RFC 1491: A Survey of Advanced Usages of X.500 | RFC Editor
Skip to content
Info
RFC
1491
:
FYI
21
:
A Survey of Advanced Usages of X.500
C. Weider
,
R. Wright
Informational
Network Working Group                                          C. Weider
Request for Comments: 1491                           Merit Network, Inc.
FYI: 21                                                        R. Wright
                                            Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
                                                               July 1993
A Survey of Advanced Usages of X.500
Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is
   unlimited.

Abstract

   This document is the result of a survey asking people to detail their
   advanced usages of X.500. It is intended to show how various
   organizations are using X.500 in ways which extend the view of X.500
   as a "White Pages" service.  This RFC is a product of the Integrated
   Directory Services Working Group of the Application and User Services
   Areas of the IETF.
1
. Introduction
As the use of X.500 spreads in the Internet, organizations are
   finding uses for it which go beyond the "white pages" paradigm which
   has been used to introduce it to new users. Consequently, to document
   those new uses and to encourage the wider use of X.500, we sent out a
   survey to obtain "advanced usages" of X.500.
1.1
The survey
The survey we sent out is included here for two purposes:

   1) completeness, and
   2) we'd like to encourage anyone who retrieves this document to send
      us their advanced usage for inclusion in the next revision.

   If you wish to fill this out, please send it to the working group
   list: IDS@merit.edu.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 1]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
_____________________________________________________________________

   Application Name:

   Author(s):

   Company or Institution:

   e-mail address for more information:

   If this is a product for public distribution, please give us the
     Type: FREE, COMMERCIAL PRODUCT, or PROTOTYPE/RESEARCH
     FREE               - Anyone may obtain this product at zero cost.
     COMMERCIAL PRODUCT - One may purchase this product.
     PROTOTYPE/RESEARCH - This product is not yet available, only a
                          prototype.

   If FREE, please give us:
     * FTP and/or FTAM address (if available via FTP and/or FTAM):

   If COMMERCIAL, please give us:
     * Directions to obtain product:

   Availability: (When will product be available?)

   List of platforms product runs on:
   [The platform list can be general - e.g. UNIX]

   Short Description (< 100 words):

   Full Description (< 1 page):

                   Fig. 1: Advanced Usages Survey Template

   ______________________________________________________________________

   This survey went out to the following mailing lists: osi-
   ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk, disi@merit.edu (now ids@merit.edu), and
   dssig@ics.uci.edu.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 2]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
1.2
Disclaimer
Descriptions of the advanced usages were written by the implementors,
   and not by the members of IDS. Although IDS has worked with the
   description authors to ensure readability, no guarantees can be made
   regarding the validity of descriptions. Caveat emptor.
2
. The Survey Responses
2.1
Index to Responses
Application                                                   Page
2.2.1
Global Time-table Information Service ................
3
2.2.2
Pre-Message Security Protocol         ................
4
2.2.3
Electronic Data Interchange           ................
5
2.2.4
Network Topology Information          ................
7
2.2.4.1
Shared Whois Information Project    ................
7
2.2.4.2
EARN's Network Directory            ................
8
2.2.5
Soft Pages                            ................
9
2.2.6
X-Tel                                 ................
10
2.2.7
Xerox Clearinghouse                   ................
12
2.2.8
X.500 Sendmail                        ................
13
2.2.9
Transparent ODA Conversion            ................
14
2.2.10
X.500 and the whois protocol          ................
16
2.2.11
X.400 table handling                  ................
17
2.2
Survey Responses
2.2.1
Global Time-table Information Service
Application Name: Global Time-table Information Service based on X.500

   Date Received: 7/1/1992

   Date Last Validated: 7/1/1992

   Author(s):
     Jens Hofmann
     Cuno Lanz

   Company or Institution:
     Laboratory of Computer Engineering and Networks,
     Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich)
     Switzerland

   e-mail address for more information:
     c=CH; a=ARCOM; p=SWITCH; o=ETHZ; ou=TIK; s=Lanz (lanz@tik.ethz.ch)
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 3]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Type:
     experimental prototype; not public

   FTP address: <none>

   Short Description:
     This application aims at integrating the time-table information
     services offered by public transport providers of different scope
     (local, regional, national or international) into a homogeneous and
     unified user interface.  X.500 is used to store the information in
     an autonomous and extensible way.

   Full Description:
     Most of the public tranport providers offer some kind of time-table
     information service like printed directory, help-desk, telephone
     support or PC software. Unfortunately these services have some of
     the following drawbacks:

         - no automatic update of data (information accuracy)
         - no global availability (place independency)
         - no permanent availability (time independency)
         - no inter-provider service (service integration).

     X.500 may serve as a vehicle to overcome these drawbacks as
     follows: The public transport providers store the time-table
     information in a standardized format on locally managed DSAs. There
     is some kind of special purpose DUA which (1) queries the user for
     the input parameters (date, time, source and destination station)
     then (2) searches for the relevant paths by querying the involved
     DSAs and (3) displays the resulting time-table to the user.

     In a diploma thesis a student is developing a new data model which
     supports easy selection of source and destination station as well
     as fast exploring of the time-table information. He is implementing
     a prototype application onto an existing DUA interface (based on
     HyperCard and running on Apple Macintosh) which is connected to the
     world-wide X.500 pilot service over DIXIE protocol.  In order to
     test the prototype application the time-table information of the
     Swiss national public transport company and of most of the regional
     providers around the city of Zurich is included under the branch:
     c=CH;o=ETH Zurich.
2.2.2
Pre-Message Security Protocol
Application Name:
     Defense Message System Directory

   Date Recieved: 7/1/1992
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 4]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Date Last Validated: 7/1/1992

   Author:
     Bob Cooney

   Company or Institution:
     The Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station, Washington
     and
     The Defense Information System Agency

   E-mail address for more information:
     cooney@wnyose.nctsw.navy.mil

   Type:
     experimental prototype, not public

   FTP address: <none>

   Short Description:
     The U.S. Navy will build a directory based on X.500 to support the
     distribution of Pre-Message Security Protocol security keys.

