[159534] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: De-funding the ITU
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Jan 14 03:34:33 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B74917C@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:31:37 -0800
To: Fred Baker (fred) <fred@cisco.com>
Cc: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>, "<nanog@nanog.org>" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
The regulatory side of ITU-T is responsible for much of the damaging =
legacy Telecom attitude of revenue entitlement.
I think defunding that and seeing what is developed in its place might =
well be a good thing.
Owen
On Jan 12, 2013, at 9:04 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred@cisco.com> wrote:
>=20
> On Jan 12, 2013, at 8:17 PM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>=20
>> Please learn a little more about the ITU before doing so. There is
>> more to the ITU than the dysfunctional ITU-T, and the political
>> fallout from the US being seen as a big rich bully taking its wallet
>> and going home is likely not worth the trivial amount of money
>> involved.
>=20
> On that I would agree. ITU-D and ITU-R do a lot of good work. ITU-T =
does reasonable work, for the most part, in regulatory matters, which =
neither the IGF nor the IETF address. Frankly, if the ITU gets shut =
down, ITU-R, ITU-D, and the regulatory component of ITU-T will have to =
be re-created to accomplish those roles. Where we have travelled in =
circles with the ITU is in conflicting technical standardization and in =
the desire of ITU-T staff to take over certain functions from ICANN and =
the NRO. Shutting down the ITU would be in effect discarding the baby =
with the bathwater.
>=20
> http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/pages/default.aspx
> http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Pages/default.aspx
