Re: [ifwp] Re: announcement from the Berkman Center

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Jim and all,

  Good post in response to Dave Crockers rather disillusioned view of the IANA
and the internet as it is today.  Well Done here Jim!  >;)

Jim Dixon wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> > IANA has been doing it's job for more than 15 years.  Most of the folks who
> > are strongly active (and vocal) participants in the IFWP process have
> > little knowledge of, or concern for, Internet operations.
>
> Yes, IANA has been doing its job for more than 15 years.  For most of
> those 15 years that job has been almost entirely technical.  Insofar
> as the job has been technical, IANA has been quite successful.
>
> However, for the last two or three years, IANA has been struggling less
> and less successfully with the consequences of the growth of the Internet.
> The Internet is no longer a tool of academics and researchers.  It is now
> largely and increasingly commercial.  As the Internet emerges, as it moves
> towards the centre of everyday life, it is increasingly in collision with
> with non-technical values, with existing social, legal, political, and
> commercial structures.  IANA is not managing this collision well.
>
> >                                                           Some do, of
> > course.  Most do not.  To most participants, this is a political and/or
> > legal process, having to do with ideals or with "winning".  It has
> > essentially nothing to do with graceful and stable evolution of network
> > administration.
>
> Certainly this is true of some participants.  It may be true of most.
> But what these participants are bringing with them is an understanding of
> the larger world, an understanding that most of those with technical
> expertise, including those running the IANA, lack.  We need those people.
> Bringing outside expertise into the management of the Internet is not
> something that can be done tomorrow, next year, sometime in the next
> century.  It has to happen now.
>
> If IANA is to evolve gracefully, if the co-ordination of the
> management of core Internet functions is to remain stable, then somehow
> political, legal, and commercial expertise has to be integrated into
> the management of IANA.
>
> True, the people having that expertise will in generally not care much
> about network operations.  But if my experience is anything to go by,
> they will be extremely concerned with the long-term stability of the
> Internet.  It will be up to those with technical expertise to educate
> them on the operational consequences of their proposals.
>
> This is actually nothing new to the Internet community.  The whole IETF
> process revolves around subjecting proposals to wider scrutiny.  It is
> an iterative and collegial process, a process in which highly qualified
> technical experts can be challenged by anyone walking in the door, one
> in which anyone who can make a good case will be heard.
>
> > By agreeing to participate, then, IANA essentially would be faced with
> > having an equal voice/vote with those who are quite literally ignorant
> > about the core subject matter, except possibly as an academic topic.
>
> The question is what the core subject matter is.
>
> The management of any enterprise looks in and looks out, like Janus.  It
> looks in at the core activities of the enterprise.  If it doesn't understand
> those, it fails.
>
> Yes, it is utterly important that those designing the new corporation create
> something that is capable of taking on the responsibilities that IANA now
> has and carrying out those responsibilities at least as well as IANA does
> today.
>
> But it is EQUALLY important that the new corporation be capable of managing
> the interaction of the Internet with society at large, in all of its many
> aspects.  That is, that management has to comprehend the social, political,
> legal, and commercial ramifications of its decisions.
>
> It should be clear to everyone after the endless and fruitless debates of
> the last two years that while IANA, possibly with some restructuring, is
> capable of handling the technical side, it has not done well in handling
> the Internet's relations with the larger world.  IANA needs fresh blood,
> fresh insight.  This is exactly what the White Paper called for and exactly
> what the IFWP is intended to bring into the process.
>
> > Imagine starting a commercial company that way, and then think hard whether
> > you would invest.
>
> Yes indeed.  When people are making investments, they don't just look at
> technical skills.  They look for a well-balanced management team.  Not just
> super-competent technologists, but financial, marketing, sales, and
> management skills.
>
> Would I invest in IANA as it is?
>
> No.
>
> Would I invest in IANA with its technical skills and the moral authority
> that it commands supplemented by a full range of skills in the larger
> world?
>
> Yes, if this new expertise were actually integrated into the new entity's
> management as full partners.
>
> > Then think about the risk of this approach for the administrative heart to
> > the operational Internet.
>
> The risk to the operational Internet comes from a fragile IANA that is
> not capable of managing the collision between the Internet and the outside
> world.
>
> In actual fact, the risk is not all that great, because the operators of
> the Internet will simply take alternative paths.  And the role that IANA
> has had at the heart of the Internet will fragment and gradually disappear.
>
> We need a strong IANA, a global focal point for the co-ordination of
> Internet activities.  We don't need an Imperial IANA, laying down a new
> world order.  However, we cannot continue to rely upon an
> IANA-of-the-techies.  What we need is both technical competence and
> worldly wisdom in equal balance.
>
> > In that context, it not only is reasonable for IANA to consider refusing to
> > participate, but there is a line of argument which says that it is
> > essential to refuse.
>
> IANA should bring its technical competence and moral authority to the
> meetings in Cambridge.  It has nothing to lose, and a great deal to gain,
> in doing so.
>
> --
> Jim Dixon                                                 Managing Director
> VBCnet GB Ltd                http://www.vbc.net        tel +44 117 929 1316
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Member of Council                               Telecommunications Director
> Internet Services Providers Association                       EuroISPA EEIG
> http://www.ispa.org.uk                              http://www.euroispa.org
> tel +44 171 976 0679                                    tel +32 2 503 22 65
>
> __________________________________________________
> To view the archive of this list, go to:
> http://lists.interactivehq.org/scripts/lyris.pl?enter=ifwp
>
> To receive the digest version instead, send a
> blank email to ifwp-digest@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
> subscribe-IFWP@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
> unsubscribe-ifwp@lists.interactivehq.org
>
> Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email andy@interactivehq.org.
> ___END____________________________________________

 Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com