[NA-Discuss] A contribution to a NARALO comment on the ICANN Draft 2011-2014 Strategic Plan

Eric Brunner-Williams ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Mon Jan 10 15:46:39 UTC 2011

On 1/10/11 10:09 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> Hi, Eric,
> Your comments are being added to the general ALAC comments on the
> Strategic Plan, but we could use a little help with how they get in.
> The level of detail in your comments is laudable, but can probably
> serve more as an appendix than as part of the body of the main comment.

> If you're arguing that there is a lack of clarity regarding strategic
> objectives, let's say specifically what needs to be changed and how.
> You've offered plenty of background, but no actual conclusion in the
> form of actual change proposals for the Plan.

My comments are to a specific text. My first task is to identify what 
is simply non-strategic. If ICANN's final StratPlan is less cluttered 
by non-strategic goals and their supporting text, a reasonable 
accountability and transparency goal will have been met.

> At the beginning of the
> comment you suggest that the Afterward contains specific recommended
> changes but I'm too dense to see them. Are issues of "increased
> Internet access" even within ICANN's scope?

The "next billion users" meme is current in ICANN policy discussion.

While the "market penetration" of endpoint identifiers in the North 
American Region, like the Western portion of the European Region, is 
significantly higher than elsewhere, at saturation levels for 
commercial providers, it is unacceptable that the material condition 
of users, and potential users, with limited, or no access to endpoint 
identifiers, in North America, remains ignored.

I'm not comfortable with ICANN serving primarily the for-profit 
commercial parties and their commercially reasonable goals. These have 
the direct consequence of ignoring the at-and-under 56kb access 
technology (rural and low income urban users), and users of public 
places of accommodation (schools and libraries).

Harvesting the surplus value of the "next billion users" in Asia on 
commercially reasonable terms will lead to ignoring specific forms of 
access technology, and specific modes of accommodation to persons 
lacking residential or place of employment access.

I mention this only to convey my sense of the logical consequences of 
responsibility for coordination of endpoint identifiers, responding to 
your question, not to convince you of any particular point of view.

> Your assistance in percolating your comments into concrete change in
> the Strategic Plan would be helpful, and most importantly it prevents
> the forcing of others to pare down your words in a manner you might
> not find agreeable.

Thank you for your constructive comment. I will send a follow-up note 


More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list