- KICTANet - KICTANet

A Step Towards Meaningful Participation- EA-IGF
by alice 13 Apr '09

13 Apr '09

http://www.glocom.ac.jp/e/publications/ A Step Towards Meaningful Participation April 10, 2009 A Step Towards Meaningful Participation By Adam Peake, GLOCOM Executive Research Fellow. Now in the fourth year of its initial five-year mandate, the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is established as an important arena for international multi-stakeholder dialogue about policy issues affecting the Internet's management, development and deployment. However, an area where it has failed to perform as well as hoped has been attracting the interest and participation of stakeholders from developing countries. With limited knowledge of the issues and discussions, developing countries have too often been under-represented in the global arenas where Internet policies are developed, and also unable to contribute fully to the dialogue at the IGF. Enabling the meaningful participation of developing country partners in the formation of global Internet policy has long been identified as an important priority in achieving an equitable and accessible Information Society. Many of the rules and norms of global information society are being created in forums and processes discussing policies related to the Internet and ICTs, and it is important that all should have the opportunity to shape and influence the direction of these discussions. With this challenge in mind, in 2008 a regional IGF process in East Africa brought together participants from Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya to identify, explore and build consensus around common policy priorities. Each country began with an online discussion to identify the Internet policy issues most important to them, followed by a face-to-face national IGF meeting. These multi-stakeholder national processes then fed into the East African Internet Governance Forum (EA-IGF) held over three days in Nairobi, Kenya. The outcomes of the regional forum were then presented and discussed at the 2008 IGF meeting in Hyderabad. I was fortunate to be able to help with the organization of the 2008 EA-IGF, and hope to continue to work with colleagues from what will be five countries –Burundi asked to join the process– on the EA-IGF initiative this year. Contributing to this process is a continuation of work GLOCOM began when we participated in the G8 Digital Opportunity Task Force (DOT Force) where our focus was on recommendations to ensure universal participation in international policy and technical issues raised by ICT and the Internet. We knew at the time that participation had to mean more than simply attending meetings and being in the room where Internet and ICT issues were being discussed; developing country stakeholders had to be able to identify issues important to them, bring those issues to international processes and have the results contribute to local strategies and policies. However, in the seven years since DOT Force made its recommendations, little progress had been made in achieving the goal of "meaningful" participation. Developing countries are still too often under-represented and unable to contribute fully and effectively in the formation of Internet and ICT policies, even in the IGF. National and regional initiatives around the IGF themes and process provide an opportunity to build a local foundation from which to contribute and participate. The multi-stakeholder model developed in East Africa of online discussions, followed by national meetings, culminating in a regional process provides a framework for sharing knowledge, experience and expertise, whether local, national, regional or global. Goals of the 2008 EA-IGF process: * Raise awareness of Internet Governance among policy makers and stakeholders in the East African Region * Establish which Internet Governance issues are relevant to the countries of the region * Build consensus and national and regional positions around relevant Internet Governance issues * Share the outcomes of the regional forum with IGF Hyderabad 2008 And priority areas identified by the 2008 national and regional processes: * Connectivity and infrastructure development * Access including issues of local content development * Representation, inclusiveness and participation through fostering collaboration of all national and regional stakeholders * Capacity building to promote skills growth and general awareness * Policies for the development of local content * Development of legislative frameworks for information society * Cyber-security and setting up national and regional Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT)/Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT) * Critical Internet resources, the transition to IPv6, ccTLDs, new gTLDs and IDNs. These priority issues were shared with global partners in discussions at the 2008 IGF in Hyderabad, and are now the subject of ongoing discussions at the national level as the five East Africa countries (Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, Burundi and Uganda) identify needs, assess progress and develop common positions on an ongoing basis, and continue the regional EA-IGF process in 2009. While the global IGF was established as a non-binding forum and finds it difficult to directly influence policy, the processes in East Africa have no such restrictions. We are beginning to see outcomes relating to the harmonization of ICT policy in the region and more specific results such as progress being made with policy relating to country code top-level domains of Rwanda and Uganda. The first online discussions for the 2009 process are being planned now and once started will continue throughout the year. National face-to-face IGF meetings will be organized and held by the end of July 2009, the regional EA-IGF will be held before the end of September 2009. A recommendation from the 2008 EA-IGF was to develop a capacity building initiative around the issues highlighted by process. A curriculum is being developed based mainly on local East Africa expertise and themes identified by the national and regional processes. The course will target policy-makers and policy-influencers from government, the non-profit sector/NGOs, academia and the private sector, with objectives of: * Providing a deeper understanding of global internet governance issues, institutions and processes * Developing regional perception of Internet governance topics * Enhance use of the Internet in socio-economic development The EA-IGF is being considered as the model for other clusters of national and regional meetings being planned in Africa this year. It is my hope that these national and regional IGFs will help to realize many of the capacity building and development goals of the IGF discussions, as well as creating a sustainable foundation that supports developing nation participation and contributions to Internet policy processes that are shaping the emerging information society.

