[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Future

On 20:28 30/11/02, Alexander Svensson said:
Richard, I'm hearing you and I know that many others share
your point of view "let's keep outside the ICANN process".
The problem is that I have heard very little convincing
proposals how those people who want to keep outside the
ICANN process will try to influence the ICANN process.
Dear Alexander,
this remark is half true: I am .. may be not proposing well, may be not doing well, but I am proposing and doing.

1. the first proposition is http://dot-root.com. I certainly accept this is something complex for many to understand and too slow to make a scoop every day. I will however put anyone interested on the distribution list and you may look at http://dot-root/pr.sht page to see that this are serious matters. I would be more than glad to share with serious technicaly, societaly, prolitcally competent people as some of the top ones are on this list.

That proposition is npt to influence ICANN. It is to test the life after ICANN, to document how it works and permit the international network community to evolutate in the proper way. Forget ICANN execept as the Legacy space manager (the space we agreed to allocate them uin 1984 and they never changed since then except though the 2000 pathetic 6+1 TLD allocation and the 2003 3 TLD rumors).

2. the second proposition is atlarge/ws, to progressively switch from an ICANN centric focus to a real life @large governance Member network group, in just supporting its cristalization. A real life where ICANN related issues will be addressed together wih probably much more important ones. I long said that my only slogan for ICANN was "get real". You may note that it is now Esther's leit motiv. Takes time but simplest thing get through smart brains sometimes.

May I remind you that there is a survival process engaged by the largest eocnomico/military power of the planet to revise the DNS, IPsec and the Network Gateway Protocols (ie to rebuild the Internet) in a stable and secure way. This will most probably/realisticly compatible with Windows 2005 (Longhorn) ie totally incompatible with everything we use today. What some have called a necessary e-colonization logic (you cannot make the Internet globally secure without controlling it). What we all need to address in making the USG (ie the White House) understand that "global" does not mean US governed, but every Gov together. Not a NORAD command but an e-NATO.

The US global vision was not born in Stuart Lynn call. It was born in the 1780s. The US network concepts were not born in late 1960s. They were born in the Secession war, with a strong central Federal concept killing a lose and open confederal culture. So we will not do anything within ICANN. We must keep in touch, but the real thing is to make the White House understand. As we had to make them understand in 1940/1941.

Europe today carries the confederal, subsidiarity, equal right and respects values the Internet people want and need. USA are not against them, but they face a real danger because people who designed the Internet protocols were no fools in spite of what some USG people may say, but USG people who supported the Internet development with such protocols were stupid ignorant. The first thing I learned in 1977 when entering datanets was "to make money in this area you can use every technology but Arpanet one". Not because it is that bad, just because it is the first try and all the other ones improved over it. The only way we can make them understand is to make them relax in showing we also are serious at it, and touch where are true long term stability, security and innovation capacity.

It is not in the IETF which produced the protocols patch stack, but in the real world testing (dot-root) and in the @large real community.

There are not in IETF, a place which has not yet understood that a network is brainware first. Would you feel secure with your Compaq PC if Compaq was telling you that what matters is the hardware and they do not care about software? This is what IETF tells us: "nevermind brainware, never mind there are 600 millions of brains around using the same system as yourself, this has no impact". You want to know the true IETF problems: "is the Internet 7 or 8 bits?", "how to permit IETF to decide if anti spam solutions are tobe discussed before the spam on IETF lists kills the IETF".

Not in a place like ICANN which has not understood the way 600 millions user brains understand and want to use the DNs, and which want only to manage the way a few purses consider them.

May be I am not convincing. So I keep trying to get a result so the result convinces you. But frankly I think we would go faster and better if you gave us an hand (you would be good at it and you would most probably enjoy it :-)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de