 |
Board of Trustees
2001 Board Election
"Ask the Candidates"
Question 7:
The Internet is evolving very fast and ISOC needs to be prepared to
face new challenges but with the firm and strong conviction to faithfully
support our original purpose - key technical activities including support
of the Internet standards process.
ISOC focuses on three main areas: standards, education, and policy issues
that affect the Internet community. We are a very international organization
and understandably, member interests are quite diverse.
As a Trustee, how would you work to bring these interests together while
recognizing the importance of maintaining our technical base as our primary
contribution to the Internet community and the primary reason for our
existence.
Responses (in alphabetical order):
Fred Baker
I have been a continuous member of the Internet Society since 1992.
In that time, the Internet Society has made statements to the membership
and to other bodies, but apart from discussions within chapters or has
happened in conferences like INET, has not (in my opinion) effectively
solicited input from random members or held discussions among the members.
For example, in developing public policy positions, I have never seen
a note to the membership asking them what they thought that policy position
should be, whether by asking for email responses or by asking for a web
form to be filled out. This is as compared to the IETF, which has made
statements about public policy as it relates to the Internet infrastructure,
and in doing so has solicited and listened to extensive debate both on
mailing lists and in person. No doubt these discussions have been held
within chapters and the chapter council, and certainly among the Board
and other key people, but they have not included people like myself who
are not affiliated with a chapter.
I believe that discussion on issues are as important to policy and education
as they are to the standards process, and are the only real way to build
consensus. Facilitating such discussions is, at least in my mind, a key
component. The question of language looms there. I believe that it is
a little too easy to say "have the discussion in English", although
I believe that this is the most practical place to start. There will have
to be development in that area.
The IETF is ISOC's engineering arm. I am happy to leave the development
of standards in the IETF, and use ISOC as a funding funnel and a protective
body, as it has been since 1992. However, the engineering part of standardization
is a narrow slice; the impacts of those standards on society, and the
societal needs that technical standards might help or hinder, is quite
outside the domain of the IETF. For this reason, the IETF has held panel
discussions and given presentations at INET for many years, both to listen
and to inform. I believe that this should continue.
Education on Internet technology has been a focus for the Developing Countries
Workshop and other efforts. This has largely been funded and staffed by
companies that are members of ISOC, and has been effective. However, other
education venues are developing, including commercial schools and public
education. So in recent years this program as started to morph. I cannot
say that I know the best answer to this part of the question, but I believe
that we will recognize it by its attributes. ISOC's role in education
needs to continue to support programs which make people of various origins,
languages, and genders effective in using the Internet, and dealing with
its impact on their societies. We want the outcome to be that people who
would not otherwise have used the Internet use it, and even people that
do would understand and use it more effectively. Determining ISOC's programs
in this area is an important discussion to be had this year.
So first, I see a need for more effective, open, and frank discussion
on the subjects that concern the membership, these among them. It may
be that part of this comes out of the ISTF, but I would not assume that
all of it will. Second, I see a need for continuing programs targeted
at addressing needs that are identified.
The final part of this is, I believe, a deliverable to the corporate and
individual members. Companies and people donate their time and money to
accomplish goals that are fairly lofty, and often ave difficulty calibrating
the outcome. With the Developing Countries Workshop, it was fair to say
that some number of people experienced a certain type of training. But
for more general conferences and activities, about the only thing we can
definitively say is that a grand time was had by those who attended. I
would like to see the ISOC's activities focused a little more toward specific
goals, so that efforts towards the goals can be measured for effectiveness
and valid statements made to the membership about the outcome of their
efforts.
Alan Greenberg
It is correct that there are several areas of importance that the Internet
Society should focus on. It is the responsibility of the Board and individual
Trustees to balance these potentially competing needs. This will no doubt
get harder as time passes, not easier.
That being said, Trustees may oversee some of these activities, but their
successful execution relies on a judicious combination of paid staff and
dedicated volunteers. In the area of standards, the Internet Society’s
strength is not that it has had respected standard’s folks on the
Board (which it certainly has), but that it understands, supports and
when applicable interacts with the standards activities. The same can
be said for ISOC’s unquestionable success in training.
I do not think there will be much argument that ISOC needs to continue
to aggressively support the standards process, but equally, there should
be little argument that we need to address new areas, and that it will
take much work to reach consensus on exactly what positions to support.
To make this work, there are several steps, and to a large part, these
have already been addressed in previous questions.
1. ISOC management including the Board as a whole must put ISOC is a stable
and then thriving financial position. Without this, the rest of the question
is meaningless. With it, the Board can judiciously invest in both new
standards activities and other emerging areas.
2. The overall election process (and this is a multi-year issue due to
the Trustee term cycles) and the Board size should ensure a reasonable
balance of skills and interests on the Board, these Board members having
the time, energy and interest to effectively champion the various interest
areas.
3. Let it happen.
Latif Ladid
The 21st Century new Internet tidal wave has just started and we have
to get ready for it!
