What do you mean exactly by "second-tier thought-leaders"? It REALLY, AWFULLY, sounds patronizing and "imperialistic" etc.
Best Regards | Cordiales Saludos | Grato, Andrés L. Pacheco Sanfuentes <[email protected]> +1 (817) 271-9619 On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Bill Woodcock <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sep 18, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Bill Woodcock <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sep 18, 2013, at 8:28 AM, David Johnson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Interesting ... but is this even possible? >>> http://world.time.com/2013/09/18/brazil-looks-to-break-from-u-s-centric-internet/ >> >> Well, there are a bunch of different concepts being discussed. The primary >> one is localization of routing, which isn't just possible, it's >> best-practice, and something Brazil has been doing an excellent job of >> already for quite a few years. If you look at >> https://pch.net/applications/ixpdir/summary/ you'll see that they've got 23 >> active exchanges, which puts them second in the world after the U.S., with >> 77% annualized growth, compared to 10% in the U.S. If you look at the >> Brazil section of https://pch.net/ixpdir you'll see that almost all of that >> growth has been occurring since they made it an explicit policy goal in >> 2008, and began aggressively implementing IXP best-practices. >> >> At a governance level, Brazil is divided. The CGI, which decides and >> implements domestic Internet policy, is the agency responsible for all this >> growth and best-practices-following. As such, they've been largely aligned >> with OECD-country and Internet interests. The Brazilian federal government, >> on the other hand, sets foreign policy, interacts with the ITU, et cetera. >> And so although it has no appreciable influence over what happens _within_ >> the country, it's what's seen by other national governments in diplomatic >> circles. In Internet governance, Brazil tends toward this >> Brazil-India-South Africa axis, which doesn't particularly align with the >> Internet or OECD countries, unless by accident. This is the area that >> Internet folks are most worried about, since those three countries are >> second-tier thought-leaders in the ITU, and can swing a lot of >> developing-country votes in their respective regions. So Brazil is, in many >> ways, the U.S.' opposite: they do the right thing domestically, but say the >> wrong thing internationally. > > Sorry, hit "send" too soon. The third area is content and the application > layer. Localizing routing doesn't make any difference if users explicitly > choose a service that's only hosted elsewhere, so promoting local content and > online services is also important, and an inherently good thing (in that it's > more efficient from routing, performance, and economic standpoints). Getting > all their users off Orkut, for instance. :-) > > So, my guess is that what happened here is that the Brazilian federal > government went to the CGI, asked what the scoop was, got clued in, and > crafted the most opportunistic possible spin on what they've already been > doing (well) for the past six years. Because they've already been doing a > good job of it, the announcement looks particularly momentous to people who > haven't been paying attention. > > -Bill > > > > > > -- > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of > list guidelines will get you moderated: > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, > change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at > [email protected]. -- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected].
