[PNIF] PNIF - doodle working call

Fri Nov 11 10:32:10 EST 2022

Hi Bill

Of course, please find it here (at the bottom):
https://www.intgovforum.org/en/content/pnif-working-meeting

Glad you can make it!

Best
Sheetal.

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 18:37, William Drake <williamdrake.org at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Sheetal
>
> Thanks for the ping. Sure, the timing is Western Hemisphere-friendly
> (unlike the middle-of-the-night sessions in Addis).
>
> Sorry I missed this but where does one read the draft framework?
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
> On Nov 10, 2022, at 4:31 AM, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Milton, Bill, all
>
> We can't promise any bets will be won, but please join us for a 'working'
> call of the Policy Network on Monday to discuss a draft framework to
> conceptualise internet fragmentation (and that has come out of the webinars
> hosted in the past few months), which we plan to get wider consultation on
> at the upcoming IGF - with the view to using it as a foundation for work
> for the Policy Network next year. We would really appreciate it if you can
> join us, especially as we are committed to building on existing work. Wim
> has shared the details on another thread and I'm copying below.
>
> *[Joining details] *
>
> The PNIF working meeting will discuss and further refine the PNIF Internet
> fragmentation framework that emerged from the PNIF webinars and prepare it
> to feed into PNIF session at the IGF.
>
> Topic: PNIF - working session
>
> Time: Nov 14, 2022 03:30 PM Universal Time UTC
>
> Join Zoom Meeting
>
> https://intgovforum.zoom.us/j/93904282708
>
> Meeting ID: 939 0428 2708
>
> Find your local number: https://intgovforum.zoom.us/u/abQcw2cP2L
>
> *[Agenda]*
>
> The PNIF working meeting will discuss and further refine the PNIF Internet
> fragmentation framework that emerged from the PNIF webinars and prepare it
> to feed into PNIF session at the IGF.
>
>    1. *Welcome and introduction, purpose of the framework.*
>    2. *Open discussion on the drat PNIF Internet fragmentation framework*
>    3. *Conclusion and next steps*
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 20:07, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>> Yes, Knake replied and accepted the bet, and later a European conference
>> organizer brought us together for a live debate and held a vote afterwards.
>> (I won the vote 😉) That may be available somewhere.
>>
>> https://ne-np.facebook.com/cyberseceu/photos/-at-some-point-in-this-decade-the-chinese-government-with-the-support-of-russia-/2913423022255590
>>
>> हेर्नको लागि लग इन वा साइन अप गर्नुहोस्
>> <https://ne-np.facebook.com/cyberseceu/photos/-at-some-point-in-this-decade-the-chinese-government-with-the-support-of-russia-/2913423022255590>
>> Facebook मा पोस्ट, फोटो र थप कुराहरू हेर्नुहोस्।
>> ne-np.facebook.com
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* William Drake <williamdrake.org at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2022 11:50 AM
>> *To:* Mueller, Milton L <milton at GATECH.EDU>
>> *Cc:* Wolfgang Kleinwächter <wolfgang at kleinwaechter.info>;
>> pnif at intgovforum.org <pnif at intgovforum.org>
>> *Subject:* RE: [PNIF] PNIF - doodle working call
>>
>> Hi Milton
>>
>> Actually, we did a CITI meeting yesterday with Jason Pielemeier and Chris
>> Riley based on their Lawfare critique of the recent Council on Foreign
>> Relations report
>> https://www.lawfareblog.com/defense-global-open-internet-0.  They said
>> that alas that report is getting traction in DC policy circles, some
>> relevant people are buying the notion that because of fragmentation,
>> policies to promote Internet openness and freedom have failed and so the US
>> should shift to a national security / great-powers-conflict mindset on
>> Internet issues.  Despite the fact that the task force co-chair is now the
>> ambassador in charge of State’s Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy,
>> which has a policy unit on Digital Freedom, sigh.  All of which, per
>> previous, points to the problems that can ensue if slanted conceptions of
>> fragmentation become the basis for national and international policies.
>>
>> BTW did Knake ever reply to your post and take your bet? Offer a defense
>> of his systemic frag prediction?  Would also be interesting to know how
>> policy circles elsewhere are processing frag talk.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> On Nov 6, 2022, at 4:02 PM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at GATECH.EDU> wrote:
>>
>> All:
