I really like Jane's suggestion; I think it's a good idea.
I'm curious to see if the experience of CN operators and the community in
general reflects the model she outlined.
Best,
-Michael
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018, 10:49 AM Jane Coffin <coffin(a)isoc.org> wrote:
Hi Luca –
Some food for thought as I was not at Rights Con (sadly 😉).
CNs – from my experience – go through phases of development and phases of
challenges.
In the IXP world (which is similar) we saw the:
-start-up phase (mostly volunteer and often non-profit and not yet
charging for services or ports/other)
-Intermediate phase – from start-up to more developed platform, membership
base, and management of IXP by volunteers which transition to charging
annual fees or for services at the IXP. Customer service switch from
purely volunteer to hiring part-time staff/full time after that (or in some
cases still purely volunteer, but more organized or more accustomed to what
they are doing)– more members have generally joined as the value-add
(value) of the IXP was clear and members began to invest more time and
business focus into the IXP becoming more stable, more of a non-profit
business, and more focus on customer service from the sense that the
platform needed to be stable as it was a boon to the community. Member
base is transitioning from pure ISP and a few content delivery networks.
-more mature non-profit entity (business if you will) – generally not
commercial, but a business nonetheless – more professionalized as its
member-base grows and diversifies and maintenance and expectations are
different when both the technical facilities and management need to match
expectations due to the value of the platform. Classic bottom-up
governance and a clear Internet player.
*there are challenges at all of these levels and I would suggest the same
is likely the case for CNs
For CNs – my guess is that we can chart development of a CN in a similar
manner.
-“start-up”
-Intermediate non-profit that is relied up for its service and the team
managing has more experience, can troubleshoot faster, and is dedicated to
customer service (or keeping the network up)
-More developed/non-profit that has shifted into a different mind-set that
may be more network growth focused, business focused in order to make sure
more gear can be purchased and the platform is managed.
Do you want to limit the workshop to start-up, but consider identifying
the other phases in the compendium for future consideration?
Clearly there is going to be great info from all of the phases.
The development of CNs is of great interest. What I have not noted is the
importance to the community – social value and the value of the CN to
local, regional, other authorities and what the corollary impact on how one
is able to advance reg/pol change.
Best,
Jane
Internet Society |
www.internetsociety.org
Skype: janercoffin
Mobile/WhatsApp: +1.202.247.8429
*From: *<dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net> on behalf of Luca Belli <
luca.belli(a)fgv.br>
*Reply-To: *Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity <
dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net>
*Date: *Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 2:19 PM
*To: *Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity <
dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net>
*Cc: *"donna_scheeder(a)comcast.net" <donna_scheeder(a)comcast.net>
*Subject: *[DC3] Planning the DC3 Session
Hi all,
A further issue we should start discussing is the planning of the DC3
session.
As DC3 has continuously produced outputs, we have a session slot by
default but we should send a draft session proposal by *29 June*.
As discussed at Rightscon
<http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/4391/1254>,
the DC3 session could have a threefold structure featuring the following
parts:
1. presentation of (at least some of) the initiatives featured in the
2018 DC3 Report (that should be the “CN Manual” mentioned in my previous
email)
2. discussion with people in their early phase of CN development to
understand the challenges they are facing
3. discussion with potential partners
FYI, the 90 minutes time slot has been reestablished (thanks to all those
who commented during the IGF stocktaking consultation requesting
restauration of the 90 min slot!!).
The session should be as much as possible, multistakeholder, gender
balanced and geographically diverse.
I propose to have up to 3 speakers in part 1; 2 for part 2; and 2 (or
maybe 3) in part 3.
The speakers for part 1 will be chosen amongst the contributors of the CN
Manual. If anyone is already sure to submit a contribution for the CN
manual, please send a message (on-list or a PM) so that I can include your
name in the DRAFT session description.
As regards part 2, Nico Pace offered to help liaise with people currently
developing CNs and facing challenges. Nico can you suggest some names?
As regards part 3, I was thinking that IFLA could be good (I am CCing
Donna) and perhaps one Intergovernmental org that is dealing with CNs e.g.
CITEL or African Union.
Lastly, after having read what Google India is doing, providing Free WiFi
at Indian train stations, I have started wondering if it could also be a
potential partner to be included in the discussion
https://qz.com/1300522/googles-free-wifi-at-railway-stations-is-a-way-of-li…
What do you think?
Best
Luca
[image: FGV Direito Rio]
*Luca Belli, PhD*
*Senior Researcher *
*Head of Internet Governance @ FGV <http://internet-governance.fgv.br/>*
luca.belli(a)fgv.br
+55 21 3799 *5763*
*@1lucabelli <https://twitter.com/1lucabelli>*
[image:
http://www.fgv.br/mailing/Direito_Rio/assinatura_email/Ondas.png]
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3