Internet Society Frontpage

Events Membership
About the Internet Standards
Publications  Public Policy
About ISOC Education

About the Internet Society 

Become an ISOC Member

Board of Trustees

2006 Board Elections

Candidate Forum

Q7. Looking to the future

The term of the board members elected will be three years. Three years from now, what you would like ISOC and its various categories of members to have achieved? What do we need to do to accomplish that? What present encumbrances do we need to step away from? What new projects or missions do we need to undertake? What that is working do we need to continue and enhance? How might you suggest that we enhance it? What would be the role of the Organizational membership in achieving that, and what benefit would accrue to them? What would be the role of the Chapters in achieving that, and what benefit would accrue to them? What would be the role of individual members in achieving that, and what benefit would accrue to them? What benefit would accrue to the Internet as a whole, and how would that help in enabling access to those who now do not have it or are in one way or another limited?

This entry was posted by the ISOC Elections Committee on Monday, April 24th, 2006 at 2:45 am. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 or Atom 1.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Q7. Looking to the future”

  1. Comment by: Artur Serra   
    April 25th, 2006 at 5:24 am

    Let me summarize my vision about Internet and ISOC and why it makes a difference. For the first time, an open organization, ISOC, is responsible of a general purpose and open technology, Internet. Traditionally, technology was considered a natural fact and people should adapt themselves to this “reality”. But the relation between ISOC and Internet is challenging this tradition. Everyday we see how we build Internet by ourselves. This technology is our deed, our artefact. And ISOC gather its living fathers (and mothers), at least , a lot of them.

    ISOC should maintain this unique position as the organizations of the inventors of the Internet that at the same time cares for its evolution and its societal use. Do not forget: “internet is for everyone”.

    The next 3 years can be a critical growth period in Internet. The child is grown up. Then ISOC faces two critical challenges.

    a) A new generation of researchers want to produce new Internet technology to overcome the limitations of the first Internet generation. They want to be the new Internet “fathers”. Projects like GENI, CANET4, GLIF, and others want to renovate the Internet technology to adapt it to the new explosive demands. How to build an Internet for everyone is still a remaining challenge. In 2006, Internet connects only 1/6 of the human population.

    b) A new generation of professionals, entrepreneurs and young political leaders are looking for new economic and political opportunities for their countries in the digital era. They want Internet for their countries and companies. Nobody wants to be left aside. The debate about the “Government of the Internet” is a not affortunated expression of this problem.

    The ISOC should develop answers in both directions:

    a) The IETF and the IAB as well all the ISOC members and organzations should participate actively in the first challenge, how to create a new generation of Internet technology.

    b) The local chapters should focus mainly in the second challenge, how to extend the Internet to everyone. Governments and companies in each community should discover in their ISOC local chapter the best advisor to their national and local interest in the new global realities.

    In the first issue, I consider critical points for the next 3 years the followings:

    1. ISOC should participate in the emerging research programs oriented to redesign the Internet technology. ISOC should gather also the emerging “fathers” of the next generation Internet.

    2. ISOC should encourage also the global coordination of the different research programs oriented to such goal.

    In the second area, the societal one:

    1. ISOC should establish platforms of dialogue with our national governments to explain them how Internet can benefit their national strategies, its economic and social dimensions. In some countries that platform can take the form of a IT Council to the President or to the Regional gov., in others a more bottom up approach including private-public partnership promoted by local chapter can be considered. But never, never ISOC should be considered as a foreign organization.

    2. Engaging the Local Chapter of ISOC in the promotion of local languages and cultures is a good way to extend the Internet to everyone. People want control its own Internet, they want consider Internet as part of their country, of their community, and in their mother language. In 2006 ISOC has about 80 local chapters speaking around 50 different languages. In the planet, there are approximately 5.000 human languages alive.A new and more divers constituency of local chapters is possible and necessary. This is particularly important in continents like Asia, Africa, Latin American and Middle East, all below the global average of Internet users.

  2. Comment by: Franck   
    April 25th, 2006 at 7:48 am

    I know the answer to this question:




  3. Comment by: Spencer Dawkins   
    April 25th, 2006 at 2:27 pm

    In three years, I hope that ISOC has completed transitioning all IETF administrative support to IASA, including improvements to IETF IPR handling.

    In three years, I hope that IETF has revamped its standards process, and that we have achieved significant improvements in standards quality and “work in progress” intervals for Internet standards.

    In three years, I hope that ISOC has provided guidance to IETF on balancing current-operator requirements and architectural direction – this balance doesn’t exist today, and the lack of balance shows when we discuss “net neutrality”, or even IPv6 multihoming.

    In three years, I hope that ISOC has spoken, or encouraged others to speak, on technical trends that are shattering our Internet (for example, NATs, firewalls, and Session Border Controllers) and making it difficult to deploy new applications.

