[ianatransition] Composition of the ICG

JFC Morfin jefsey at jefsey.com
Tue Jul 29 17:15:19 UTC 2014

At 15:52 29/07/2014, John Curran wrote:
>On Jul 29, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Michel S. Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:
> > At 14:37 29/07/2014, Vint Cerf wrote:
> >> There is a reason for that. It coordinates the allocation of IP 
> addresses via the Regional Internet Registries.
> > Vint,
> > this is something which came along with the US Arpanet global 
> internetting paid by the USG. This is what many states, corporates 
> and people want to get rid of.
>jfc/mg -

OK. Got rid of the etherpad simulation I confused in subscribing to 
the list myself.

>Could you please clarify - in the above, "This" (that you assert 
>folks want to get rid of)
>refers to:

"This" is what legitimately came with Vint's first experimental phase 
of the ARPANET internetting project. This project has been unduly 
extended, as defacto US VGN monopoly over the catenet, through the 
"status-quo" strategy.

This has confused the notions of:
- internet: end to end TCP/IP protocol set.
- catenet: collection of federal, non-federal, national, regional, 
local, private, indvidual real and virtual packet networks which are 
connected together throughout the world).  This confusion has been 
technically clarified on August 22nd, 2012 and politically defeated 
in Dubai on December 14th, 2012 (over the WCIT vote).

On August 22nd, 2012, IAB has abdicated its role as the technical 
referent for the whole internet to work better: the new accepted 
referent are the global communities economies that proceeds from non 
necessarily formalized standards, that users can "comment", cannot 
not appeal, and are bound to use.

The difficulty is that architecturally we are entering the SDN time 
(Software Defined Nteworks) 
https://www.opennetworking.org/sdn-resources/sdn-definition. This is 
like switching from single-user DOS to multi-user Linux.

>1) the overall US oversight model of the IANA provided by the 
>present NTIA contract, or

The IANA is a functor. Its function is to disseminate referenced 
information: names, number, information, documentation, etc. This 
includes what come from the RFC IANA section. Such RFC sections can 
be considered as the IANA Protocol version 1.

What is under discussion right now are the remenants of the 1997 
reduction of the INTERNIC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterNIC) into:
1. the ICANN US VGN, i.e. the part of the software defined 
multi-network internet system designed on the DNS Class "IN" (ICANN/NTIA),
2. having retained control of the whole catenet IP addressing.

The ICANN DNS part is no problem. The DNS is actually multi-ledger 
(ICANN is only the Registrar Ledger of as single class over around 
40.000 global and billions of local ones. How to proceed is perfectly 
described by ICANN/ICP-3);

The real issue is the IP addressing.

>2) not the US oversight, but the actual community-based Internet 
>identifier coordination system itself (consisting of IETF, IANA, ICANN, RIRs)?

There is not such a thing. There was an ARPNET internetting 
authorized to support commercial traffic. Then there was a 
framentation of the INTERNIC by the NTIA. Now there is an NTIA 
disengagement. The USG ARPANET internetting experimentation is 
eventually over.

1. The US Executive branch has decided to leave it to the private 
sector now it is proven it is fully police readable. This transfers 
it under US legislation (i.e. from US protectorate to US colonny).

2. They will multilaterally negotiate some sovereign/military/police 
partial control at state level for what ICANN will show (on behalf 
the "Internet Community") as innapropriate to be left to the 
private/civil sector (this mitigation will permit the WCIT signature).

As a civil society member my only concern is: can the existing Doug 
Engelbart's NIC sock-puppets be positively used toward a better 
governance of the digital singularity we have entered (the mankind 
cannot scale the complexity it has reached without an technology 
facilitated use of its digitality). I was always suspicious about 
Doug's Plato society: he calls ABC what Plato called Bronze, Silver 
and Gold. http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/engelbarts-law.html. 
When he headed Tymshare Augment, I did Tymnet Extended Services. Two 
different perspectives of the human digitality growth. To be 
networked as in a vertical hierarchy or as in an horizontal mesh.


More information about the ianatransition mailing list