[Chapter-delegates] ITU Followships for the World Telecommunication Policy Forum, April 2009, Lisbon, Portugal

[borka at e5.ijs.si]

The study I know (see the PEW report on the Future Internet
from December 14, 2008:
www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Future_Internet.pdf) where about 1150 people
were asked for opinions (both known leading experts (50%) and ordinary 
Internet 
users) shows that the clean slate design has no real footing
at least for the next 10-15 years (is too risky and the current models
is too widespread). NFS is certainly funding the clean slate
research within GENI  and similar programmes but so far .....

In the PEW report 76% of experts and 81% of users responded
that the Internet will evolve and the  R&D will be focused on the
improvement of the current Internet. the same applies to the security,
HIP protocol is being deployed in EU and U.S and IPv6 if fully implemented
introduce good security on network level.


With regards,

Borka

ISOC Slovenia


On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Franck Martin wrote:

> I think Scott Bradner in one of his presentations put it well. The difference between NGN and IPv6 is that NGN is licensed.
>
> There has been a paper recently in the NY-Times about a clean slate Internet, where people would be indetified, you loose freedom for better security... And you know the old saying: "people who forgo freedom for security will have neither"
>
> Recently I was looking at ITU initiative on SPAM: http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/spam/ as you can see the page as not been updated since 2006. They did Naming, went nowhere, standards are made by IETF and IEEE not ITU, So here are they, they move from topic to topic till they find their "raison d'etre". The last "marmotte" they have is Internet Security, what next?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: borka at e5.ijs.si
> To: "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl at gih.com>
> Cc: "ISOC Chapter Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, 17 February, 2009 6:13:50 PM (GMT+1200) Auto-Detected
> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ITU Followships for the World Telecommunication Policy Forum, April 2009, Lisbon, Portugal
>
> Dear all,
>
> My two cents to this debate:
>
> I fully agree with Olivier and Alejandro  observation.
> My viewing
> is very similar  - there is a big rush in ITU
> and similar organization as they are obviously
> loosing the ground - the old telecom model
> of telecommunication (and everything relied to it -
> the telecommunication models used) is dying.
>
> They are looking for what is happening within the
> Future Internet activities (taking
> place in U.S, EU, S.Korea and Japan)
> and the forums developing
> the NGN which is certainly using the good exepriences
> of Internet development and the Internet model.
>
> I was recently approached by one "national" industry member
> in one of many SG groups of ITU to provide to  him the
> "requirements for the NGN - the definition"
> beeing worked and designed
> within Future Internet activities in EU
> (He said that he was asked to look around the
> R&D efforts in his environment).
> What a nonsense -
> no one is ready now to specify accurately all  NGN requirements in
> order stanadrdization effort to be applied within ITU!
>
> Other parties (The FIA - Future Internet Assembly of EU
> and the EU Technological platforms (ETP - mainly
> consisted of telecom industry and academia)  NESSI, NEM and
> eMobility) have recently published (January 2009)
> very good document entitled " Future Internet - The Cross-ETP Vision
> Document (can be reached www.future-internet.eu) where
> they clearly say:
>
> "It is hopeless for the Telecom players to compete with
> Internet players keeping Telecom model for applications"
>
> and further:
>
> "Governance of Future Internet will be beyond Internet Name and addresses,
> issues dealt today by ICANN.  It will include other significant public
> policy issues  such as  critical Internet resources, security and safety
> and issues pertaining to the use of the Internet"
>
> We all are aware that  this is a matter of discussion within IGF and
> similar forums and certainly not ITU.
>
> Shall ISOC people help ITU in loking for NGN specification
> in order they to start standardizing and later selling their CDs?
>
> With regards,
>
> prof.dr.Borka Jerman Blazic
> ISOC-Slovenia and ISOC-ECC
>