Internet ubiquity and adoption of IP by industry and governments around
the world is testimony of the success of the people that have being toiling
in the past 3 decades to make it happen!
Now, we need to propel this success beyond, win new friends and new challenges
of the next generation world ( in which I would like to humbly contribute
to with a couple objectives):
- Take leadership in further developing standards for next generation
applications (v6, 3G, Home networks, peer-2-peer, end-2-end, ..) with
new standard bodies ( 3GPP, 3GPP2, ..)enabling rejuvenation of the Internet
and get back its transparency, robustness and scalability.
If technology is our strength, then we need to prove it here!
- Education is key! any dime spent on education is the seed of Internet
for Everyone! A larger scale Next Generation Internet Academy project
model can be designed and proposed for outside funding !
- Any weakness in the Internet is free lunch for policy makers! Strategic
awareness work and team spirit with governments and NGOs is key to lift
off barriers of dialogue and consensus. an example can be see at www.ipv6-taskforce.org
- Last but not least: Open chapter-driven dialogue.
Cheers!
Latif
Veni Markovski
I think there was already a similar question in one of the ISOC forums..
Anyway, here's what I think: as a Trustee my primary task will be to make
ISOC stronger.
I believe my experience from Bulgaria and around Europe is what would
bring the fresh ideas to ISOC Board.
IETF will be the primary task for any Trustee and in fact for any Internaut.
However, we should never forget that promoting the Internet usage, bringing
INternet to everyone is only possible if ALL people are to be certain
they need it.
The new way of thinking I would like to implement in ISOC is the one of
frank, open-hearted, without prejudicies or internal fights. I want to
have ISOC as the strongest Internet organization in the world. I want
ISOC to be the leader _indeed_ of the Internet revolution. I want to have
other countries following our Bulgarian model of working in cooperation
with the government, the President, and the Parliament. I want to have
ISOC not wondering which one of the three main areas to develop, but to
work on opening new areas of interest for its members.
After all, I don't think I want too much, huh? Can we do it now, in the
first year of the new century, or we'll remain the same - without any
changes, without any vision of the future? The choice is in our hands,
and I know - elected or not - I will try to do my best to help ISOC in
bringin Internet to everyone, everywhere in the world (not only this planet,
Vint:-)
yours,
veni
Kees Neggers
"The Internet is evolving very fast and ISOC needs to be prepared
to face new challenges but with the firm and strong conviction to faithfully
support our original purpose - key technical activities including support
of the Internet standards process."
I whole-heartedly support the above statement. The standards process is
a unique resource and is the key to the success of the Internet. I consider
protecting this process and securing ISOC support for it as my first responsibility
as a Trustee. Anybody who does not support the above statement should
not be a member of ISOC.
Nevertheless, based on this foundation, individuals and organizations
that constitute ISOC can and should continue to do more for the Internet.
The know-how and energy bundled in the ISOC constituency can make a real
difference in the way and speed in which the benefits of the Internet
become available for the world at large. ISOC has already a track record
in the Education and Policy areas. But we should realize that in these
areas many other players are active too and ISOC's role here is less unique.
In these areas ISOC should focus its contribution around its technical
strength and as such complement the contributions from other organizations
with different backgrounds.
O.O. Oruye
The Internet is evolving very fast because there is an adequate technical
base to enhance available facilities. Without the observance of and maintenance
of standards and policies the superhighway would have been impossible
to control. Then, in order to face new challenges one must have adequate
knowledge to identify and tackle them. These must be some of the reasons
why ISOC decided to focus on standards, education and policy issues that
affect the Internet community.
Though member interests are quite diverse, the interests are stimulated
by the availability of Internet. This is why the primary effort must be
sound technical base to provide avenues for the satisfaction of the numerous
interests of our members. The Internet itself is a product of research,
so further research needs to be encouraged.
Every effort has to be made to eliminate communication gaps. If genuine
effort is made to carry everyone along, members shall be more open and
accommodating to the diverse interests of others. Chapters of ISOC may
be encouraged to co-operate amongst themselves in the area of exchange
or joint programmes. As chapters are of different strengths and levels
of technical know-how, such programmes may help to bridge unfavourable
gaps.
Finally, the trustee must work in concert, as a team, not only with his
colleagues but with the ISOC membership. He should be able to identify
ISOC focus as the evolution of the Internet forges ahead.
Warmest regards.
Odie.
Jonathan Robin
Without the impartial Standards base provided by and through the IETF
ISOC would indeed lose its raison d'être. However times are changing,
and there is acute awareness in public sector circles that it is the internet
interfaces just as much as national legislations which impact daily life.
The independance of the IETF will not last forever without strong Civil
Society support.
Given recent BoT reluctance to reach out to Civil Society, or to encourage
appropriate NGO membership of ISOC, the Internet Society finds itself
at a critical turning point in its existence because of the need to reinforce
liaison between those who represent the Standards commitment, and those
aware that in some areas of the world, Governments are positionning themselves
to accelerate their advance through the learning curve so as to protect
what they perceive as their own legitimate vital interests.