   Long Description:
     The U.S. Navy has been asked to build a directory service to support
     the distribution of Pre-Message Security Protocol security keys.
     The Pre-Message Security Protocol will provide SMTP/X.400 security
     services for unclassified but sensitive mail on the Defense Data
     Network.

     The directory will be based on QUIPU. Proof of concept is expected
     by October 1992, with initial operational capacity by October 1993.
2.2.3
Electronic Data Interchange
Application Name: An X.500 User Agent for Electronic Data Interchange

   Date Received: 7/10/1992

   Date Last Validated: 7/10/1992

   Author:
     Neil Weldon

   Company or Institution:
     Networks Group,
     Computer Science Dept.,
     Trinity College Dublin,
     Ireland
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 5]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
e-mail address for more information:
     omahony@cs.tcd.ie
     nmweldon@vax1.tcd.ie

   Type:
     Research product and not for public distribution

   FTP address: <none>

   Short Description:
     The Directory is used to assist in solving the 'first order'
     problem associated with Electronic Data Interchange (EDI). EDI is
     the transfer of trade documents between application processes in a
     processable form.  The 'first order' problem describes the
     agreements that two organizations must come to regarding
     capabilities and preferences, before using EDI.

     To solve this problem we defined object types to allow the storage
     of product catalogues within the Directory, as well as information
     about the EDI readiness of trading partners: addresses, preferences
     and EDI capabilities.

   Full Description:
     Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) is the means by which
     organizations exchange trade related documents between application
     processes in an format which may be processed electronically.

     Before using EDI an organization must establish a series of goals
     and objectives, to establish what type of documents they wish to be
     able to transmit (invoices, purchase orders etc.) and what their
     communication requirements are. Each of these time consuming and
     tedious steps is usually done in conjunction with trading partners
     where these agreements regarding EDI capabilities and preferences
     must be made.

     To solve this 'first order' problem (the need to come to agreements
     with other organizations before trading using EDI takes place) we
     defined object types to allow the storage of product catalogues
     within the Directory. The Directory may also convey information
     regarding the EDI readiness of trading partners: addresses,
     preferences and EDI capabilities.

     Using an experimental User Agent based on Pod which was developed
     at Brunel in the UK, trade documents may be built up by selecting
     products from the stored catalogues. These documents are then
     encoded as an EDI Interchange after the Directory has been queried
     about addresses, etc.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 6]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
The current object types are very basic and may only convey the
     minimal amount of information necessary. We are now in the process
     of extending this further to a full product class hierarchy which
     is being based on information that may be sent within an EDI trade
     document using the EDI standard document syntax EDIFACT.

     By using the Directory as a repository for product information to
     aid in EDI the catalogues become available worldwide. They may be
     replicated at various nodes, and the updating and propagation of
     changes to slave copies becomes trivial.
2.2.4
Network Topology Information
There are two projects in this area; Merit Network's Shared Whois
   Information Project, and EARN's Network Directory.
2.2.4.1
Shared Whois Information Project
Application Name: Shared Whois Project

   Date Received: 6/1/1993

   Date Last Validated: 6/1/1993

   Author(s): Sheri Repucci

   Company or Institution: Merit Network, Inc.

   e-mail address for more information: swip@merit.edu

   Availability: June 1993

   Type:
     experimental prototype, not public

   List of platforms product runs on: UNIX

   Short Description:
     The Shared Whois Project merges network data held by various
     organizations.  The principal purpose of merging this data is to
     find and resolve conflicting network information between the
     databases.  The longterm goal of this project is to move away from
     the current model of storing similar and/or duplicate network
     information in multiple databases and to move to a X.500
     distributed database model.  To this end, we are working on loading
     the NSFNET network information into X.500 in anticipation of
     participating in a distributed database trial.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 7]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Full Description:
     The Shared Whois Project is a collection of programs and shell
     scripts which collectively merges the network data held by each of
     the participating organizations.  Currently this includes Merit,
     the RIPE-NCC and the InterNIC.  The principal purpose of merging
     this vast quantity of data is to find and resolve conflicting
     network information between the various databases.  It is our
     intent to merge this data bi-weekly and thus rapidly reach, and
     thereafter maintain, a stable set of commonly held network
     information.

     While there is a common set of information all three of the
     participants hold in their various databases, additional
     information unique to the function of each organization is also
     held.  Furthermore, the resulting set of data created by the merger
     holds only one entry per network without attempting to combine the
     variations.  Thus, each entry includes a listing of all databases
     found to contain information for that network as well as all
     databases found to be in conflict with the entry held in the
     resultant set.

     The longterm goal of this project is to move away from the current
     model of storing similar and/or duplicate network information in
     multiple databases and to move to a X.500 distributed database
     model.  To this end, Merit is working to load the NSFNET network
     information into X.500 in anticipation of participating in a trial
     with the InterNIC and others on the road to a globally distributed
     database model.
2.2.4.2
EARN's Network Directory
Application Name: Ditnet/EARN Network Directory

   Date Received: 7/7/1992

   Date Last Verified: 7/7/1992

   Author(s):
     Peter Sylvester

   Company or Institution:
     Inria Rocquencourt - France

   e-mail address for more information:
     peter.sylvester@inria.fr

   Type: FREE (data owned by EARN/Bitnet)
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 8]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Short Description:
     The EARN/Bitnet Network database consists of descriptions of all
     participating members, network nodes, adminstrators, and topology
     information. This database commonly known as BITEARN NODES is being
     made available through x.500.