1 0

Personal invitation from Nancy Bosire
by Nancy Bosire 13 Apr '09

13 Apr '09

Personal invitation from Nancy Bosire

1 0

Sabotage suspected in Silicon Valley fiber outage
by Harry Hare 11 Apr '09

11 Apr '09

Hello all, I have noticed some of the optical fibre cable being buried around Nairobi is less than 4 feet under, is there a standard depth that providers should adhere to. Having the cable too shallow could give saboteurs something to do and have serious ramifications on everything that depends on these networks....Lets learn from stories like these deep cables and secure manholes, at least. Harry +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sabotage suspected in Silicon Valley fiber outage By Paul Boutin The Industry Standard SAN FRANCISCO (04/09/2009) - Forget Twitter downtime. This is serious: Around 2 A.M. local time on Thursday, a fiber optic cable running ten feet beneath a Silicon Valley roadway was damaged, possibly as deliberate sabotage. A surprising number of services ranging from broadband Internet to mobile phones, were knocked out. Repairs are still in progress, with no schedule for completion. The cable is owned by AT&T but leased to Verizon. The San Jose Mercury News reports: It appears somebody opened a manhole in South San Jose, climbed down 8 to 10 feet and cut four or five fiber-optic cables. The outage is affecting cell phones, land lines and Internet access for Verizon customers in Morgan Hill, Gilroy, San Martin and Santa Cruz County. "Verizon is completely down; other carriers are intermittent at best," said a spokesman for Santa Clara County. There is no timetable for the service to return. Service is also affected in South San Jose around Monterey Road and Bailey Avenue. ATM machines may also be affected. Police say they believe the line was deliberately cut, as were several other cables in the area. Why would someone sabotage a vital telecommunications link? The Merc alludes to a union contract with AT&T that expired last weekend, but no formal accusations have been made. African eDevelopment Resource Centre eDevelopment House : : 604 Limuru Road Old Muthaiga : : P O Box 49475 00100 Nairobi : : Kenya T +254 20 3741646/7 : : C +254 725 650044 Training : : Research: :Consultancy: : Publishing

