RE: The telephone network and the internet (RE: [ga] ALAC comments on proposed Bylaws modifications)

[richard.hill@itu.int]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Schneiders [mailto:marc@fuchsia.bijt.net]
> Sent: Thursday, 06 March 2003 19:44
> To: richard.hill@itu.int
> Cc: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: The telephone network and the internet (RE: [ga] 
> ALAC comments
> on proposed Bylaws modifications)
> 
> 
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, at 09:46 [=GMT+0100], richard.hill@itu.int wrote:
> 
>>The above
> brought up one question to which I have no answer. How would 
> the ITU be
> able to deal with a network that is designed in a totally 
> different way
> than the one it already knows so well for a hundred (?) 
> years, vid. the
> telephone? 

Actually today's telephone network is switched by computers, using protocols
(SS7) developed within ITU that have absolutely no relation to the
mechanical switching that was used 100 years ago, so the today's telephone
networks, and the issues that ITU handles, are quite different from those of
100 years ago.

ITU as an institution deals with issues in much the same was as IETF, or
ISO, or IEEE, or any other standards-making body.  It organizes forums for
discussion, in which experts meet to exchange views and to agree on
solutions.  The agreed solutions are published.  The forums can be
face-to-face meetings, electronic meetings, e-mail discussion lists, etc.

So the way that ITU would deal with any issues that its members would like
it to deal with is to invite members to express their views, and then
facilitate the formation of a consensus for how to proceed.

The issues that are being discussed in ITU today obviously are very
different from those that were being discussed 10 years ago, and even more
different from those that were discussed 100 years ago.

> 
> The variety of devices and the relative dumbness of the network they
> connect to are two sides of the one coin we call the internet. Is an
> organization like the ITU suitable to take over (some of) 
> ICANN's roles,
> since it has such a venerable tradition in coordinating a 
> very different
> sort of network, where the intelligence is in the network and 
> not in the
> machines, and open standards are _less_ important, or cannot 
> be allowed
> even for they will ruin the network?

As I've stated elsewhere, in my opinion discussions are only productive when
they involve  all concerned parties, and people with expertise in the
subject matter.  I would hope that any discussions in ITU would meet those
criteria.  In some cases, that would imply greater participation in ITU by
people who currently don't participate that much.

In my opinion, if you get the concerned parties and the experts together,
you can find solutions.


> 
> I would hope that if ICANN is ever replaced, completely or in 
> part, that
> it will be by a better organization. In my view that means _less_
> regulation, a more open DNS. (Minimal requierements for new 
> TLDs, and only
> of a technical nature. No business plans and 13 appendices.) 
> Would this be
> possible 'under' the ITU?

ITU only does what its members ask it to do.  The ITU staff (such as me)
don't write any Recommendations.  We just facilitate the process.  The
Recommendations are written by our membership, mostly by people from
industry (Sector Members).

If you will allow an analogy to telephony, no telephone operator sends its
business plans to ITU and we have no mandate to look at how they operate.
National regulators may have such mandates, that depends on national laws.

ITU does not have contracts with telephone operators (except of course for
the contracts we need to get telephone service for our premises).  What ITU
does (for example, my administration of the telephone country codes) is
specified in detail in a Recommendation (E.164.1 for the telephone codes).
I follow the instructions in the Recommendation.  That service is provided
at no cost.

ITU-T Recommendations are of two types.  Most are technical standards, such
as modems, xDSL, X.509 (used in PKI), etc.

Some tell the ITU staff (like me) what they are supposed to do to support
global interoperability.  Those services are provided free of charge.  No
contracts are required between the ITU and the users of the services.

Most people don't know about it, but there are actually non-national
telephone country codes.  These are assigned (by me, in accordance with
Recommendation E.164.1), on the basis of what I would call minimal technical
requirements.  No business plans are required for an assignment.

Best,
Richard
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html