   Full Description:
     A full description of the contents of the EARN/Bitnet database
     can be found in some EARN internal document which is available
     as a file BITEARN NODES from any NETSERV in EARN/Bitnet. The
     contents of this file is mapped into an X.500 subtree containing
     descriptions of network nodes, adminstrational personnel, and
     topology information.

     The first version of the directory subtree will be created using a
     simple textual mapping to a flat directory tree using private
     attributes.
2.2.5
Soft Pages
Application Name: Soft Pages

   Date Received: 9/25/1992

   Date Last Validated: 9/25/1992

   Author(s):
     Thomas Johannsen
     Glenn Mansfield

   Company or Institution:
     AIC Systems Laboratory,
     Tohoku University Sendai

   e-mail address for more information:
     spp-support@aic.co.jp

   Type:
     Intended for public distribution, not yet public

   FTP address: <none>

   Short Description:
     A file name look-up services for anonymous FTP servers, provides ls
     -lR information and FTP server address. Additionally, the nearest
     FTP site (from user's site) which holds the requested file is
     chosen.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                     [Page 9]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Full Description:
     With the growing of number and size of electronic archives for
     documents, programs and the like, the problem of finding and
     retrieving a specific file becomes more and more complex.
     Furthermore, bandwidth in the Internet is still limited. Users
     should be encouraged and supported to do local FTP sessions as often
     as possible instead of getting everything from the other end of the
     world (i.e., the net).

     The Soft Pages Project combines an Archie-like file look-up service
     with network configuration knowledge.  A dedicated User Agent gives
     a suggestion how to retrieve a document in a network traffic
     optimized manner.

     Basically, Directory information introduced by Soft Pages falls
     into two parts: A file information part and a network configuration
     part.

     The file information part describes objects and attributes for file
     servers and their contents. For each file server, names and
     attributes of its files are stored and updated periodically. This
     provides global access to Archie-like information for all
     registered file servers and, furthermore, opens the way to store
     document description together with the file name.  Thus, document
     search is not restricted to file name matches but might be run for
     keywords as well.

     The network configuration part provides information on networks
     (subnetworks), nodes and lines in the Internet. Furthermore, IP
     numbers can be mapped to network and node objects. In order to
     evaluate file server sites, Internet (site to site) connections are
     given a cost index and then alternatives are compared by their cost
     index. Cost index is a calculated parameter representing properties
     of a connection like speed, average traffic, charges etc. where
     values for the latter are hold as attributes to line objects.

     If a document is stored at two or more sites, the site with the
     lowest cost index (which naturally will be the "nearest" in network
     terms) will be chosen for retrieval.  A Soft Pages User Agent
     basically interacts with the Directory for finding a pointer to the
     "best" copy of a file wanted by a user.
2.2.6
X-Tel
Application Name: X-Tel's advanced applications

   Date received: 7/1/1992
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 10]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Date last verified: 7/1/1992

   Author(s):
     Colin Robbins
     Julian Onions
     Graeme Lunt

   Company or Institution: X-Tel Services Ltd.

   e-mail address for more information:
     x500@xtel.co.uk

   Type:
     Commercial Products / Ideas

   Short Description:
     1) Product Information.  Products that have DUA facilites built in
     have a "latest info" button or other request method.  When
     "pressed" a well known node below the X-Tel part of the tree is
     read.  The attributes contain descriptions of the latest version of
     the software, new features etc.  If you decide you would like the
     new version, a second read obtains the information required for a
     template order form.

     2) BUG Status.  As above, but obtains details of known bugs in the
     version of software you are running.  (If only we could find a way
     of putting fixes in, and automatically updating the software
     itself!)

     3) X-Terms.  We have a conferencing product, allowing X users to
     "talk" and share windows.  The problem is identifying which X
     Terminal device a particular user is currently on.  One solution we
     are using is modify a users directory entry during login to say
     which X display they have logged into.  The conference can the
     query the directory, and open windows on the appropriate device.
     The directory is also used to store details of current conferences,
     so new delegates can join the conference easily.

     4) Organisation browsing.  There are a rich set of attributes about
     people and their roles stored in the directory.  We have a special
     purpose DUA that exploits this information, and presents
     information on who manages who, who is secretary for who etc.  This
     is very useful when combined with the search ACL mechanism defined
     in OSI-DS 21 as different views can be given to different
     catergories of users.

     5) MHS use of directory.  The directory is use to store MHS routing
     information (as per the MHS DS working group documents)
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 11]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
6) Mail Lists.  Details of mailing lists are stored in the
     directory.  With careful use of access control, users can be given
     access so that they can subscribe and unsubscribe themselves
     to/from a list.

     7) Details of restuarants in the Nottingham area are stored in the
     directory!

     8) We plan to use the directory as a rendevuz for a multi-user
     adventure game.  Each "room" will be a different entry, and modify
     operations will be used to pick up and put down objects!

     The next two are "advanced" features of our DUA, they may not be
     considered relevant to this document!

     9) Templates.  The directory is used to store template entries.
     Our DUA then uses this template when adding new users.  Very
     useful, as a number of default attributes can be set.

     10) Editors.  Special purpose editors for a number of complex
     attribute syntaxes are built in to our DUAs.  This includes QUIPU
     ACLs, and X.400 OR Addresses.
2.2.7
Xerox Clearinghouse
Application Name: Clearinghouse Interface

   Date Received: 7/1/1992

   Date Last Validated: 7/1/1992

   Author(s):
     Margaret Avino

   Company or Institution:
     Xerox Corporation

   e-mail address for more information
     mavin.cin_ops@xerox.com

   Type:
     Early Design/Implementation stages

   Short Description:
     X.500 DSA interface to XNS (Xerox Network Services) Clearinghouse
     directory to provide access to Xerox Corporation's Clearinghouse via
     X.500 DUAs.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 12]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Full Description:
     Xerox uses the XNS network protocol suite to provide Mail, Filing,
     Directory, Authentication, etc. network services for the installed
     based of 45,000+ Xerox workstations.  The Directory is based on the
     XNS Clearinghouse protocol which is similar to X.500 in that it
     contains objects which have properties (attributes) and is a fully
     distributed, replicatable directory.  The searching capabilities of
     the Clearinghouse protocol are not as robust as the X.500 search
     operation and the physical structure of the original database is
     not amenable to complex searches as it could be if it were stored
     in a relational database.

