Response: OpenStand: Principles for The Modern Standard Paradigm

The IAB, IEEE, IETF ISOC and W3C are jointly declare the need for open standards. As a public relations move it looks more like an American government response to Chinese government moves in the ITU to take a share in developing Internet standards. The movement is suspect.

OpenStand is a global community that stands together in support of The Modern Paradigm for Standards – an open, collective movement to radically improve the way people around the globe develop, deploy and embrace technologies for the benefit of humanity.

I’ma fervent supporter of open standards but the organisations that control Internet standards and governance are overwhelmingly run and administrated by American nationals. While I would align myself with democratic values and open systems, it is equally difficult to accept that only America has the moral right to control technologies like DNS and effectively control standards bodies.

I can’t see an easy way out of the current dependence on these standards bodies, but at least we can recognise and accept that other countries and governments have valid reasons for wanting to have equal control and access.

The IETF RFC 6852 – Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards says:

 In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and  are voluntarily adopted globally.  These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation.  Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the   growth and expansion of existing markets.

I can’t argue with this logic. I agree with it. But I can’t see that this is going to solve the problem.

via OpenStand: Principles for The Modern Standard Paradigm.

  • Brent Salisbury

    It seems to take forever to read between the lines. I researched the ITU / UN attempt at governance of the Internet abortion of an execution quite a bit and it all came down to putting up tollbooths on the internet at a countries POP. The other was new mechanism to filter and censor Inet traffic by the usual suspect nations.

    As a westerner, I get sketchy when I see countries like Russia, China, Iran, Saudi etc looking to have a say in content and content delivery. I do agree it needs to be transparent since the word open doesn’t have much of a meaning anymore. My only concern is censorship creep but what little I know about some of those bodies I don’t think that applicable.

    Whats the net of what they want to get out of it? I it just annoyance with US dominance in the bodies?

  • David Rutledge

    I think we as Americans love to be the stewards but are afraid of handing the reins over. It’s like a parent/child relationship. The Internet is our baby and it’s a scary world out there.