3 2

Fwd: Adbusters Wins a Legal Victory
by Wainaina Mungai 11 Apr '09

11 Apr '09

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Adbusters Magazine <jammers(a)lists.adbusters.org> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:13:42 -0700 Subject: Adbusters Wins a Legal Victory To: 56509 <wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org> ADBUSTERS WINS A LEGAL VICTORY AGAINST CANADA'S MEDIA GIANTS, LEGAL ACTION IN THE US MAY BE NEXT After 15 years of legal tussling to bring democracy to the public airwaves, Adbusters has finally scored a great victory. The Supreme Court of British Columbia has granted us an appeal in our landmark case against Canada's CBC and Canwest Global, giving us the go-ahead to set a precedent and establish some public rights over the airwaves (check out the judges¹ ruling here <http://adbusters.org/files/pdf/adbusters_courtappeal_20090403.pdf>). People are spending an unparalleled 8.5 hours per day in front of screens and even with the influx of new screen formats cell phones, computers, kindle TV is still dominant. It¹s the most powerful social communications medium of our time. And yet it is a place where commercial imperatives rule and dissenting voices are routinely censored. Adbusters¹ attempts to purchase airtime from major commercial broadcasters for its socially-minded public service spots <http://www.adbusters.org/abtv/censored_tv_spots.html> have been repeatedly denied over the years. The airwaves are public property just like city sidewalks or parks. They are a public space where freedom of speech must prevail. This is an inspiring idea for media activists and could pave the way for further legal victories down the road not only on the TV airwaves, but in cyberspace as well. Not surprisingly, none of Canwest¹s 13 daily newspapers or 23 TV channels covered the appeal court ruling. The silence has been deafening. Canadians citizens should be aware that the largest media conglomerate in our country is censoring the news to suit its own interests. Here¹s who did cover the story: CBC Radio <http://www.cbc.ca/asithappens/latestshow.html> (after April 9, the link changes to <http://www.cbc.ca/radioshows/AS_IT_HAPPENS/20090408.shtml>, the Globe and Mail <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090406.wads0406/BNStory /National/>, the Georgia Straight <http://www.straight.com/article-212819/bcs-highest-court-rules-adbusters-med ia-foundation-can-sue-cbc-and-global-tv> and the Tyee http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Media/2009/04/07/Adbusters-win-appeal/. CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, MTV and the Food Channel have also repeatedly refused to sell us airtime over the past 15 years and we would like to launch a freedom of speech legal action in the US. If you know an American lawyer who may be interested in being part of our legal team then let us know, email kono(a)adbusters.org. The endgame will be a series of lawsuits around the world forcing the half a dozen media megacorporations controlling the bulk of news and entertainment flows around the planet to return some control back to the public. Email kono(a)adbusters.org if you want to talk strategy or contribute to our legal war chest. -- Sent from my mobile device --- http://www.bungesms.com http://www.madeinkenya.org

1 0

Financial Crisis biting Kenya too Ouch.....Zain cuts 141 staff in Kenya
by alice 10 Apr '09

10 Apr '09

Zain cuts 141 staff in Kenya and looks at job cuts elsewhere in Africa Zain has cut 141 staff in Kenya as part of a group restructuring designed to help it weather the effects of the global economic downturn. It has also cut staff in Nigeria earlier in the year. Zain`s CEO for Africa Chris Gabriel announced the job cuts in Nairobi last Monday, but added it was too early to work out what the programme would cost or save Zain. Studies would be carried out in other countries to determine whether job cuts were required, he explained. However, Gabriel said the new business model would push the company into becoming a top 10 global mobile operator by 2011 with 110 million customers and over $6 billion in revenue. ``It is a very difficult decision to take, but it is all about creating efficiency by changing the way we operate,`` he told a press conference in Nairobi. Zain`s new business model, which is expected to inject a new lease of life in the company’s operations, involves downsizing, centralizing and merging certain key functions and outsourcing non-core functions. The strategy has been dubbed the `modular business model` is based on a successful implementation in Zain Saudi Arabia last year. The Kenya layoffs which targeted finance, sales, information technology, customer service and technical operations departments, come after the company`s ARPU went down to US$4 even before the full impact of the two new market entrants (Essar and Orange) have been felt. (Source: IPP Media)

1 0

Balancing Act: Satcom 09: Africa’s satellite providers find themselves looking at a less rosy future
by alice 10 Apr '09