     The first piece of this project is to transfer the data into an
     Oracle relational database and create a new Clearinghouse server
     which accesses the oracle database and is a full fledged member of
     the Clearinghouse, sending and receiving updates to other servers
     using the XNS Clearinghouse protocol.  This will allow powerful SQL
     queries to be performed on the data which will provide some very
     desired functionality such as: list all of the Distribution Lists
     of which this name is a member.

     To build on the new database, we are probing the implementation of
     an X.500 DSA interface to the Oracle Clearinghouse Directory.  This
     would allow X.500 DUAs to access the data and utilize the powerful
     search operations.  It will require the definition of one or more
     new object classes and several new attributes and some thought
     about the appropriate schema.
2.2.8
X.500 Sendmail
Application Name: X.500 Sendmail

   Date Received: 9/25/1992

   Date Last Verified: 9/25/1992

   Author(s):
     Tim Howes

   Company or Institution:
     University of Michigan

   e-mail address for more information:
     x500@umich.edu

   Type:
     FREE
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 13]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
FTP address: terminator.cc.umich.edu

   Directions to obtain product:
     get x500/sendmail-5.65.x500.tar.Z

   Short Description:
     Modifications to sendmail-5.65 to do X.500 lookups.

   Full Description:
     We have modified sendmail-5.65 so that it does X.500 lookups,
     returning the value of a user's rfc822Mailbox attribute. It
     handles multiple matches by sending a message containing the
     choices back to the sender.  If the user has no email address in
     X.500, the sender is sent a message containing postal and phone
     information on the user. Both exact and approximate matching is
     supported.
2.2.9
Transparent ODA Conversion
Application Name: Transparent ODA Conversion

   Date Received: 7/16/1992

   Date Last Verified: 7/16/1992

   Author(s):
     MacFarland Hale (MITRE Open Systems Group)

   Company or Institution:
     The MITRE Corporation

   e-mail address for more information:
     machale@mitre.org

   Type:
     Not Yet Available

   Short Description:
     Plan to use X.500 in conjunction with X.400 and Open Document
     Architecture (ODA) to provide transparent translation of compound
     documents between a sender and one or more recipients.

   Full Description:
     In the future, MITRE would like to combine X.500, X.400 and Open
     Document Architecture (ODA) to automate the conversion of compound
     documents in such a way that the users need not know about ODA or
     even that the conversion is taking place.  This will require new
     and/or updated X.400 products.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 14]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
A preferred compound document format (e.g., Microsoft Word,
     FrameMaker, etc.)  for each user is stored in the X.500 directory.
     Each X.400 Message Transfer Agent (MTA) host also houses converters
     between each such format and the Open Document Interchange Format
     (ODIF).

     A user (sender) creates a document with his or her preferred
     compound document editor.  Ideally, the editor software will have a
     link (e.g., button or pull-down menu) to the X.400 User Agent (UA).
     The user invokes the X.400 UA (either using this link, or outside
     of the editor software) to send the document as an X.400 message to
     one or more recipients.  Next, the document may need to be
     converted to ODIF, and this may be done in one of two ways.

     Preferably, the X.400 MTA will be responsible for the ODIF
     conversion.  The UA must somehow be told what format the original
     document is in.  This may be done via the UA invocation from inside
     the editor, via a UA configuration file, by examining the filename
     extension, etc.  It then tags the document to indicate the
     document's original format using one of the body parts:
     "Bilaterally Defined" (body part 14), "Nationally Defined" (body
     part 7) or "Externally Defined" (body part 15).  The UA then sends
     the message, and the MTA interprets the tag to determine the
     document's format.

     For messages internal to MITRE, the MTA will look up the
     recipient's preferred document format.  If it is different than the
     sender's format, the MTA calls the appropriate ODIF converter and
     sends the message.  If the recipient's preferred format is the same
     as that of the document being sent, then no conversion is
     performed.  For messages going outside MITRE, the document is
     always converted to ODIF.  The user may prevent this by specifying
     that the enclosed document is not to be converted, in which case
     the UA simply sends the document in binary form with no special
     tag.

     Alternatively, the UA may do the conversion.  As above, the UA must
     be told the document's original format.  The UA may then call the
     appropriate local ODIF converter, and then send the message.  There
     are some disadvantages to this approach:

       1) ODIF converters must be purchased for and maintained on many
          more hosts;

       2) the document is always converted to ODIF (unless the UA
          accesses the directory, but...);

       3) conversion overhead could be traumatic on a small PC.
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 15]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
At each recipient host, the X.400 MTA catches the incoming message,
     recognizing the contents as ODIF.  It then looks up the recipients'
     preferred compound document formats, calls the appropriate
     converters to translate the contents, and then delivers the
     messages to the recipients.  If the incoming message contains one
     of the format tags described above, then no conversion is performed
     (since the document is not in ODIF).

     Please note that MITRE is a not-for-profit organization.  We will
     not produce commercial products to support this scenario, but we
     are anxious to encourage and work with companies interested in
     doing so.
2.2.10
X.500 and the WHOIS protocol
Application Name: Phone Book

   Date Received: 7/15/1992

   Date Last Verified: 7/15/1992

   Author(s):
     Steven Schoch

   Company or Institution:
     NASA Ames Research Center

   e-mail address for more information:
     schoch@sheba.arc.nasa.gov

   Type:
     FREE, see Steve

   Short Description:
     On-line edition of our phone book, using X.500 for storage and
     retrieval.

