-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I agree and realize this. However, the let's take that argument out
in the open and not hide it behind "national security".
I regret such an agressiveness. I simply listed suggestions I
collected to ask warning, advise, alternative to problems identified
not from inside the internet but from outside.
Why don't you simply go inside and find out? There is nothing like
first hand knowledge!
I was labelled as a topic of national security because it was to
prepare a menting on national vulnerability to Internet. If it had
been about a Web Information and Services Providers, or User Networks
demands, it would have been the same
I know a number of countries that have looked at this from a national
perspective. None of them have argued that the ITU is the solution. On
the contrary, the distributed control of the Internet is a good value.
I expected warnings, advices, alternative propositions. If you need a
long discssion among specialists to come with that, please do. I am
only interested in an authorized outcome. And we will all thank you
for that.
What the collective Internet thinks is documented largely through the
IETF process, or related organizations. I think that the issues you are
trying to raise are already answered at any point in history as being a
reflection of the current set of standards.
- - kurtis -
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
iQA/AwUBP8+D+KarNKXTPFCVEQJm9QCgzecWX5+0R1RcADym1rrZHICjvPAAoK2o
DBfR0ezNIcNGpKt4bb+J8bGl
=HL9l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----