[Chapter-delegates] How can ISOC chapters help in the development of IP-based networks?

Thu Dec 16 08:57:55 PST 2010

All,

I don't feel it's appropriate for me to engage on some of the questions in this thread re: what Chapters should and should not do.  But I want to strongly agree with Fred's message here.  I also would like to draw your attention to some of the work staff has been doing to try to nudge discussions in the ITU away from an "us vs them" conversation, and in the direction of "making the Internet work better and be more accessible for more people."  To quote our working framing statement for ISOC involvement with the ITU: 

"ISOC engages with the ITU in areas where it makes sense to support their activities to advance the Internet, while working to create awareness of different and complementary activities taking place in the Internet ecosystem.  We are always working to ensure that the Internet ecosystem continues to evolve to support a usable and useful open Internet."

As we pursue that goal, we have consistently for several years produced briefing papers for governments, and as ITU Sector Members in the Standardization and Development Sectors we have submitted them to the ITU as official documents.  Some of them have been submitted several times, because they are relevant to a number of the meetings, conferences, study groups, working parties, ad hoc groups, etc., that have been created in the ITU.  You can find all of our work specifically developed for use in the ITU context at the following URL:
<http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/community/itu.shtml>

Please note in particular the basic papers that have been translated into all six United Nations languages, to ensure that they get maximum exposure in the ITU, and among our Chapters and members who may wish to talk to their national government officials involved in the ITU on Internet-related topics.

In that respect, we also prepared for our membership a guide on to how to reach out to government organizations responsible for their ITU activities.  that guide is available at: <http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/governance/itu_forum_20080223.shtml> before the 2009 World Telecom Policy Forum.  We provided a similar guide with a brief discussion of issues before the last World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly of 2008: A Members' Guide to Internet Society Participation in the WTDC at
<http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/docs/wtdc_20100507.pdf>

That information remains valid today, and I hope it is useful.

While it is not linked directly from the ITU site, one of the documents that several governments have told us is most useful is the Internet ecosystem graphic, that has now been expanded by adding text that describes in detail how the various parts of the ecosystem fit together.  
2 page Internet Ecosystem Graphic and Glossary <http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/docs/factsheet_ecosystem_20090310.pdf>
Expanded full-text version <http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/docs/internetmodel.pdf>

The full text version includes a section on the ITU that places it in context.  In terms of "making the Internet work better and be more accessible for more people", it is important to remember that while the ITU's Plenipotentiary decision that Veni referred to will mean the ITU can be expected to reach out more broadly to the Internet organizations, the ITU is not one of the primary organizations that deals with Internet issues, although it certainly has a role to play.  

For now and the foreseeable future, as shown in the Internet Ecosystem documents referred to above, the Internet institutions are central and key to the development of IP-based networks.  This has been one of the primary areas of work for ISOC as an organization, and our activities are directed to ensuring that the Internet and its organizations remain healthy and well functioning.  The ITU footnote from the Plenipotentiary calls for involvement "on the basis of reciprocity."  That is a key concept.

Until now, many of the ITU Member States have been inward looking.  That is to say, they have worked to create bodies *within* the ITU that are supposed to undertake work of various sorts on Internet-related issues and standards.  To participate in that work, the native Internet institutions have had to go to the ITU's meetings to try to help shape the discussion in a way that at least respects their own mandates.  A prime example of that is the joint ITU-T and ITU-D Group on IPv6 
<http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/others/ipv6/Pages/default.aspx>.  

Member States are correct to be concerned that the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 takes place, and no doubt have questions about the mechanisms for that and a need for capacity-building and the sharing of best practices.  The RIRs are the most appropriate place for that discussion, and most if not all actively reach out to governments as well as the private sector and local Internet communities.  One hopes that the Plenipotentiary will lead those concerned, and the ITU itself, to participate in the RIRs' activity, rather than creating a stand-alone group in the ITU, where the RIRs, ISOC, ICANN and concerned governments and Sector Members feel a responsibility to participate, to ensure that the discussion is fact-based and to help direct on-going work in a positive direction.  (Another example of an ISOC paper that was widely used and referred to by governments is the briefing paper "A Fine Balance: Internet number resource distribution and de-centralisation", which you can find at:
<http://www.isoc.org/pubpolpillar/docs/address-allocation_200906.pdf>

As you know, on December 14, the UN held a consultation on "enhanced cooperation."  I sought your views, and shared the ISOC contribution that we provided to the UN in mid-November.  I requested, and got, a speaking slot during the consultations.  Since then, the IAB asked me to make it clear that I was speaking for them as well as ISOC at the event this week.  A point I stressed in that speech was the need for governments and intergovernmental organizations to recognize and participate in the native Internet organizations:

"When speaking about Internet governance, it is vital that we cooperate in an open and reciprocal way.  Enhanced cooperation should not mean just that governments and intergovernmental organizations reach out and invite stakeholders from the private sector, civil society and the academic and technical community to come to their meetings.  It is equally important for governments and intergovernmental organizations to recognize that many of the relevant stakeholder groups have existing expert organizations with well established and open processes already dealing with Internet issues, which welcome all who want to participate.  Of course, some governments and intergovernmental organizations already do take part – the issue is one of enhancing the cooperation by learning to work together in the most appropriate venues, in partnership."

That point seems particularly relevant to the discussion about what approach ISOC (writ large) should take to involvement with Member States and the ITU itself.