   Full Description:
     Phone Book is a user application which communicates using the
     Internet WHOIS protocol.  It is listed in the Internet Resources
     Guide as such.  The latest incarnation, however, does not make use
     of a flat file -- it gets information from a DUA that performs
     conversions between information received via DAP and the format that
     users expect to get back from our Phone Book queries.  The change to
     X.500 has allowed us to supply additional data such as E-mail
     address which do not normally appear in the phone book.  The fields
     supplied in response to a query include:
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 16]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Name
           Telephone Number
           Mail Stop
           Office Number
           Organizational Affiliation (either a NASA organization code
                   or a contractor name)
           E-mail address

   Queries may be made on any of the fields specified, with the office
   being divided into building and room components.  A sample lookup
   might be:

   trident:297-->phbook yee
   Name                        Phone    M/S     Office    Organization
   --------------------------- -------- ------- --------- ------------
   Arnold M. Yee                 4-4315 258-6   N258/134  COMPSCICOR
   Cindy Yee                            226-3   N226/105  CALSPAN
                                        cyee@ames.arc.nasa.gov
   David H. Yee                  4-4106 213-8   N213/256  EEF
                                        david_yee@qmgate.arc.nasa.gov
   Dr. Helen M C. Yee            4-4769 202A-1  N202A/216 RF
   Harry Yee                     4-6557 213-2   N213/101F EES
   Peter Edmond Yee              4-3812 233-18  N233/240  EDC
                                        yee@atlas.arc.nasa.gov
   Robert Yee                    4-4122 T041-3  TA20/155  SFA
                                        robert_yee@qmgate.arc.nasa.gov
2.2.11
X.400 table handling
Application Name: X.400 table handling

   Date Received: 7/15/1992

   Date Last Verified: 7/15/1992

   Author(s):
     Julian Onions
     Colin Robbins

   Company or Institution:
     X-Tel Service Limited,
     Nottingham, England

   e-mail address for more information:
     jpo@xtel.co.uk

   Type:
     FREE, not yet available to the general public
Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 17]
RFC 1491
X.500 Advanced Usages                 July 1993
Short Description:
     Implementation of the work of the IETF MHS-DS group. The goal is to
     put X.400 tables into X.500 in order to facilitate gateway and
     routing functions.

   Full Description:
     See the Internet drafts for MHS-DS. NASA Ames Research Center is
     participating in the testing and development of the next release of
     the PP message handling software. The latest update (alpha test)
     contains usage of X.500 by X.400 for
RFC 822
<->X.400 gatewaying, as
     well as hooks for X.400 intelligent routing. Use of X.500 to
     eliminate static tables will greatly improve the ability to
     maintain the information necessary for mail gatewaying and routing,
     while making it easier to keep this data current and well
     distributed.
3
.  Security Considerations
Security issues are not discussed in this memo.
4
.   Authors' Addresses
Chris Weider
   2901 Hubbard, Pod G
   Ann Arbor, MI 48105

   Phone: (313) 747-2730
   EMail: clw@merit.edu

   Russ Wright
   Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
   1 Cyclotron Road
   Berkeley, CA 94720

   Phone: (415) 486-6965
   EMail: wright@lbl.gov

Integrated Directory Services Working Group                    [Page 18]
RFC
1491
: A Survey of Advanced Usages of X.500
Informational


