Re: Paul Vixie on the wgig report

["Fergie (Paul Ferguson)" <fergdawg () netzero net>]

I would highly recommend reading Paul's comments, as he
brings up some very key issues.

He also mentioend one of my pet peeves, which is the WGIG's
posture on peering arrangements:

Vixie says:

[snip]

"WGIG seems to be concerned about the general lack of
interconnection and the anticompetitive cost of entry
for new ISPs. One can see the ITU influence here (ITU
more or less regulates international telephone service
today), but when I think of the way national sovereignty
has been abused to turn telecommunications access fees
into [ major GDP sources ], I already don't think I'm
going to like the endgame if "regulation" occurs in the
area of international Internet peering and interconnection."

[snip]

Seeing as how the Internet isn't a science project anymore,
it's a little difficult to reconcile taking something which
are now _business_ decisions for many organizations and
turing the entire peering issue into regulatory hell.

$.02,

- ferg




-- Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists () gmail com> wrote:

http://fm.vix.com/internet/governance/wgig-report-july05.html

I like the ending -

> I think a lot of hard work went into this report, and considering the
> number and strength and diversity of views expressed during the WGIG
> process, the result has to be called herculean. I'm a bit concerned that
> it amounts to a generally agreed upon statement that "somebody ought to
> put a bell on that cat". Turning hegemony into democracy by peaceful means
> has been done only a few times in human history, and the outlook for this
> time isn't good.
>
> Paul Vixie

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists () gmail com)

--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 fergdawg () netzero net or fergdawg () sbcglobal net
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/