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>This year, we decided to expand the Toolkit with a new mechanism that allows us to better </span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>understand not only what the Internet needs to exist, but what it needs to thrive. </span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>The IWN's critical properties are essential to protecting the Internet's networking model, but we need more information to fully guard it against threats. We've been working to develop </span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>a new white paper:</span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'> "Enablers" of an Open, Globally Connected, Secure and Trustworthy Internet. These factors enable the Internet to reach its full potential. We deeply appreciate</span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'> your</span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'> contributions</span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'> in the PDP process of this white paper, and to help us understand what we need to support the Internet we all want. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>We </span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>are proud to let you know the</span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'> white paper</span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'> is available on the IIAT webpage <b>today</b></span></span><span class=author-7239213814><b><span style='color:#222222'>, </span></b><span style='color:#222222'>along with a new tool for advocacy<b>: the Internet Impact Brief.</b></span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'> </span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#0C1C2C'>The Internet impact brief is a resource to help both policymakers and Internet advocates rapidly analyze emerging issues to determine how to mitigate harm, and whether a full Internet impact assessment is needed. The Toolkit now includes <i>How to Conduct an Internet Impact Brief</i>, and five briefs that show how real-life issues can impact the Internet.</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>We are continually honored to work with you </span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>as part of a global</span></span><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'> community to promote and defend the Internet. This addition will provide an important foundation for the Internet Society's future work </span></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>and advocacy to protect the Internet we all want.</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>Want to help us use and promote our new tools? You can:</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=list-bullet1 style='margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span class=author-7239213814><b><span style='color:#222222'>Share the Toolkit with your professional and social networks.</span></b></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'> Here's a suggestion: “Worried about threats to the open, globally connected, secure and trustworthy Internet? Take your advocacy next level with @internetsociety’s new tool: How to Conduct an Internet Impact Brief.”</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=list-bullet1 style='margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>·<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span></span><![endif]><span class=author-7239213814><b><span style='color:#222222'>Use the Toolkit in your advocacy: </span></b></span><span class=author-7239213814><span style='color:#222222'>If you spot a threat to the Internet, let us know! We'd be happy to collaborate on future Internet impact briefs. </span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>Best regards,</span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span class=author-8332150188><span style='color:#222222'>The IWN Team </span></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>