    In three years, I hope that ISOC has spoken, or encouraged others to speak, on political trends that are shattering our Internet (content filtering, etc.).

    In three years, I hope that we have made substantial progress on integrating China and India into the Internet community (not just the Internet Protocol community).

    If half of these things have actually happened (especially if it’s the correct half), I’ll be thrilled, but I’d like to work toward making all of them happen.

  4. Comment by: Franck   
    April 25th, 2006 at 6:36 pm

    It is not much my vision of the future but our vision of the future. ISOC has two major constituencies, the IETF supported by the organisations, the Chapters supported by individual members. This is a summary and a little bit crude but it will allow me to explain how I see things.

    I don’t know too much about IETF, I have involved myself a little bit on explaining issues in developping countries that would affect standards implementation. IETF seems to make a tremendous job in the technical area, so let’s not fix it. However there are some issues as Spencer is pointing out where ISOC should work with IETF to ensure that the standards are free to implement (free as in freedom not in free beer).

    On the political side, the governments of the world have started to reclaim their authority over the Internet (an issue affecting all of their citizens). The WSIS and the new Internet Governance Forum is such example. In a previous post, I highlighted the top down approach of the WSIS, which brought back the emergence of a bottom up approach. Let’s work on this problem at the local level, then national, then regional, then internationally.

    Where does ISOC fit on these two streams?

    ISOC and especially, its board must listen and feel what these two constituencies want to do. Chapters and individuals are working at the local level to ensure “Internet for Everyoneâ€?. ISOC must provide support, expertise and experience to the chapters. The IETF is working on the new
    Internet generation and how it is rolled out. Same here, ISOC must provide support, expertise and experience to the IETF. It must listen to people and find consensus. It must must get these two communities to mix and match. The IETF journal is one example of something good happening, the ISOC ambassadors is another example of getting the information flowing between communities. INET was a forum to exchange ideas, we do not need a conference, but we need mechanisms to talk to each others, and ISOC should facilitate that.

    In summary, I would like to see ISOC much more closer to its base, supporting initiatives and reforms coming from its various constituencies (and stakeholders) and making people meet people

    This can only be achieved as a group, where I will do my utmost to help.

  5. Comment by: Richard Bell   
    April 27th, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    The question might almost be simplified to “What is my agenda and how do I intend to pursue it?â€? the answer to which would be that “I do not have a pre-determined agendaâ€?. I see my role as being one of representing the views of Chapter members on the board in a way that uses the consensus of those members to build an agenda with which in turn to deliver results. It would be putting the cart before the horse for me to state what that agenda is since I’m not yet in a position to solicit the views of all those I am to represent.

    If I had to be more specific I would say that in general terms I would if elected to the board have three guiding principals:
    [1] My intention would be to narrow in on a few specific high priority projects where there is a clear consensus amongst those I represent and aim to deliver some specific progress on them during my tenure.
    [2] As a representative of chapter members I have a responsibility to them. Nevertheless as a member of the board I have a fiduciary responsibility to ISOC as a whole. As such the agenda of chapters needs to be pursued within the overall context of ISOC and clearly aligning the interests of such a diverse membership is in itself an ongoing challenge.
    [3] I do have a bias towards the interests of emerging Internet markets. Not just African ones but all those economies where for either regulatory, economic or political reasons the Internet is still less developed than in G8 economies. The future of developing economies lies not in poverty reduction as much as in wealth creation. Business creates jobs, jobs create wealth and wealth improves the lives of everyone in society. The mobile phone has had an unprecedented impact in stimulating economic activity in emerging economies. I believe passionately that the Internet could achieve even more if the basic building blocks can be put in place.

  6. Comment by: Yan Baoping   
    May 7th, 2006 at 9:06 pm

    I see the trend of Internet development is becoming more localized while at the same time, becoming more internationalized. When I say more localized, I mean the content of the Internet and the way to access the Internet is localized to meet the needs of different parts of the world. And when I say more internationalized, I mean the Internet as one of the most powerful communication tools, will unite the world even closer.

    Thus, as my vision for the next three years, I would like to see myself and ISOC contribute efforts to facilitate these movements. In detail, I would devote myself into and see ISOC working on:
    1. More outreach to developing countries and emerging economics to include them in the global Internet development;
    2. Build communication mechanism to facilitate communication between local chapters and members, a cost effective communication channel to accommodate members who have a tight budget is essential;
    3. Provide an users’ experiences focus to the technical community while they develop and refine technical standards;
    4. Build on its local chapters, ISOC can work well with local members, users and government agencies to encourage the participation in ISOC’s processes, and while respect local culture and regulations, promote the importance of the free flow of information.