De-funding the ITU

Eric Brunner-Williams brunner at
Tue Jan 15 00:37:49 UTC 2013

On 1/14/13 11:23 AM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> ... The ITU ...

How shall states determine what harms are lawfully attempted, and what
harms are not lawfully attempted? Shall there be a treaty concerning
"cyber" strife between states, or shall "cyber" strife between states
be without treaty based limits?

If one answers that without is less attractive than with, what is the
means by which states arrive at treaties, without the ITU, or treaty
bodies similar to the ITU, whether regional, or global, in membership
and form?

Shall all predatory or intentionally injurious uses of
trans-jurisdictionally routed communications be {managed, reduced,
mitigated, ...} by private parties, which are, inter alia, for the
most part, for-profit corporations, with no, or negative, fiduciary
duty to "police" the net?

Flawed as the current institution is, and has been, for the duration
of the the connectionist vs connectionless struggle, proposing to
remove the state member organization without a proposal for an
alternative public purposed organization, not all of which are state
actors, means not have very useful starting points for the big
questions -- shall there be any limit on state actions? shall there be
any limit on non-state actions?


More information about the NANOG mailing list