Ethics of Artificial Intelligence - AI | UNESCO
Skip to main content
UNESCO
English
English
Français
Español
Русский
العربية
中文
UNESCO
Main navigation
Who we are
About us
About us
Member States Profiles
Member States Profiles
Global presence
Global presence
Partners
Partners
What we do
People we serve
People we serve
Core functions
Core functions
Objectives
Objectives
Programmes
Programmes
News
Newsroom
Newsroom
Calendar
Calendar
International days and more
International days and more
Stay updated
Stay updated
Resources
Legal texts
Legal texts
Sites navigator
Sites navigator
Multimedia
Multimedia
Learning Hub
Learning Hub
Publications
Publications
Documents
Documents
Global reports
Global reports
Data and indicators
Data and indicators
Member States Portal
Search
Search
Search
Search
Quick links:
AI
Response to Crisis
Key Challenges
Breadcrumb
Artificial Intelligence and emerging technologies
Shutterstock
Artificial Intelligence and emerging technologies
Home
Our actions
Sharing knowledge
For governments
For the judiciary
For policy-makers
For teachers
For students
Building standards
Recommendation on the Ethics of Neurotechnology
Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
Promoting inclusion
AI for gender equality
Digital Inclusion
AI and human rights for youth
Green digital transformation
Resources
Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
AI Ethics for the people
Jump to :
Core values
Global AI Ethics and Governance Observatory
Core principles: A human rights approach to AI
Areas of policy action
Resources
The rapid developments of artificial intelligence (AI) have created many opportunities globally, such as facilitating healthcare diagnoses and treatment, opening access to more tailored learning, and creating new means to safeguard and protect cultural diversity, among many others.
However, these changes also raise profound ethical concerns. These arise from the way AI systems are developed, designed, deployed, and used, which may lead to reproducing and amplifying biases, contributing to climate degradation, threatening human rights, and more.
In November 2021, UNESCO's 193 Member States adopted the first global standard on AI ethics: the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence.
At its core, it states that AI must respect human rights and human dignity. It is grounded in key principles such as transparency, fairness, environmental sustainability, and human oversight of AI systems, which guide its ethical framework.
This Recommendation doesn’t focus only on ethical values and principles but also lays out concrete policy recommendations to help implement them, across policy areas from gender to data to international cooperation.
Read the full Recommendation
©UNESCO
Core values
Central to the Recommendation are four core values which lay the foundations of AI systems that work for the good of humanity, individuals, societies and the environment:
1
Respecting and promoting human dignity and human rights
2
Fostering just, peaceful, and interconnected societies
3
Ensuring diversity and inclusiveness
4
Supporting flourishing of environment and ecosystems
© Getty Images / ivanastar
Global AI Ethics and Governance Observatory
The aim of the Observatory is to provide a global resource for policymakers, regulators, academics, the private sector and civil society to find solutions to the most pressing challenges posed by Artificial Intelligence.
The Observatory showcases information about the readiness of countries to adopt AI ethically and responsibly.
Discover more
Core principles: A human rights approach to AI
Ten core principles
These principles outline a human- rights centred approach to the ethics of AI. They provide a shared ethical foundation to guide the development, deployment, and governance of artificial intelligence:
1. Proportionality and do no harm
The use of AI systems must not go beyond what is necessary to achieve a legitimate aim. Risk assessment should be used to prevent harms which may result from such uses.
2. Safety and security
Unwanted harms (safety risks) as well as vulnerabilities to attack (security risks) should be avoided and addressed by AI actors.
3. Right to privacy and data protection
Privacy must be protected and promoted throughout the AI lifecycle. Adequate data protection frameworks should also be established.
4. Multi-stakeholder and adaptive governance and collaboration
International law and national sovereignty must be respected in the use of data. Additionally, participation of diverse stakeholders is necessary for inclusive approaches to AI governance.
5. Responsibility and accountability
AI systems should be auditable and traceable. There should be oversight, impact assessment, audit and due diligence mechanisms in place to avoid conflicts with human rights norms and threats to environmental wellbeing.
6. Transparency and explainability
The ethical deployment of AI systems depends on their transparency and explainability (T&E). The level of T&E should be appropriate to the context, as there may be tensions between T&E and other principles such as privacy, safety and security.
7. Human oversight and determination
Member States should ensure that AI systems do not displace ultimate human responsibility and accountability.
8. Sustainability
AI technologies should be assessed against their impacts on sustainability, understood as a set of constantly evolving goals including those set out in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
9. Awareness and literacy
Public understanding of AI and data should be promoted through open and accessible education, civic engagement, digital skills and AI ethics training, media and information literacy.
10. Fairness and non-discrimination
AI actors should promote social justice, fairness, and non-discrimination while taking an inclusive approach to ensure AI’s benefits are accessible to all.
Areas of policy action
Key policy areas operationalise the values and principles set out in the Recommendation.
The policy actions can guide societies in dealing responsibly with the known and unknown impacts of AI technologies on human beings, societies and the environment and ecosystems, and offers them a basis to accept or reject AI technologies.
Read more on the Key policy areas
-
Resources
Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
UNESCO
2022
UNESCO
Available in...
Arabic
Chinese
English
French
Lithuanian
Mongolian
Portuguese
Spanish
Uzbek
UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence: key facts
UNESCO
2023
UNESCO
Available in...
English
Related items
Social and human sciences
Natural sciences
Culture
Respond to Current Global Challenges (AI, Climate Change Biodiversity...)
Artificial intelligence
Norms & Standards
Policy Advice
UN & International cooperation
High technology
Information technology
Information technology (hardware)
Information technology (software)
Technology
Computer science
Ethics of science
Science
Science and development
Science and society
Science policy
Social science policy
Social sciences
Ethics of artificial intelligence
Ethics
Ethics of technology
See more
add
Get involved
Careers
Fellowships
Prizes
Visit us
Organize your event
UNESCO Shop
Subscribe to our newsletters
Networks
Associated Schools (ASPnet)
Clubs and Associations
Cities Platform
Chairs and UNITWIN Programme
Field Offices
Goodwill Ambassadors
Institutes and Centres
Partners
UNEVOC
Youth
Specialized websites
World Heritage
Intangible Cultural Heritage
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
International Decade of Action for Cryospheric Sciences
International Decade of Sciences for Sustainable Development
International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation
Virtual Museum of Stolen Cultural Objects
Dive into Heritage
UNESCO Datahub
UNESCO Digital Library
Terms of use
UNESCO name and logo
FAQ
Report fraud, abuse, misconduct
Scam alert
Preventing harassment at UNESCO events
Policies
Protection of human rights (Procedure 104)
Privacy Notice
Access to information
Environmental and Social Policies
Stakeholder Response Mechanism (SRM)
Query list
Follow us
Instagram
LinkedIn
YouTube
X
TikTok
Facebook
WhatsApp
UNESCO applies a zero tolerance policy against all forms of harassment.
top
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. For more information on how we use cookies, read
our privacy notice
.
close


Policies | Shaping Europe’s digital future
Skip to main content
en
Select your language
Close
bg
български
es
español
cs
čeština
da
dansk
de
Deutsch
et
eesti
el
ελληνικά
en
English
fr
français
ga
Gaeilge
hr
hrvatski
it
italiano
lv
latviešu
lt
lietuvių
hu
magyar
mt
Malti
nl
Nederlands
pl
polski
pt
português
ro
română
sk
slovenčina
sl
slovenščina
fi
suomi
sv
svenska
Search
Search
Shaping Europe’s digital future
Menu
Close
Menu
Back
Previous items
Next items
Home
Policies
Activities
News
Library
Funding
Calendar
Consultations
AI Office
Home
Policies
Policies
Digital Decade
Read more
Digital Society
Cybersecurity
Digital inclusion
Digital public services
Green digital sector
Language technologies
Media and digital culture
Next Generation Internet
Online privacy and safety
Advanced Digital Technologies
Advanced computing
Electronic components and semiconductors
Advanced digital technologies
Artificial intelligence
Data and cloud computing
International Cooperation in Digital
International relations
Digital Economy
Digital skills
Supporting industry
Connectivity
Online platforms and e-commerce
Last update
22 May 2025
Shaping Europe’s digital future
This site is managed by:
Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology
Digital EU on Mastadon
Digital EU on LinkedIn
Digital EU on Facebook
Digital EU on Youtube
Digital EU on Instagram
Digital EU on X
About us
Privacy statement
Copyright notice
About Directorate-General CONNECT
Language Policy
Accessibility statement
Follow the European Commission
Mastodon
LinkedIn
Bluesky
Facebook
Youtube
Other
Contact us
Report an IT vulnerability
Languages on our websites
Cookies
Privacy policy
Legal notice
Accessibility