10 Apr '09

Satcom 09: Africa’s satellite providers find themselves looking at a less rosy future Satcom is the African satellite industry’s annual get-together and this year’s was held this week. On the second day of the conference the West African Cable System announced the signing of an over-subscribed fundraising. And this is only one of half a dozen international fibre projects that will be built. At the conference itself, new satellite entrants announced services that were both innovative and cheaper. Russell Southwood looks at how all this will change things for a regional satellite industry that has more or less been the main provider of bandwidth for the continent. Guns to the left of them, guns to the right of them, it was not a comfortable conference for the more traditional satellite operators and resellers. On the one side, there was the ever-present story of the imminent arrival of much, much cheaper international fibre capacity. So although there are a number of new satellite launches (including Intelsat’s New Dawn) that in any other year would have held people’s attention, the spotlight kept drifting back towards the impact of the new fibre. As if that was not distracting enough for those wanting to get their message across, a number of new entrants were offering some combination of innovation and price drops. O3B, which launches its constellation of satellites in 2010, was offering carrier grade satellite capacity with low latency at fibre or near fibre prices. On a much smaller scale, Asia Broadcast Satellite was pitching satellite capacity for just above 03B’s prices for delivery in 2011. Based broadly on the US Wild Blue model, Yahsat was promoting its satellite broadband service YahClick for US$350 per site (FOB) at US$30 a month upwards for the user. And as Tata’s Head of Africa – Global Data Solutions said with a broad smile on his face:”It’s all good.” Intelsat’s Executive Vice President and General Counsel Phil Spector might respond that neither 03B nor Yahsat had operational satellites but somehow the blow intended failed to make much impact. Indeed the traditional satellite operators seemed strangely passive. Improvements in modulation or compression? That’s up to the manufacturers. (To be fair, Intelsat’s Regional VP Flavien Babachi mentioned putting a router on a satellite and we await the results of that with interest.) Any plans to provide keener pricing? That will only happen if there’s a glut in the market and that’s unlikely. Why no new satellite broadband services? Our operator customers aren’t asking for them. They will not be able to stick to this script over the next five years: something has got to change. Cheaper fibre and satellite prices will mean that operators and resellers will take their business elsewhere. Part of this is the natural transition that occurs when fibre arrives and national backbones begin to connect demand to the new international fibres. 90% of demand in most countries is found in their urban centres and these will soon be connected to landing stations. The process of doing this will by itself create a series of inter-country fibre connections. Both those with satellite and fibre were at pains to point out that they were complementary (which they are) but the scale of transition about to occur made this seem simply like an act of good manners that did not quite ring true. So what’s the upside for the traditional satellite operators faced with this transition? * Despite the economic downturn, there will continued above-average overall growth in bandwidth demand at least up until 2013. So some of the effects of the transition to fibre will be blurred by everyone wanting more of everything. * Fibre is new to Africa and some countries neither have the capacity to run it effectively nor is it always safe and secure. Ethiopia’s link to Sudan is a case in point which means that ETC is still a large purchaser of satellite bandwidth. Nevertheless the opening of the new route through Djibouti should improve matters. One operator was reporting that new fibre customers were signing up for 25% of their capacity on satellite as redundancy to cover these kinds of issues. 03B’s Greg Wyler made much of fibre outages in the Suez Canal. But with fibre routes up both sides of the continent, even that risk is to some degree mitigated. * According to GSMA figures, 66% of Africa’s population now has GSM coverage. This disguises a range of progress from Uganda with 90% of its population covered to countries that still have only 30-40% population coverage. Satellite cellular backhaul will continue to fill this demand but as these will be low ARPU locations, operators will be under considerable cost pressures and will look hard at all pricing. * Finally, many users have long-standing contracts (10-15 years) and it will be some time before the natural consequences of the transition are fully felt. But whilst this will be of some comfort in the short to medium term, it is not a long-term defensive position. A number of global satellite operators have significant parts of both their turnover and profitability coming from the continent: half of Intelsat’s fleet serves Africa. This is bound to change and the only question is by how much? Some snapshots of the exchanges at the conference give some idea of the shifting of the tectonic plates: * It’s pricing, stupid: Brian Herlihy, CEO of Seacom spoke about offering prices of between US$50-300 an mbps per month and whilst IRUs might add as much as 20% in interest payments, this is still much sunnier that the US$4-6,000 per mbps currently being charged for satellite. Better still, Seacom is promising this price wherever the capacity lands, whether in a coastal country or one inland. Paul Edwards, Chair of Nigeria’s largest CDMA operator Starcomms said he had been offered US$100 per mbps on one of the west coast fibres. In addition, O3B’s pricing is pitched fairly close to these numbers. The traditional satellite operators are stuck: they either have to take what’s left over or come up with something innovative technically which will improve their price offer. If they do, then it runs the risk of cannibalising existing revenues. (According to a report in an international industry paper, 03B has been in discussions with both SES New Skies and Intelsat. Read that how you will. Who’s courting who?) * Price elasticity provides massive increases: Tata’s Steven Van Der Lind described the process of transitioning customers from satellite to fibre. Three years ago, their assumption was that it would be a 1:1 replacement. As the likely fibre prices became more established, customers started asking for the equivalent of a 2:1 replacement. Recently he has signed contracts where the increase has been 10-15 times the original capacity being utilised. The arrival of fibre is also having an impact for those dealing with short-term satellite needs. Tom Omariba, Managing Director of UUNet Kenya (who have bought fibre capacity) said that they were “technology-neutral” in meeting their customers needs but increasingly it was leasing them satellite equipment. * Pushing to the edge of market: Vodacom DRC’s Alain Malanda, Head of Transmission, Data Planning and Optimisation is probably one of the candidates for satellite cellular backhaul as DRC has few roads, let alone. However, he told the conference that 50% of his national traffic was carried by microwave and fibre and 50% by satellite. And whilst he was clear that they were still pushing out coverage, they had undergone an optimisation exercise on its satellite capacity to get more for less. The DRC Government’s announcement of a fibre route to the coast and the likely connection of Lumumbashi will also eat into the 100% of international traffic currently going by satellite. Timescale: 2-3 years? * The 2010 bonus: Mashilo Boloka, Director: Broadcasting Policy at South Africa’s Department of Communications gave an update on preparations for the 2010 World Cup. He said that the fibre network between the 10 host stadiums and the International Broadcast Centre would be ready for the Confederation Cup in June 2009 and that a second teleport was being provide for outgoing links. The satellite industry has done the continent a tremendous service when no-one was thinking of building the scale of fibre now being undertaken and whatever happens, it will still be the only technology to reach widely dispersed populations. It’s also hard to believe that the global operators will not come up with some innovations to strengthen their positions. However, it’s fair to say that the industry has had its five years of feast and may be entering a period where food is in somewhat shorter supply.

