{"id":1584,"date":"2012-12-15T14:59:24","date_gmt":"2012-12-15T13:59:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.ofcourseimright.com\/?p=1584"},"modified":"2012-12-15T16:40:23","modified_gmt":"2012-12-15T15:40:23","slug":"wcit-the-internet-the-itu-t-and-what-comes-next","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ofcourseimright.com\/?p=1584","title":{"rendered":"WCIT, the Internet, the ITU-T, and what comes next"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Courtesy of Mike Blanche of Google, the map on the left shows in black countries who signed the treaty developed at WCIT, countries in red who indicated they wouldn’t sign the treaty, and other countries who are thinking about it.\u00a0 A country can always change its mind.<\/p>\n

Over the next few weeks that map will change, and the dust will settle.\u00a0 The fact that the developed world did not sign the treaty means that the Internet will continue to function relatively unmolested, at least for a time, and certainly between developed countries.\u00a0\u00a0 As the places that already heavily regulate telecommunications are the ones who are signing the treaty, its impact\u00a0will be subtle.\u00a0 We will continue to see international regulatory challenges to the Internet, perhaps as early as 2014 at the ITU’s next Plenipotentiary conference.\u00a0 Certainly there will be heated debate at the next World Telecommunication Policy Forum.<\/p>\n

This map also highlights that the ITU is the big loser in this debacle.\u00a0 Secretary General Hamadoun Tour\u00e9 claimed that the ITU works by consensus.\u00a0 It’s just not so, when matters are contentious, and quite frankly he lacked the power and influence to bring all the different viewpoints together.\u00a0 This loss of consensus has split the Union, and has substantial ramifications.\u00a0 There is no shared vision or goal, and this will need to be addressed at the next Plenipotentiary conference.<\/p>\n

With different sectors and diverse participants, it is hard to lump the Union into a single group. Nations come together to manage radio spectrum in the ITU-R.\u00a0 That’s important because spectrum crosses borders, and needs to be managed.\u00a0 In the ITU-D, both developing and developed countries come together to have a dialog on key issues such as cybersecurity and interoperability.\u00a0 The work of the -D sector needs to be increased.\u00a0 Most notably, their Programmes need even more capability, and the study groups should be articulating more clearly the challenges and opportunities developing countries face.<\/p>\n

The -T standardization sector is considerably more complex.\u00a0 It’s important not to lose sight of the good work that goes on there. For example, many of the audio and video codecs we use are standardized in ITU-T study group 16.\u00a0 Fiber transmission standards in study group 15 are the basis for long haul transmission.\u00a0 Study group 12 has some of the foremost experts in the world on quality of service management.\u00a0 However, the last six years have demonstrated a fundamental problem:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

At the end of the day, when conflicts arise, and that is in the nature of standards work, because of one country one vote, the ITU-T is catering to developing countries who by their nature are not at the leading edge of technology.\u00a0 The ITU-T likes to believe it holds a special place among standards organizations, and yet there have been entire study groups whose work have been ignored by the market and governments alike.\u00a0 To cater to those who are behind the Rogers adoption curve<\/a> is to chase away those who are truly in front.\u00a0 This is why you don’t see active participation from Facebook, Twitter, or Google in ITU-T standards, and why even larger companies like Cisco, IBM, HP, and others prefer to do protocol work largely elsewhere.1<\/sup><\/p>\n

So what can be done?<\/h2>\n

In practice study groups in ITU-T serve four functions:<\/p>\n