[Npoc-discuss] Internet Infrastructure and Sea Level Rise: Food/Question for Thought

Thu Oct 31 19:20:40 UTC 2019

Thanks for the clarification.

Le jeu. 31 oct. 2019 à 14:29, Sam Lanfranco <sam at lanfranco.net> a écrit :

> Thank you Olevie for the following question. I think it is appropriate,
> and I suspect we will discover that the timing of the question is
> appropriate as well.
>
> Olivie's question is: Please, could Sam cited an exemple of an ICANN's SG
> or AC or C which are already behaving like that ?
>
> Here is a short answer and it requires some thought and reflection. First,
> look at the existing context of stakeholder groups within ICANN. IPC, the
> contracted and non-contracted constituencies, even GAC, represent the
> interests of those constituencies, and also represent those constituencies.
> They have organizational structures outside ICANN, structures to which they
> are accountable. It is through those external structures, structures that
> involve governance (e.g. GAC) and institutional structures (e.g. IPC) where
> they pursue their ICANN interests, and wider Internet ecosystem interests
> in a an organized manner. They do not do this from within their ICANN
> constituency structure. The do this from within the organized structure
> that sits outside and behind their ICANN constituency presence.
>
> In contrast, as you correctly note, NPOC is a complete creation of ICANN,
> its birth prompted, at the start, by the issue of protection of
> not-for-profit integrity in the DNS, an issue raised by Red Cross and Red
> Crescent, (RC/RC) and one where RC/RC almost immediately pushed NPOC to the
> sidelines and engaged with ICANN at levels above NPOC and NCSG.
>
> NPOC has no existence external to ICANN, unlike other
> stakeholder/constituency groups. Also, because of that NPOC does not, and
> cannot, speak on behalf of the ngo/not-for-profit community. Instead, it
> speak to the concerns of the ngo/not-for-profit community. That is as it
> should be, since NPOC is not formally accountable to any particular
> ngo/not-for-profit constituency. We come from that constituency and we work
> as best we can and in good faith trying to represent and protect the
> interests of that constituency, interests that include the public good.
>
> It is even the case, in some instances, that NPOC members who serve as
> representatives of ngos and non-profits are not formally held accountable
> to the organizations they represent. They do not regularly report back, or
> ask for direction. This is not a criticism. In many cases the
> ngo/non-profit's primary mission is not the security and stability of the
> DNS and it simply expects the NPOC representative to do good work with
> regard to the DNS in the interests of the public interest and the interests
> of the wider ngo/non-profit community.
>
> So what am I asking here? I am asking if the time is ripe for NPOC to
> consider expanding beyond ICANN's remit, to leave the nest and consider
> forming an "NPOC org" that is external to ICANN, an org that may -
> depending on structure and dynamics - play a strong role in NPOC's
> membership (an issue that would require serious thought), and (more
> important) be an organized stakeholder and constituency forum, voice and
> force within other Internet ecosystem forums where policy and practices
> are reviewed and developed.
>
> I know that this is a big "ask". But, given the magnitude of the
> challenges coming with regard to the technical and behavioral integrity of
> the Internet ecosystem, NPOC may want to take the lead here, or it may
> simply wish to let others take the lead and remain primarily a voice for
> the DNS concerns of the ngo/non-profit community within ICANN's mandate.
>
> As I say "food for thought".
>
> Sam Lanfranco
>
> On 10/31/2019 4:17 AM, Olivier Kouami wrote:
>
> Greetings everyone from Lomé Togo.
> +1 @all, first.
> I'm following up this discussion and found it really interesting.
> It's true that ICANN's interest in this IG ecosystem is at the logical
> layer with a sound impact on socio-economical layer. With the notice that
> most of the infrastructure layer, wich is the basical layer of the IG
> ecosystem, belong to multinationales privates companies (90% of the all
> backbone).
> Finally, it's a struggle between the consumers and producers.