1 0

Fwd: Safcom Mobile Internet Charging Model
by Odhiambo Washington 10 Apr '09

10 Apr '09

FYI So let's cross our fingers. Our prayers might be answered. Quoting verbatim another Kenyan who uses Safaricom 3G (from another tech forum): <Begin Quote> My Beef with safaricom is the way they handle the unused MB's after 30days. if you have 512mb remaining after 30days it just dissappears. I called their customer care and they said the billing system can't be changed. To me, I believe it should be like airtime top up,the more u top up,the more MB's balance u have but alas. Thats not the case,we are just being ripped off! <End Quote> Thanks, MJ for listening. We hope you can also change the billing model. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Joseph <MJoseph(a)safaricom.co.ke> Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 9:36 AM Subject: Re: [kictanet] Safcom Mobile Internet Charging Model To: odhiambo(a)gmail.com There is new pricing coming out soon. Take a look then and see if it is more interesting. Regards Michael Joseph CEO Safaricom Limited BlackBerry® powered by Safaricom ------------------------------ *From*: kictanet-bounces+mjoseph=safaricom.co.ke(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke *To*: Michael Joseph *Cc*: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions *Sent*: Thu Apr 09 09:07:13 2009 *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] Safcom Mobile Internet Charging Model On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:34 AM, mike oketch <mikeoketch(a)gmail.com> wrote: > John > 1GB is Ksh 2499. > > The charging model is different from Zain. Zain uses E220 Huawei Modem and > Safaricom now has upgraded to the E160 though all are HSDPA (3G) modem. Zain > charges you Ksh 3999 (4k) per month for unlimited modem while you use GPRS > in most cases and edge in very few cases. So with Zain you have very low > speeds at cheep rate whil Safaricom has high speeds but at a great expense > of around Ksh 10 per mb. > > Safaricom has the same charge for pospaid and prepaid. You will not > restrict your budget with prepaid in Safcom. I met a guy who was complaining > that Safaricom charged him close to 35,000 for internet in a month. > Safaricom was right because they charged him per MB and the guy downloaded > all the Music and Softwares using Peer to Peer systems. > > Zain is good for the patient man out there. But Safaricom is best when you > want to control your budget as well as have a fast cconnectin and you are > the only one using thee modem. Otherwise, utalipa kwa mapua > Put another way. Based on the Orange data Ad that appeared in the media yesterday, I should think it's possible to rephrase the last paragraph, viz: Zain is for the very patient man out there. Safaricom is good when you want to control your budget as well as have a fast connection, but Orange EVDO is the way to go if you are keen on good pricing as well as good speeds. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society." -- Mark Twain ------------------------------ *Note:* The information in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the use of the named addressee. Emails are susceptible to alteration and their integrity cannot be guaranteed. Safaricom Limited does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this email if the same is found to have been altered or manipulated. The contents and opinions expressed in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Safaricom Limited. Safaricom Limited disclaims any liability to the fullest extent permissible by law for any consequences that may arise from the contents of this email including but not limited to personal opinions, malicious and/or defamatory information and data/codes that may compromise or damage the integrity of the recipient’s information technology systems. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender and immediately delete this email from your system.Unless expressly stated by a duly authorised officer of Safaricom Limited nothing contained in this email message shall be construed as being an offer to contract or an acceptance of an offer capable of constituting a contract between Safaricom Limited and any recipient(s) of this email. ------------------------------ -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society." -- Mark Twain