22 May 2025

Month Year date pattern in document text


Artificial Intelligence and emerging technologies | UNESCO
Skip to main content
UNESCO
English
English
Français
Español
Русский
العربية
中文
UNESCO
Main navigation
Who we are
About us
About us
Member States Profiles
Member States Profiles
Global presence
Global presence
Partners
Partners
What we do
People we serve
People we serve
Core functions
Core functions
Objectives
Objectives
Programmes
Programmes
News
Newsroom
Newsroom
Calendar
Calendar
International days and more
International days and more
Stay updated
Stay updated
Resources
Legal texts
Legal texts
Sites navigator
Sites navigator
Multimedia
Multimedia
Learning Hub
Learning Hub
Publications
Publications
Documents
Documents
Global reports
Global reports
Data and indicators
Data and indicators
Member States Portal
Search
Search
Search
Search
Quick links:
AI
Response to Crisis
Key Challenges
Shutterstock
Shutterstock
Artificial Intelligence and emerging technologies
UNESCO is committed to a future where AI and emerging technologies work for the people
Home
Our actions
Sharing knowledge
For governments
For the judiciary
For policy-makers
For teachers
For students
Building standards
Recommendation on the Ethics of Neurotechnology
Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
Promoting inclusion
AI for gender equality
Digital Inclusion
AI and human rights for youth
Green digital transformation
Resources
Since its founding at the dawn of the atomic age, UNESCO has helped societies navigate and manage the transformative power of technology – to the benefit of all.
Today, in an era shaped by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and related breakthrough innovations, UNESCO continues the critical work of ensuring these emerging technologies are developed and deployed in service of equity, opportunity, and inclusivity.
Video series: 7 minutes to understand AI
UNESCO
Our impact
How UNESCO is shaping an ethical digital future.
Green Digital Transformation
We foster global collaboration to make AI more sustainable, inclusive, and resilient for everyone.
Digital transformation
We promote a human-centered digital transformation, wherein AI, data, and open solutions build capacity, foster inclusion, protect diversity, and drive sustainable, rights-based innovation.
Quantum computing
We are helping the world prepare for the quantum revolution, wherein quantum mechanics helps solve problems too complex for today’s computers, in areas like medicine, encryption, and materials science.
Neurotechnology
We are developing ethical frameworks to ensure these technologies fulfill their promise in health while upholding equity, mental privacy, freedom of thought, and protection of the most vulnerable.
Natural science
We leverage AI to advance innovative, science-based solutions for sustainable development – from managing water and biodiversity to reducing disaster risks and strengthening climate resilience.
Information integrity
Algorithms and generative AI are reshaping how people access and trust information, with major effects on journalism, expression, and rights. We foster media literacy and inform digital platform governance.
Culture
As AI transforms how culture is created, accessed, managed, and experienced, UNESCO works to ensure AI’s development and use protect and promote cultural diversity, creativity, and access for all.
Gender
New technologies risk widening gender gaps, especially when AI learns from biased data. UNESCO’s work on AI and gender guides policymakers and innovators to close these divides.
Education
We convene leaders, experts, and innovators to address the impact of AI and technology in education, promoting human-centered, inclusive, and equitable approaches to the benefit of all learners.
Building standards together: emerging technology ethics
UNESCO’s normative recommendations guide the ethical use of technologies, helping ensure they respect human rights, promote fairness, and benefit everyone.
Recommendation on the Ethics of Neurotechnology
The 2025 UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Neurotechnology sets global principles to ensure neurotechnology is developed and used in ways that respect human rights, dignity, and societal well-being.
Recommendation on the Ethics of AI
In 2021, UNESCO adopted the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, guiding its work and helping Member States develop ethically aligned AI policies and capacities.
Policy Development: Readiness Assessment Methodology (RAMs)
UNESCO helps Member States evaluate their readiness for the AI transformation through its Readiness Assessment Methodology (RAM) program, which helps policymakers identify their policy gaps and develop their national policies and strategies toward the development and deployment of these transformative technologies.
As of October 2025, over 75 countries from five continents have initiated or completed to RAM assessments, and policymakers worldwide are further able to draw on the Technology Policy Assistance Facility, developed in cooperation with the South African G20 Presidency.
Readiness Assessment Methodology
Technology Policy Assistance Facility
© SeventyFour / Shutterstock.com
Key initiatives
G20 Technology Policy Assistance Facility
A G20-backed platform that helps policymakers and stakeholders research, design, and implement ethical, inclusive, and future-ready technology and AI policies.
Global AI Ethics and Governance Observatory
The Observatory supports global stakeholders in promoting ethical and responsible AI through research, tools, and best practices.
Readiness Assessment Methodology (RAM)
The RAM program helps governments identify and address gaps in their AI policies, strategies, and legislation, so that AI is deployed ethically and responsibly to the benefit of their their citizens.
Internet Universality Indicators
This tool helps countries assess their Internet landscape, guide evidence-based policies, and foster inclusive, future-ready digital governance.
UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance
The UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance brings together Member States and stakeholders to engage in the meaningful global conversation on AI that the world needs.
Coordinated by UNESCO and the ITU as the joint UN Secretariat, the Dialogue—mandated by the General Assembly—aims to ensure that AI governance reflects the priorities of all nations, not just the most technologically advanced. International cooperation on AI governance is essential to ensure that AI development benefits all of us.
More information
Register here
Thumbnail
play_arrow
©UNESCO
News and stories
News
UNESCO Peru promotes dialogue on the ethical horizons of artificial intelligence at FIL Lima 2026
6 August 2026
News
UNESCO welcomes Pope Leo XIV for a day of reflection on artificial intelligence, education and peace
6 August 2026
News
AI, human rights and rule of law: A global debate in London
5 August 2026
News
Caribbean Voices Shape the Future of Ethical AI at Regional Summit
4 August 2026
Load more
Get involved
Careers
Fellowships
Prizes
Visit us
Organize your event
UNESCO Shop
Subscribe to our newsletters
Networks
Associated Schools (ASPnet)
Clubs and Associations
Cities Platform
Chairs and UNITWIN Programme
Field Offices
Goodwill Ambassadors
Institutes and Centres
Partners
UNEVOC
Youth
Specialized websites
World Heritage
Intangible Cultural Heritage
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
International Decade of Action for Cryospheric Sciences
International Decade of Sciences for Sustainable Development
International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation
Virtual Museum of Stolen Cultural Objects
Dive into Heritage
UNESCO Datahub
UNESCO Digital Library
Terms of use
UNESCO name and logo
FAQ
Report fraud, abuse, misconduct
Scam alert
Preventing harassment at UNESCO events
Policies
Protection of human rights (Procedure 104)
Privacy Notice
Access to information
Environmental and Social Policies
Stakeholder Response Mechanism (SRM)
Query list
Follow us
Instagram
LinkedIn
YouTube
X
TikTok
Facebook
WhatsApp
UNESCO applies a zero tolerance policy against all forms of harassment.
top
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. For more information on how we use cookies, read
our privacy notice
.
close