> Anyway, my concern is the fact the NPOC is an invention of  the ICANN org,
> like so, is it really possible to add another tasks, which are not among
> the goals of the ICANN, to NPOC's charter ?
> Please, could Sam cited an exemple of an ICANN's SG or AC or C which are
> already behaving like that ?
> It's my question.
>
> Thank you, in adavance, for your clarifications.
>
> Warm regards.
> Olévié
>
>
> Le mer. 30 oct. 2019 à 14:46, Poncelet Ileleji <pileleji at ymca.gm> a
> écrit :
>
>> Spot on Sam,
>>
>> Way to go 👍🏿
>>
>> Poncelet
>>
>> On Wednesday, 30 October 2019, Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Poncelet,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comments. I agree that the looming crisis around
>>> Internet Infrastructure and Sea Level Rise is not central to ICANN's
>>> mandate, and do not see it as occupying a central position on the ICANN
>>> agenda. But, as multiple stakeholder constituencies we (including ICANN and
>>> ICANN org) have to press for greater attention elsewhere, where stakeholder
>>> awareness and engagement are raised with regard to such issues.
>>>
>>> The IGF is one of those venues and I support NPOC developing a strategy
>>> (say as NPOC org, with an independent budget and above and beyond its ICANN
>>> constituency existence) to take on such tasks.
>>>
>>> I remind us that this is more or less how the other ICANN constituencies
>>> operate outside ICANN, targeting their efforts at areas that impact their
>>> core interests. Our interests are two fold, the impact of the Internet
>>> ecosystem on the NGO, not-for-profit, community constituency, and on "the
>>> public good". Within NPOC we focus on the DNS, but our concerns are wider.
>>> This is a good opportunity to mature NPOC as a concerned constituency
>>> within the challenges facing the wider Internet ecosystem.
>>>
>>> <*Food for though*>
>>>
>>> Sam L.
>>>
>>> ---- Original Message ----
>>> *From*: Poncelet Ileleji <pileleji at ymca.gm>
>>> *To*: "Sam Lanfranco" <sam at lanfranco.net>
>>> *Cc*: "NPOC Discuss" <npoc-discuss at icann.org>
>>> *Sent*: Wed, Oct 30, 2019, 5:32 AM
>>> *Subject*: Re: [Npoc-discuss] Internet Infrastructure and Sea Level
>>> Rise: Food/Question for Thought
>>>
>>> Hello Sam,
>>>
>>> I think it’s more of an issue within the overall internet governance
>>> domain so within Berlin discuss we can do it. As under the realm of ICANN
>>> we won’t get far with the discuss as it centers on infrastructure not DNS.
>>>
>>> Our chair @Joan can see how we can promote it within the global IGF as
>>> per NPOC and within our regional gatherings.
>>>
>>> Just my little thoughts
>>>
>>> Poncelet
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, 30 October 2019, Sam Lanfranco <sam at lanfranco.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> NPOC colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> I am raising this within the NPOC discussion group because I want to
>>>> get a sense of whether this is an issue that should be somewhere on the
>>>> ICANN agenda. At a minimum ICANN and its communities are constituent
>>>> stakeholders in this issue.Most analysis sees serious problems within 15
>>>> years.
>>>>
>>>> Much of the Internet’s physical infrastructure is situated in locations
>>>> close to coastal shorelines, connected to the half-million miles of
>>>> undersea cables. New estimates of sea level rise driven by climate change
>>>> have tripled earlier estimates of global vulnerability to sea-level rise
>>>> and coastal flooding.
>>>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12808-z
>>>> <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12808-z>
>>>>
>>>> The impact of this on human habitation, and human migration, will be
>>>> catastrophic. Estimates are that by mid-century up to 340 million people
>>>> will live on land below projected annual flood levels. Current estimates
>>>> put one billion people now occupying land less than 10 meters above current
>>>> high tide lines, including 250 million living below 1 meter above current
>>>> high tide lines. These populations will become a migration tsunami. But
>>>> that is not the issue I want to raise here.
>>>>
>>>> *The impact of sea level rise on the infrastructure of the Internet
>>>> ecosystem will be equally catastrophic and is approaching fast.*
>>>> Rather than belaboring the point that some action is necessary here, I will
>>>> just share a short bibliography on the subject. *Do we need a
>>>> discussion?*
>>>>
>>>> Sam Lanfranco
>>>>
>>>> The Internet May Be Underwater in 15 Years:  *https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2018/07/news-internet-underwater-sea-level-rise/
>>>> <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2018/07/news-internet-underwater-sea-level-rise/>*
>>>>
>>>> Buried Internet infrastructure at risk as sea levels rise:
>>>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180716141627.htm
>>>>
>>>> Rising Seas Could Cause Problems for Internet Infrastructure
>>>> https://biodiversityfunders.org/rising-seas-could-cause-problems-for-internet-infrastructure/
>>>>
>>>> Sea Level Rise to Jeopardize U.S. Internet Infrastructure In 15 Years
>>>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/2018/08/11/sea-level-rise-to-jeopardise-u-s-internet-infrastructure-in-15-years-study-says/#1fdac65a7cb0
>>>>
>>>> Internet infrastructure will be inundated as sea levels rise:
>>>> *https://www.networkworld.com/article/3290250/internet-infrastructure-will-be-inundated-as-sea-levels-rise-says-report.html
>>>> <https://www.networkworld.com/article/3290250/internet-infrastructure-will-be-inundated-as-sea-levels-rise-says-report.html>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> Key Internet Connections and Locations are at Risk from Rising Seas:
>>>> https://www.americanscientist.org/article/key-internet-connections-and-locations-are-at-risk-from-rising-seas
>>>>
>>>> The internet is at risk from rising sea levels | World Economic Forum:
>>>> https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/07/rising-sea-levels-are-coming-for-the-internet
>>>>
>>>> Rising sea levels are going to mess with the internet, sooner than you
>>>> think:  https://www.popsci.com/sea-level-rise-internet-infrastructure/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
>>> Coordinator
>>> The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
>>> MDI Road Kanifing South
>>> P. O. Box 421 Banjul
>>> The Gambia, West Africa
>>> Tel: (220) 4370240
>>> Fax:(220) 4390793
>>> Cell:(220) 9912508
>>> Skype: pons_utd
>>>
>>>
>>> *www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm> http://jokkolabs.net/en/
>>> <http://jokkolabs.net/en/> *
>>>
>>> *https://www.netfreedompioneers.org/
>>> <https://www.netfreedompioneers.org/>   *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *www.waigf.org <http://www.waigf.org> www,insistglobal.com
>>> <http://www.itag.gm> www.npoc.org <http://www.npoc.org> *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
>> Coordinator
>> The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
>> MDI Road Kanifing South
>> P. O. Box 421 Banjul
>> The Gambia, West Africa
>> Tel: (220) 4370240
>> Fax:(220) 4390793
>> Cell:(220) 9912508
>> Skype: pons_utd
>>
>>
>> *www.ymca.gm <http://www.ymca.gm> http://jokkolabs.net/en/
>> <http://jokkolabs.net/en/> *
>>
>> *https://www.netfreedompioneers.org/
>> <https://www.netfreedompioneers.org/>   *
>>
>>
>>
>> *www.waigf.org <http://www.waigf.org> www,insistglobal.com
>> <http://www.itag.gm> www.npoc.org <http://www.npoc.org> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Npoc-discuss mailing list
>> Npoc-discuss at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/npoc-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
>> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
>> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
>> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You
>> can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
>> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------
> "It is a disgrace to be rich and honored in an
>  unjust state" -Confucius
>  邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也
> ------------------------------------------------
> Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus), Econ, York U., CANADA
> email: sam at lanfranco.net   Skype: slanfranco
> blog:  https://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
> Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/npoc-discuss/attachments/20191031/ce5eaee1/attachment.html>