Bill

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ISOC IETF SPEECH_FINAL check.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 37888 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20101216/f37b9f53/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------

On 2010-12-16, at 1:01 AM, Fred Baker wrote:

> Let me say I agree with you here on several points.
> 
> 1) it's about making the Internet work better and be more accessible for more people. 
> 2) It's not "us vs them" in any sense. Where I get wary is when people have different objectives than I do (see item 1), objectives that are less altruistic and more self-serving. But if we can work together on a common objective, so be it.
> 3) Cisco works with anyone it perceives to be working on an objective it can support. Yes, that can be confusing, especially because sometimes we're wrong or do things in a less-than-clueful way. Color us human.
> 
> Let me tell a story. In 2002-2005, I worked off and on with Makerere University in Uganda, with Cisco, with UNDP, and with USAID, to develop what came to be called a "Faculty in Information Technology" - a school that is turning out engineers to operate networks and develop technology in Eastern Africa. That started with an award - recognition I was given for my work in the IETF by Cisco - which was used as a poker chip to get cooperation from the public sector. The partnership worked very well, and I got to speak at the graduation of the first 42 CCNPs from the school. In 2002, while we encouraged people to set up educational programs, we privately worried that there would be no jobs for the graduates when they were done. Of those 42, 2/3 had jobs the day they graduated.I was very proud of the students and the faculty, and glad to be a part of that.
> 
> Cisco has also worked with various agencies in a number of programs in developing countries where things have not worked out as well, and where it turned out that objectives were misaligned or money was misused. That kind of outcome makes everyone upset.
> 
> See bullet (1). ISOC tries, Cisco tries, and each of us individually and in our various groups tries. See bullet (1).
> 
> On Dec 15, 2010, at 5:43 PM, Alejandro Pisanty wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> there are no ITU representatives. There are people in governments, as well as companies, who are representatives to the ITU. Some of them do become standard-bearers for the ITU. Some, in turn among these, tend to have their eyes and ears close to the Internet. Telecommunications policy and business are different.
>> 
>> That said, we can understand the ITU better.
>> 
>> When the ITU starts a project in a country it has allies in the country. some of these projects are good and some even go beyond extending infrastructure and training for telecommunications and allow Internet access and use. This is not always intentional.
>> 
>> Some projects are like setting up training in developing countries. Some of these are supported by Cisco. Many academic communities don't agree with them because they put aside some fundamental knowledge and are too much oriented to the company's product. We have discussed this with Fred Baker and others in Cisco over the years. The participation of companies like Cisco in both the Internet and the telecommunications field creates some confusion.
>> 
>> Our work must be for the growth of the Internet - take it to everyone possible, make it usable, make it used. We have to care about standards, interoperability, openness, access to information and to all (legal) resources available over the Internet. We have to try to avoid or stop misguided policies and programs which try to regulate and limit technology when they are trying to regulate people's conduct.
>> 
>> If part or all of an ITU-driven project fits into these goals, fine. We are not in a fight with the ITU. What we care about is the Internet.
>> 
>> Yours,
>> 
>> Alejandro Pisanty
>> 
>> 
>> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . .  .  .  .  .  .
>>    Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
>> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
>> 
>> Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732
>> 
>> * Mi blog/My blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
>> * LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
>> * Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
>> * Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
>> 
>> * Ven a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org.mx, ISOC http://www.isoc.org
>> *Participa en ICANN, http://www.icann.org
>> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010, Grigori Saghyan wrote:
>> 
>>> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 01:21:27 +0500
>>> From: Grigori Saghyan <gregor at arminco.com>
>>> To: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] How can ISOC chapters help in the development
>>>    of IP-based networks?
>>> Dear All,
>>> fully support Veni's suggestion.
>>> It is very hard process, in each country ITU representative is a governmental organization.
>>> They have serious problem - they do not have qualified staff, even more, they do not have anybody, who is able to understand modern challenges.
>>> In this situation any normal suggestion from local ISOC chapter can be very important for government, they need any  feedback from ISOC.
>>> Let me ask once more - let us prepare suggestions, recommendations  for local ITU representatives. Without such recommendations ISOC policy is a criticism without suggestions.
>>> With respect,
>>> Grigori Saghyan
>>> ISOC.AM
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 15.12.2010 18:19, Veni Markovski wrote:
>>>> Hi.
>>>> Changing the subject, I'd like to draw everyone's attention to a vital part of the ITU Plenipot 2010 resolutions, the words "including, but not limited to".
>>>> The Internet-related resolutions resolved that the ITU should
>>>> 1. explore ways and means for greater collaboration and coordination between ITU and
>>>> relevant organizations* involved in the development of IP-based networks and the future Internet,
>>>> through cooperation agreements, as appropriate, in order to increase the role of ITU in Internet
>>>> governance so as to ensure maximum benefits to the global community
>>>> * Including, but not limited to ICANN, the RIRs, the IETF, ISOC and W3C, on the basis of reciprocity
>>>> basis.
>>>> Now, my suggestion for the chapters is to see which one of you can get involved in the work the ITU does, as the resolution calls for the ITU to engage through cooperation agreements, etc., and since the words only name some of the organizations, it does not exclude the others, quite the contrary - it includes them. If any chapter has the capacity to work in the areas, covered by Resolution 101, 102, 133, then it should approach the ITU - via its regional offices, or via the national representative (usually Ministry of Communications), and see what you could do to promote the development of IP-based networks.
>>>> best,
>>>> Veni
>>>> On 12/15/2010 03:16, Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>>>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates