May I ask what part of the Internet under control of the Evil Empire is not
forwarding/routing packets and what part of the DNS is not resolving
queries ?

-J


On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:33 PM, JFC Morfin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> At 16:22 17/10/2013, John Curran wrote:
>
>> I have no knowledge of what the agenda for the Rio meeting will be, but
>>  note that these are two distinct items in the Montevideo Statement -
>>
>
> Dear John,
> there are always two faces to a coin. I am quite glad to hear an USSH
> participative opinon, our eventual decision being to join forces or not.
>
>  (1)  - They identified the need for ongoing effort to address Internet
>> Governance challenges, and agreed to catalyze community-wide efforts
>> towards the evolution of global multistakeholder Internet cooperation.
>>     This would appear to be similar to "forms and ways to achieve
>> pluriparticipative international Internet governance"
>>
>
> If I had to define myself as an IUser, I would say that I am
> multistakeholderist and anti-pluriparticipativist, as far as I understand
> those terms. Also, I understand the concepts of the WSIS and accept that
> one may lobby to refine a favorably brain washed understanding (in keeping
> in mind the non-English binding versions) but I have not the singlest idea
> of what "the community" may be (except the USSH Inc.: the US StakeHolders
> Incorporated in Montevideo?).
>
> A common polynym vocabulary would be of the essence for our global world
> (or is it the total world? what is the adjective for "whole" as in "the
> whole is larger than the sum of its parts"?)
> This should be the first task for an international meeting.
>
>  (2) They called for accelerating the globalization of ICANN and IANA
>> functions, towards an environment in which all stakeholders, including all
>> governments, participate on an equal footing.
>>     This would appear to be similar to moving "ICANN away from unilateral
>> oversight", as noted by Brenden.
>>
>
> Correct:
>
> - What USSH wants for three decades (our 1984 opposing agreement, cf. RFC
> 921) is the IANA under multistakeholder cooperation on an equal footing for
> every government and ... US coordinated. You know centers in LA and Turkey
> and Singapore. Everyone can participate ("Public comment periods are
> provided before final standards approval and adoption" ... by USSH without
> appeal procedure): pluriparticipatism!=**multistakeholderism !!!
>
> - ITU wants every Telcos too within the equal footing. Never mind, in case
> we really get a conflict, the real emergency back-up root is at Public DNS
> (8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4). I am ready to the end of the years old "IANA war":
> http://googliana.org.
>
> - What we want is the IANA to be under concerted multistakeholdership on
> an equal footing for everyone, including you and me.
>
>  I imagine that both topics will enjoy significant discussion at the
>> meeting.
>>
>
> Be sure discussions will start before the meeting. Actually, they have
> started (http://bramsummit.org).
> jfc
>