[Chapter-delegates] Application to form new Special Interest Group: Community Networks

Thu Nov 30 00:05:17 PST 2017

Hello Colleagues,

We the Kenyan Chapter are in full support, we have a couple of members
already supporting CNs and expanding!

We look forward,

Joel Okomoli
ISOC Kenya Chapter

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have been very specific in addressing community networks in
> resource-deprived environments. A lot of what is said and done about
> waiting for the communities to truly appropriate and own the technology and
> its uses is double-edged; on one hand it is all true, on the other it
> ignores the fact that people have an uncanny ability to learn to... use the
> Internet! use mobile phones! use graphical interfaces! amazing! There is
> too much paternalism and control from outsiders, or designated community
> insiders, that is actually impeding real massive progress against the
> already mentioned adversities from physics and economics. We can't believe
> in the beauty of the heroic connection a village at a time and the
> principle "Internet for everyone" at the same time unless we actively
> reconcile them and scale up the first to serve the second. Three networks
> may seem to be all different; 5,000 won't, they will naturally come
> together into a small number of classes. This is so proven that the book
> exists, and work to update it and give it broad circulation is one of the
> most important tasks the SIG could contribute to.
>
> To Joly's question: I think that we should make sure there is a
> well-defined ISOC unit as a SIG that forms alliances with other
> organizations, as this will immply at some point access to resources,
> making decisons which may involve policy differences, and put ISOC in
> difficult positions, if it is not done carefully. We are witnessing some
> organizations which only see ISOC as an  interesting partner in so far as
> they can get grants for projects they, and not ISOC, define. The SIG would
> be an  ideal instance to deal with these aspects of the problem, with all
> of ISOC's and its members' technical, operational, planning and policy
> capabilities put together.
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Martínez Cervantes Luis Miguel <
> luism.martinez at ibero.mx> wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, needs of real people are hard to be modeled. Precisely,
>> CNs are designed upon demand in contrast to service offerings pursuing a
>> market. Not even they follow conventional market rules as depicted in
>> books. Models for CNs exist, and are well known amongst engineers designing
>> and deploying the infrastructure. Gladly, these networks grow and operate
>> in such adverse conditions, which are mostly known by CNs developers and
>> operators. A big mistake is to think such a networks as
>> Internet-for-the-poor, there are well documented cases of CNs in wealthy
>> environments, where needs are different. Nevertheless, CNs provide a unique
>> experience which has been long-time forgotten when speaking about the
>> Internet. I will suggest looking at CNs growing figures, which are amazing,
>> not only a village a year.
>>
>> And again my full support CNs SIG
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Luis M Martinez
>> President ISOC Mx
>>
>> [https://www.isoc.mx/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/LMM.png]
>> Dr. Luis Miguel Martinez
>> Coordinador del Programa de Convergencia Digital
>> President ISOC Mx
>> Departamento de Comunicación, Universidad Iberoamericana Ciudad de México
>> p:      +52-5559504113 <+52%2055%205950%204113>
>> a:      Prolg. Paseo de la Reforma 880, Lomas de Santa Fe, CdMx, 01219,
>> MEXICO
>> w:      www.uia.mx<http://www.uia.mx>  e: luism.martinez at ibero.mx<mailto:
>> luism.martinez at ibero.mx>
>>
>>
>>
>> On November 29, 2017 at 7:55:17 PM, Alejandro Pisanty (apisanty at gmail.com
>> <mailto:apisanty at gmail.com>) wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Community Networks are one of the worthiest endeavors to close the
>> digital divide and make access to the Internet for everyone a reality. I
>> applaud the initiative and to make it more likely to succeed I offer the
>> following comments (parental advisory: toes will be painfully stepped upon
>> with the intent of making a clear statement on key concepts.)
>>
>> The present approaches are not scaling well. The approach that makes each
>> village - speaking about the case of small clusters of population away from
>> optical fiber to keep this rather specific - requires a heroic effort for
>> each location that has to be replicated slowly and with great expense in
>> each new one. Since physics, economics (in today's density-based models),
>> technology development, and social factors are all adverse, this
>> whack-a-mole mode will continue for a long time but it will also continue
>> to suffer from the problems of expense, long lead time, and numerous
>> instabilities (personnel rotation at the village level, inability to keep
>> links and equipment functioning over the long run, human and organizations
>> who have too many incentives to become gateways being but some of them.) A
>> village a year cannot be the model.
>>
>> The SIG IMO has to add a very high priority and an urgent task of finding
>> ways to scale up community networking by providing handbooks, e-learning
>> and other forms of remote training, keeping a pipeline of trainees at the
>> village level, creating modular kits for to-village and intra-village