>> Robert Knake (the author of the CFP report Wolfgang referenced) said in
>> January 2020 that “at some point in the next decade, the Chinese
>> government, with the support of Russia and other authoritarian regimes,
>> will move forward with plans to establish a separate [DNS] root system for
>> their share of the internet.”
>>
>> In other words, Knake was predicting “real” fragmentation – the splitting
>> of the DNS – within 10 years.
>>
>> I disagreed with him, based on my belief that the Chinese (like us) need
>> global compatibility. In fact, I made a bet with Knake: he will owe me $500
>> if China doesn’t split the DNS by Jan 2030. You can read about the terms of
>> the bet here,
>> https://www.internetgovernance.org/2020/02/26/the-knake-mueller-wager-will-china-form-an-alternate-dns-root/
>>  and in fact it’s a pretty good primer on one aspect of the meaning of
>> “fragmentation.”
>>
>>
>> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>> School of Public Policy
>> Internet Governance Project <https://internetgovernance.org/>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* William Drake <williamdrake.org at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, November 6, 2022 12:11 PM
>> *To:* Wolfgang Kleinwächter <wolfgang at kleinwaechter.info>
>> *Cc:* pnif at intgovforum.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [PNIF] PNIF - doodle working call
>>
>> Hi Wolfgang
>>
>>
>> As this report is from 2010---before e.g. Snowden, IANA transition,
>> NetMundial, the social media & disinfo booms, escalation of great power
>> tensions in cyber, etc. etc.---one would think any potential to cause
>> fragmentation would have been realized by now.  While there was some
>> controversy and debate about it back then, one could argue it seems pretty
>> anodyne from today’s overheated perspective. A number of things Knake
>> called for—doing cybersecurity outside the COE, creation of a Bureau in the
>> US State Dept, changing the status of the root, etc.---did happen, but not
>> because of the report.
>>
>> The more recent CFR report on Confronting Reality in Cyberspace that I
>> believe (?) was discussed a little here months back seems much more
>> problematic, not only because it says there’s massive fragmentation without
>> defining what that means and then concludes that in consequence policies to
>> promote openness and multistakeholderism have failed.  The guy who chaired
>> the task force that signed off on it is now the head of the State
>> Dept.’s Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy.  Whether US policy (or at
>> least those bits of it that are driven by State) could turn toward
>> operationalization of this vision and what that could mean are something we
>> should talk about in upcoming fragmentation sessions.
>>
>> Adam Segal, who runs CFR’s digital stuff, did an interview on the Lawfare
>> podcast a couple months ago comparing the two reports and their
>> differences, if anyone wants to delve further.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> On Nov 6, 2022, at 6:30 AM, Wolfgang Kleinwächter via PNIF <
>> pnif at intgovforum.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> here is another CFR-Study with a "potential" to stimulate Internet
>> Fragmentation.
>>
>> https://www.cfr.org/report/internet-governance-age-cyber-insecurity
>>
>> “It is safe to conclude that the "coordination" and "encouragement" model
>> has not yielded the desired results, and stronger leadership by the federal
>> government is necessary.”
>>
>> “The US government should challenge the IETF to develop a new suite of
>> more secure protocls.... This should include a dealine for four years... It
>> should be made clear that failure to meet the deadline would result in the
>> initiation of federal effort to create new protocols.”
>>
>> How you read this? Is this the end of the "good old times" or the start
>> of a new beginning? Multistakeholder approach under "federal government"
>> (US) leadership? And how this is related to the DFI and the dubious
>> "multistalkeholder event", organized top down and intransparent under the
>> Czech EU presidency recently in Prague?
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sheetal Kumar via PNIF <pnif at intgovforum.org> hat am 03.11.2022 18:49
>> CET geschrieben:
>>
>>
>> Dear Anriette
>> This is very helpful, thank you! We'll integrate your notes/reflections
>> into the prep for the working call group and the call itself.
>>
>> Best
>> Sheetal.
>>
>> On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 17:56, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Bruna, Wim and Sheetal and all
