[NA-Discuss] Google Fiber

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

> And this relates to NARALO how?

Joly,

The provisioning of IPv4 and IPv6 addresses in association with
bandwidth in excess of 56kB in the national markets within the "NARALO
region" is constrained by national law.  In rural areas the constraint
is implemented through a lack of universal access public policy, in
urban agglomerations the constraint is implemented through monopoly
grants of utility infrastructure for wireline placement, and
restrictions on access to local exchange carrier infrastructure.

The project Glenn cited, which is the subject of interest of Susan
Crawford and others working on the public policy of network access,
and similar projects undertaken by public agencies in the NARALO
region, provision IPv4 and IPv6 addresses in association with
bandwidth in excess of 56kB, and do so independently of the economic
organization (local monopoly) of the local franchise holders and
advantages granted incumbent local exchange carriers.

So if, and only if, the ICANN Board may be benefited by advice that
touches on IPv4 and/or IPv6 address allocation with conditions
associated with (a) prefix announcement to the default free zone and
(b) bandwidth in excess of 56kB in the North American region, then
some relationship between the bylaws role of "At Large" and its
geographical subdivision and experiments in the technologies of
addresses-and-conditions and initiatives in their availabilities in
North America nominally exists.

I hope this answers your initial question. If so, then I hope that you
may see that address allocation with announcement and link
characteristic conditions is fundamental to equity of access policy.

Eric