>> connectivity that are easily set up and maintained, and models for
>> sustainable funding. While each case is singular, particular,
>> all-of-its-own-singular-particular-class, once we look at a few hundred
>> cases distinct patterns emerge. It is necessary and urgent to build upon
>> them for scale.
>>
>> On the constitution of the SIG: as long as this is going to be an ISOC
>> SIG there has to be a differentiation between what ISOC members, chapters
>> and staff will do, what Organizational Members can contribute, and what
>> other self-governing organizations witll do. Starting the SIG with
>> alliances already in place is good, but depending on them for determining
>> ISOC's actions is - starkly said - not. I have witnessed enough
>> polarization and divisiveness in this field to back my statement. Some
>> Organizational Members are telcos which have been either strongly opposed
>> (de jure or de facto), others neutral, others helpful, in regulation,
>> legislation, spectrum and rights-of-way allocation, and the political
>> organization of communities around and for networks. Others will happily
>> customize and donate gear... maybe. Others are fully in a business model
>> that can be a valuable contribution. But, back to the main point of this
>> paragraph, I think it is much preferable to constitute an ISOC SIG with
>> ISOC resources and have the alliances stay as that. It will be more
>> sustainable in the long run.
>>
>> ISOC has some irrepleaceable resources, people in our Hall of Fame or
>> Postel Prizes, like Mahabir Pun and Ermanno Pietrosemoli; experience in the
>> field including emergency response like in Nepal; and many others. We have
>> not been effective enough yet in bringing them together and that should
>> also be a priority for the SIG. Attending conferences goes several steps
>> lower if we haven't put together in an effective way all of ISOC's
>> wherewithal. Let's also therefore make a clear statement of what the SIG
>> expects from ISOC staff, which could be a lot and very helpful.
>>
>> I do agree that the IGF Dynamic Coalition format may be useful for
>> different purposes than the SIG but would also remind those needing it that
>> the Dynamic Coalitions were thought of as emerging organizations that first
>> form from a meeting of minds and commonality of purpose within the IGF and
>> then carry resolution- and action-capable work. In a medium- or long-term
>> perspective they may become fully constituted organizations on their own
>> terms. Let's not sabotage that by throwing away the baby with the bath
>> water.
>>
>> Recent SIG formations also teach us that a collective endeavor must be
>> guaranteed and subject to vigilance. Participation, discussion and
>> collective decision-making have not been active e.g. in the Cybersecurity
>> SIG and we are all the poorer for that. Let's not repeat the mistake.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Alejandro Pisanty
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Kyle Shulman <shulman at isoc.org<mailto:
>> shulman at isoc.org>> wrote:
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> The following application to start a Special Interest Group (SIG):
>> Community Networks has been received. It is being sent to the chapter
>> delegates community for peer comment and review. Please note that the SIG
>> has not yet formed and has not officially been recognized by the Internet
>> Society. The period allowed for comments is two weeks from today and the
>> deadline is 13th December 2017. Please do not hesitate to contact me on or
>> off list.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kyle Shulman
>> Global Engagement Project Manager
>> Special Interest Group (SIG) Manager
>> Shulman at isoc.org<mailto:Shulman at isoc.org>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
>> Facultad de Química UNAM
>> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
>> +52-1-5541444475 <+52%201%2055%204144%204475> FROM ABROAD
>> +525541444475 <+52%2055%204144%204475> DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
>> <+52%2055%204144%204475>
>> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
>> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/
>> 22285/4A106C0C8614
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
>> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
>> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>> _______________________________________________
>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> La Universidad Iberoamericana, A.C. (IBERO) con domicilio en Prolongación
>> Paseo de la Reforma número 880, Colonia Lomas de Santa Fe, Delegación
>> Álvaro Obregón, Código Postal 01219, en la Ciudad de México, utilizara sus
>> datos personales recabados para la prestación de los servicios académicos y
>> administrativos en el sistema educativo de la IBERO. Para mayor información
>> acerca del tratamiento y de los derechos que puede hacer valer, usted puede
>> acceder al aviso de privacidad integral ingresando a la liga
>> http://www.ibero.mx/aviso-legal-y-de-privacidad.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> Facultad de Química UNAM
> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> +52-1-5541444475 <+52%201%2055%204144%204475> FROM ABROAD
> +525541444475 <+52%2055%204144%204475> DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
> <+52%2055%204144%204475>
> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/
> 22285/4A106C0C8614
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20171130/a20ff51f/attachment.htm>