>>
>> Thanks for two very interesting webinars. I won't be able to make the
>> call. I think the framework looks fine. I took some of my own notes at the
>> time which I share below in case it is helpful.
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>> a) Internet fragmentation which is the fragmentation of the technical
>> layer, and which is not really happening at present but if it did, its
>> effect would be profound
>>
>> b) Fragmentation with regard to the user experience that results from (i)
>> not having effective or affordable access to infrastructure (ii)
>> interventions by states (e.g. blocking, shutdowns, censorship) or
>> corporations (content control, walled gardens etc.
>>
>> c) Fragmentation of internet governance and coordination - mostly as a
>> result of insufficient collaboration between stakeholders, states, regions
>> and/or tension between multistakeholder and multilateral approaches,
>> geopolitics, and ideologically driven debates that encourages polarisation
>> rather than collaboration, but also the result of insufficient crosscutting
>> engagement by, for example, the technical community in broader public
>> policy discussions, or, when it comes to technical governance, insufficient
>> participation from people who understand the context of low bandwidth
>> users, or users who rely entirely on mobile data
>>
>> d) The "in between" for me is more a case of looking at consequences,
>> intended and unintended of trends in technical and policy developments from
>> the perspective or fragmentation of b) user experience and c) internet
>> governance and regulation. Regulatory interventions can have a fragmenting
>> effect, but they might also strengthen a unified unfragmented internet
>> (e.g. by regulating to encourage adoption of IPv6).
>>
>>
>> Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com
>>
>> Senior advisor global and regional internet governance
>>
>> Association for Progressive Communications
>>
>> www.apc.org // afrisig.org
>>
>> On 2022/11/02 15:06, Wim Degezelle wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Thank you to all participants of last week’s PNIF webinar. The recording
>> is available at https://youtu.be/kYmFsbD_nWM and a Summary will soon
>> follow.
>>
>> By the end of the webinar a rough draft framework emerged:  (a)
>> Fragmentation of the user experience & information flows control
>> management; (b) Technical layer fragmentation; (c) The ‘in-between’ (e.g.
>> current technical developments that tend towards and away from
>> fragmentation of the user experience).   It was agreed to set up a working
>> call for those interested, to continue the discussion on the framework and
>> whether it is helpful to further discussions on addressing fragmentation
>>  (e.g. is the framework useful for collecting and sorting examples and best
>> practice answers, or discuss guidelines and recommendations).
>>
>> We selected time slots for a 90min working call and invite you to
>> indicate a preference :
>> https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/b816Vwmd
>>
>>
>> Best Regards
>> The PNIF coordinating team
>>
>> Sheetal, Bruna, Wim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PNIF mailing list
>> PNIF at intgovforum.org
>> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/pnif_intgovforum.org
>>
>
>
> --
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Head of Global Engagement and Advocacy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| Time zone: GMT | M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
> ---
> <https://www.4dayweek.co.uk/>
> GPD is proud to be an accredited four-day week organisation that cares
> about the well-being of its team. Please note that our office hours are now
> Monday to Thursday (9am-5pm UK time). Find out more here
> <https://www.gp-digital.org/news/gpd-becomes-a-four-day-week-organisation/>
> .
>
>
>
>

-- 

*Sheetal Kumar*
Head of Global Engagement and Advocacy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| Time zone: GMT | M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F
E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|

---

<https://www.4dayweek.co.uk/>

GPD is proud to be an accredited four-day week organisation that cares
about the well-being of its team. Please note that our office hours are now
Monday to Thursday (9am-5pm UK time). Find out more here
<https://www.gp-digital.org/news/gpd-becomes-a-four-day-week-organisation/>.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/pnif_intgovforum.org/attachments/20221111/938a70a1/attachment.htm>