Given the explicit priority status mandated by both the Council of Europe
and the Japanese and Korean Governments to IPv6, it is in my opinion time
to bridge the gaps between ISOC's Standards and Societal representatives
so as both can gain better understanding of their respective goals and
preoccupations.
Support of "key technical activities including support of the Internet
standards process" can no longer be taken to mean mutual ignorance.
For example, a number of countries, including France, are launching Internet
training universities, with a view to gaining "a handle" on
future input and influencing standards consensus. Some might argue that
this is preferable to north american private sector representatives having
privileged historical access to Standards decision making bodies - an
opinion which though legitimate appears premature given the long term
conflictual motivations that we might witness. This is not a case of better
the devil we know than that we don't know, but the open system has until
now worked extremely well.
Given the convergence between standards based open protocols and public
sector awareness of how to use certain evolving technologies - notably
in the area of biometrics - the Standards stakeholders may find themselves
outmanoeuvred on their own territory in 5 years time once IPv6 is "on
everything". This reinforces the need for a societal balance and
input within the Internet Society and its Board of Trustees, and possibly
encouragement to members of the IETF both to join ISOC and to participate
in increasing awareness on a Chapter level.
The role of the Vice President Public Policy thus needs reinforcing, with,
as and when possible, a full time paid staff. Much interfacing and networking
remains to be done, and the bottom up information flow from the Chapters
can be very useful in offering advance notice of public sector actions
throughout the globe. In piloting the UNESCO recognition of ISOC and,
more recently, the OECD recognition of ISOC's role in the Information
Society and the two speaking invitations for ISOC offered for the May
Ministerial Global Forum of the OECD, I have attempted to increase awareness
of the need for societal outreaching within ISOC itself, as much as the
need to network into international bodies. This seems to have been seen
by some Standards members of ISOC with misgivings - as if the IETF can
exist within a vacuum ad infinitum.
Education : the emphasis is changing. We need to develop an IETF training
degree, and to take a lead role in administrating this project. This could
both increase awareness and technical abilities, ensure that ISOC's Mission
Statement is respected by all actors, and provide a revenue stream. Education
in the sense of network training, though vital in the past, will tend
to take a secondary role in the future as conflicting private sector interests
challenge each other in this area. ISOC neither has the means or the necessarily
the legitimacy to commit a major portion of revenue to this area.
Whatever the results of the coming elections, there needs to be a more
proactive approach to Civil Society, and a greater appreciation from within
the BoT that without ISOC's historical legitimacy as an acknowledged leadership
platform, the aims and objectives of Non Governmental Organizations will
become increasingly fragile, and vulnerable to Public Sector manipulation.
Best regards Jonathan
George Sadowsky
I'm not sure this is the right question, but I'll make some remarks in
the general direction.
I think it's clear that our roots are in the technical community, and
we have a fundamental obligation to support their activities, the most
important being support of the standards process.
It's also clear that the Internet space has grown to be bigger than standards
and we need to address other important facets. A group of us, all volunteers,
did that in 1993 when we started the developing countries workshops and
their spin-off activities. Now, 8 years later, with over 2,500 students
from developing countries trained, we can all be proud of what we've done.
While ISOC did support the workshops in several ways, including financially,
about 75% of the workshop money came from sources outside ISOC. We thought
that it was important enough to raise much more money externally to pull
off the workshops. We also did NOT put a claim on any core ISOC funds
that supported the standards process.
That's how standards and education have been able to live together without
conflict.
In fact, it's stronger than that. Some of our volunteer teachers have
been actively involved in the standardization process, and one of the
things people learn in the workshop is the importance of standards and
the process of making standards. They become socialized in the way of
Internet standards, and bring back that understanding to their home technical
communities.
Policy issues are somewhat different from a financial point of view, although
funds are required to support an activist education program in matters
of policy. The separate pillar funding that public policy has recently
managed to obtain helps to fund this activity. Is it enough? Probably
not, for an ambitious program, just like the amount collected for education
isn't enough to really do what we want to do. But we'll keep trying, selling
the ISOC message, and with luck and perseverance we'll obtain the funding
that is needed to get the job done.
At the individual membership level, it's the chapters that are increasingly
tying these aspects together in a complementary manner. Lots of workshop
students are in chapters in developing countries. They understand the
importance of standards because their national Internets would fail without
them. They also understand the importance of continuing the educational
process of which they were the beneficiaries, and we try very hard to
imbue them with the spirit of sharing that characterized the earlier Internet
community. Finally, once they are in place, they are the best emissaries
we know of to observe and assist the policy process in their own countries.
We want and need strong and active chapters so that eventually, the "Internet
will be for everyone."
George
To submit your question for the candidates, please email electionforum@isoc.org.
Members can choose to receive a daily email digest of all election forum
questions and responses by emailing lance@isoc.org.
|
Donate Now
