[Chapter-delegates] ISOC contributions to ITU WTPF (1)

[Franck Martin]

Thanks Bill I'm trying to wake uprie usual apathy

Looking forward for your next version

Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question

On 26/02/2009, at 21:33, Bill Graham <graham at isoc.org> wrote:

> Thank you for this, Franck.  There is no need to talk of "veto" here  
> -- this is the kind of response I'd been hoping for.  I appreciate  
> your timely help with improving the documents before they go  
> public.  We'd also benefit from having more detail from you and your  
> fellow chapter chairs on initiatives related to the papers' topics.
>
> Best regards
>
> Bill
>
> On 26-Feb-09, at 5:18 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
>
>> Bill,
>>
>> A big general comment, which makes me very uneasy with all these  
>> documents. There are no reference to the work the chapters are  
>> doing at the local/regional level. What comes to mind is: ISOC  
>> France and the law on copyright, what ISOC-ECC is doing with  
>> europe, what PICISOC is doing on creating a Pacific Cert, What ISOC- 
>> NY, ISOC-AU are doing for the promotion of IPv6. And not being on  
>> the top of things, I think my fellow chairs of chapters could add  
>> to this list.
>>
>> I have seen in some documents you have spoken of the work the NOGs,  
>> the RIR, and others are doing, why silence radio on chapters work  
>> done?
>>
>> If I had the right to veto, I would veto, till this is corrected.  
>> It is a pity, they are well written but I cannot let that pass.
>>
>> And this is something you can correct easily, I don't ask much but  
>> some mention which will show that:
>> 1) ISOC is not American
>> 2) ISOC has global reach
>>
>> Now some other comments:
>> On internet standards, it would have been nice to mention that:
>> 1) IEEE is defining the hardware level on which the internet is  
>> built upon
>> 2) W3C is defining the presentation of some the content transported  
>> by the Internet
>>
>> The IETF nebula, works with these 2 organisations to build the  
>> Internet. This will show by omission that ITU-T (and ITU) is not  
>> exactly the right place to build the future.
>>
>> IP, MPLS, and SIP are IETF protocols. You forgot to mention SIP (in  
>> reference to h232, which is now well dead).
>>
>> As a side note, did you notice the spam page on the ITU website as  
>> not been updated since 2006? So not sure they are working for user  
>> safeguard on the Internet...
>>
>> I'll write more as it comes to mind.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bill Graham" <graham at isoc.org>
>> To: "Chapter Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, 26 February, 2009 3:39:08 AM (GMT+1200) Auto-Detected
>> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] ISOC contributions to ITU WTPF (1)
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Following up on the note and documents I sent you a few days ago, I  
>> am
>> now attaching the 5th document in the series that talks about NGN and
>> the Internet, briefly described below.  Once again, your help and
>> comments on how we can improve this and the previous package will be
>> much appreciated.  Because of the rapid approach of the WTPF, I'd
>> really appreciate having your comments on this and the rest of the
>> package BEFORE MARCH 5.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>