9 13

Re: [kictanet] Safcom Mobile Internet Charging Model
by John Walubengo 09 Apr '09

09 Apr '09

I am seeking to understand the above. I bought the safcom modem during their promotion in Feb09 @ 3000Ksh (free modem(had to be ;-) and access worth 3000Ksh for I think 1G of data.) After consuming less than 50% of the 1G (I use it mainly on weekends), the access was disabled and on enquiry i was informed that the 1G access was timed to be consumed within the 1mnth (4weeks). However, I was assured that the balance of access would be availed in my next purchase... I then opted to purchase the Ksh 2000 access (700Mb), given that I didnt manage to consume the previous 1G and hence saw no need to purchase the same. Furthermore, I expected current access volumes to be consolidated with the previous balance... But before I could consume 50% of the above 700MB, my 4weeks were over and access disabled. I have now purchased Ksh 1000 access (300MB) and from the trend you can predict that my access will be disabled before I consume it... Several questions arise: 1. How do I confirm that my balance of access is truly being forward and not "disappearing". 2. Is this the same charging model @ Zain, Orange? 3. Would post-paid be a better deal for me? 4. Why should Data-access be so restrictive (4wks) as compared to voice (which gives us almost 12wks grace period) walu.

3 8

Prequalifications of Suppliers
by James Kagwe 09 Apr '09

09 Apr '09

Morning, Find attached KIPPRA's newspaper announcement for application of prequalification for provision of various services just in case you are interested.... Please do not reply to this email unless it is absolutely necessary. Best Regards, James Kagwe If you judge people, you have no time to love them ********************************************************************* Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis Bishops Garden Towers Bishops Road P.O. Box 56445 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (254) 20 2719933, 2719934, 2714714, 2714715 Fax: (254) 20 2719951 Confidentiality Warning ======================= The contents of this e-mail and any accompanying documentation are confidential and any use thereof, in what ever form, by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify admin(a)kippra.or.ke and delete it immediately from your system. Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis accepts no responsibility for losses or damage as a result of any viruses and it is your responsibility to check attachments (if any) for viruses.

1 0

How the Internet Got Its Rules --- RFCs' 40th anniversary
by Brian Munyao Longwe 09 Apr '09

