Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050210140045.04290c10@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 16:05:50 +0100
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, ietf@ietf.org
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
Subject: Re: ASCII diff of ISOC-proposed changes to BCP
In-Reply-To: <3CCE11A5508AA61F5732FD0C@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
References: <72C129C62A634BA0A142446F@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
 <9QWVNoS1w-B@khms.westfalen.de>
 <3CCE11A5508AA61F5732FD0C@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 10:56 10/02/2005, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>Lynn said that the ISOC lawyer said that this is standard legal grammar 
>for "these are the parties whose relationship the next part of the 
>sentence describes".
>I agree that it's not normal English.....

Sorry, to interrupt your important discussion about legal English grammar 
oddities. But it happens that today is the last day for comments to the 
WGIG. To formulate my own fair comments I need to be confirmed the IETF is 
not interested in addressing the needs they documented as they think they 
have adjusted for a long.

Background. There are may be today 850.000.000 non permanent web watchers 
and spam sufferers using their world digital ecosystem with the IETF end to 
end Internet application, with ICANN as an operator, and may be 50.000.000 
DNs and 97.5% illegitimate DNS root calls. There are also 190 countries 
decided to get a return from their 25 last years efforts in reducing 
computer and bandwidth costs. They issued an RFP under the form of 
Resolutions and Points of actions. They have a last call period ending 
tomorrow.

When you translate their request in rough figures, they want to support 
within 20 years (shorter delays for choices and planning) an extended 
services, broad bandwidth continuity and an interpersonal brain to brains 
(cpu2cpu) ubiquitous and 24/365 space of secure, reliable, fast privacy 
protected multi-exchanges. One can guesstimate 20.000.000.000 stations, 
7.000.000.000 users (or more as individuals have home/office systems), 
probably one or two terra names and more numbers and RFIDs, using 7620 
languages (ISO last current count), 20.000 dialects (last non-ISO very 
reduced count), for 42650 business areas (last UN count) most with their 
proximity risk contained networks, in full respect both of national, 
business, personal privacy, empowerment and sovereignty and of support of 
States regalian services, at a cost and an intergovernance complexity the 
developing countries can foot, so they can bridge the digital divide 
without fearing an e-colonization.

Support to every bidder is available by the 167 years old, Governments 
created, ITU.Competition is at least by the users' own . "InterNAT & co" 
solution.
jfc