De-funding the ITU

Bill Woodcock woody at
Sun Jan 13 06:49:59 UTC 2013

On Jan 12, 2013, at 9:04 PM, "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred at> wrote:
> ITU-D and ITU-R do a lot of good work.

Care to try to cite an example?  R we can't pull out of because NRO needs its slots.  I'm not sure that constitutes "good work."  It's minor ledger-keeping, and that's why it's excluded from the petition.

> Shutting down the ITU would be in effect discarding the baby with the bathwater.

You're being awfully naive, Fred.  It's a 147-year-old, $180M/year baby with a serious corruption problem, that wants to shut the Internet down so that it can go back to doing things the way it was before we all showed up.  I expect you think you're being sophisticated and taking a nuanced view or some such, but you aren't.  Note that the _entire_ congress disagrees with you.  Not a single vote in favor of the ITU in S. Con. Res. 50 or H. Con. Res. 127.  And if you think that any of the Internet agrees with you, you should take a look at Reddit sometime.


More information about the NANOG mailing list