09 Apr '09

FYI - a very refreshing read and a reminder of the power of human networking and the strength of consensus based approach. Regards, Brian ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Anne-Rachel Inné <annerachel(a)gmail.com> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 20:10:15 +0100 Subject: [AfrICANN-discuss] How the Internet Got Its Rules --- RFCs' 40th anniversary To: africann(a)afrinic.net http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/opinion/07crocker.html?_r=1 How the Internet Got Its Rules By STEPHEN D. CROCKER Published: April 6, 2009 TODAY is an important date in the history of the Internet: the 40th anniversary of what is known as the Request for Comments. Outside the technical community, not many people know about the R.F.C.’s, but these humble documents shape the Internet’s inner workings and have played a significant role in its success. When the R.F.C.’s were born, there wasn’t a World Wide Web. Even by the end of 1969, there was just a rudimentary network linking four computers at four research centers: the University of California, Los Angeles; the Stanford Research Institute; the University of California, Santa Barbara; and the University of Utah in Salt Lake City. The government financed the network and the hundred or fewer computer scientists who used it. It was such a small community that we all got to know one another. A great deal of deliberation and planning had gone into the network’s underlying technology, but no one had given a lot of thought to what we would actually do with it. So, in August 1968, a handful of graduate students and staff members from the four sites began meeting intermittently, in person, to try to figure it out. (I was lucky enough to be one of the U.C.L.A. students included in these wide-ranging discussions.) It wasn’t until the next spring that we realized we should start writing down our thoughts. We thought maybe we’d put together a few temporary, informal memos on network protocols, the rules by which computers exchange information. I offered to organize our early notes. What was supposed to be a simple chore turned out to be a nerve-racking project. Our intent was only to encourage others to chime in, but I worried we might sound as though we were making official decisions or asserting authority. In my mind, I was inciting the wrath of some prestigious professor at some phantom East Coast establishment. I was actually losing sleep over the whole thing, and when I finally tackled my first memo, which dealt with basic communication between two computers, it was in the wee hours of the morning. I had to work in a bathroom so as not to disturb the friends I was staying with, who were all asleep. Still fearful of sounding presumptuous, I labeled the note a “Request for Comments.” R.F.C. 1, written 40 years ago today, left many questions unanswered, and soon became obsolete. But the R.F.C.’s themselves took root and flourished. They became the formal method of publishing Internet protocol standards, and today there are more than 5,000, all readily available online. But we started writing these notes before we had e-mail, or even before the network was really working, so we wrote our visions for the future on paper and sent them around via the postal service. We’d mail each research group one printout and they’d have to photocopy more themselves. The early R.F.C.’s ranged from grand visions to mundane details, although the latter quickly became the most common. Less important than the content of those first documents was that they were available free of charge and anyone could write one. Instead of authority-based decision-making, we relied on a process we called “rough consensus and running code.” Everyone was welcome to propose ideas, and if enough people liked it and used it, the design became a standard. After all, everyone understood there was a practical value in choosing to do the same task in the same way. For example, if we wanted to move a file from one machine to another, and if you were to design the process one way, and I was to design it another, then anyone who wanted to talk to both of us would have to employ two distinct ways of doing the same thing. So there was plenty of natural pressure to avoid such hassles. It probably helped that in those days we avoided patents and other restrictions; without any financial incentive to control the protocols, it was much easier to reach agreement. This was the ultimate in openness in technical design and that culture of open processes was essential in enabling the Internet to grow and evolve as spectacularly as it has. In fact, we probably wouldn’t have the Web without it. When CERN physicists wanted to publish a lot of information in a way that people could easily get to it and add to it, they simply built and tested their ideas. Because of the groundwork we’d laid in the R.F.C.’s, they did not have to ask permission, or make any changes to the core operations of the Internet. Others soon copied them — hundreds of thousands of computer users, then hundreds of millions, creating and sharing content and technology. That’s the Web. Put another way, we always tried to design each new protocol to be both useful in its own right and a building block available to others. We did not think of protocols as finished products, and we deliberately exposed the internal architecture to make it easy for others to gain a foothold. This was the antithesis of the attitude of the old telephone networks, which actively discouraged any additions or uses they had not sanctioned. Of course, the process for both publishing ideas and for choosing standards eventually became more formal. Our loose, unnamed meetings grew larger and semi-organized into what we called the Network Working Group. In the four decades since, that group evolved and transformed a couple of times and is now the Internet Engineering Task Force. It has some hierarchy and formality but not much, and it remains free and accessible to anyone. The R.F.C.’s have grown up, too. They really aren’t requests for comments anymore because they are published only after a lot of vetting. But the culture that was built up in the beginning has continued to play a strong role in keeping things more open than they might have been. Ideas are accepted and sorted on their merits, with as many ideas rejected by peers as are accepted. As we rebuild our economy, I do hope we keep in mind the value of openness, especially in industries that have rarely had it. Whether it’s in health care reform or energy innovation, the largest payoffs will come not from what the stimulus package pays for directly, but from the huge vistas we open up for others to explore. I was reminded of the power and vitality of the R.F.C.’s when I made my first trip to Bangalore, India, 15 years ago. I was invited to give a talk at the Indian Institute of Science, and as part of the visit I was introduced to a student who had built a fairly complex software system. Impressed, I asked where he had learned to do so much. He simply said, “I downloaded the R.F.C.’s and read them.” Stephen D. Crocker is the chief executive of a company that develops information-sharing technology. _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN(a)afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann -- Sent from my mobile device Brian Munyao Longwe e-mail: blongwe(a)gmail.com cell: + 254 714 222 863 blog : http://zinjlog.blogspot.com meta-blog: http://mashilingi.blogspot.com

1 0