The Address Supporting Organization (ASO ICANN) | The Address Supporting Organization
Skip to main content
About
About the ASO
History
ASO & NRO
ASO & ICANN
News
FAQs
Events
Address Council
About the AC
AC Operating Procedures
AC Members
AC Meetings
AC Workplan
AC Transparency Review
Policy
Policy
Global Policy
Regional Policy
ICANN Board
ICANN Board
ICANN Board Appointments
Elections
NomCom Appointments
Documents
Operational Documents
MoUs
Historical Documents
Presentations
Glossary
ICP-2
Contact
ICP-2 Review
In October 2023, the NRO Executive Council (EC) asked the ASO AC to establish and manage a process to update the ICP-2 document. This update will be conducted in consultation with each of the RIR and ICANN communities to enhance the RIR system’s accountability to the broader Internet community.
Learn More
Our Purpose
The ASO is one of ICANN’s three Supporting Organizations (SOs). We review and develop recommendations on Internet Protocol (IP) address policy and advise the ICANN Board on policy issues relating to the operation, assignment, and management of IP addresses.
Learn More
ASO AC Meetings
The Address Supporting Organization Address Council (ASO AC) holds monthly teleconferences, which are open to observers.
Learn More
Documents
You can find operational procedures, MoUs and historical documents in our document archive.
Document Archive
ASO Mailing Lists
You can find out more about the ASO AC day to day operations through their open archive mailing list. Additionally, the ASO facilitates public mailing lists for discussion and/or information sharing.
Learn More
News
28 July 2026
ASO AC delivers Recommended Draft RIR Governance Document to NRO EC
Read More
12 June 2026
Follow-up Notice to the ASO Community on the Approval Action Decision Period for Fundamental Bylaws Amendments to Articles 17 and 18 of the ICANN Bylaws
Read More
9 June 2026
Follow-up Notice to the RIR Community: ICANN Empowered Community Rejection Action Petition
Read More
More News
Our Responsibilities
1
Undertaking a role in the global policy development process (GPDP)
2
Defining procedures for the selection of individuals to serve on ICANN bodies
3
Participating in the ICANN Empowered Community
Contact your local Regional Internet Registry
Learn More
ASO FAQ
ASO MoU
ASO & NRO
About
Address Council
Policy
ICANN Board
Documents
FAQs
Contact
Cookie Policy
Search the Site
Search
Search
© 2026
Address Supporting Organization.
|
Privacy Statement
|
Site by AR Design
This website is sponsored and operated by the Address Supporting Organization (ASO). This website is not supported or operated by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (
ICANN
)
×
Search the Site
Search

In October 2023,


Community – APNIC

Community – APNIC
Skip to content
MyAPNIC
Academy
Blog
Orbit
REx
DASH
Home
Whois and website search
Search
Advanced Whois
Make
a
payment
Close Search
Search APNIC.net OR enter Whois database
query
Get IP
Get IP
Make a payment
Membership
FAQs
Manage IP
MyAPNIC
Using Whois
IPv4 exhaustion
Go IPv6
Routing Registry
Make a payment
Training
About
Events
APNIC Academy
Community Trainers
Courses
Events
Conferences
Calendar
Sponsorship
Code of Conduct
Insights
APNIC Labs
DASH to secure your networks
REx
Raw Data
Community
Orbit
Community demographics
Policy Development
Fellowship
Addressing policies
Internet community
Code of Conduct
Technical Assistance
Root servers
Security at APNIC
ISIF Asia
APNIC Foundation
NRO Number Council (NC)
Blog
Help Centre
About
APNIC Region
APNIC Membership
Executive Council
Service updates
Team
Annual Reports
Transparency
APNIC Survey
Corporate Documents
Publications Archive
Careers
Glossary
Contact
Advanced Whois
Make a payment
Get IP
Get IP
Make a payment
Membership
FAQs
Manage IP
MyAPNIC
Using Whois
IPv4 exhaustion
Go IPv6
Routing Registry
Make a payment
Training
About
Events
APNIC Academy
Community Trainers
Courses
Events
Conferences
Calendar
Sponsorship
Code of Conduct
Insights
APNIC Labs
DASH to secure your networks
REx
Raw Data
Community
Orbit
Community demographics
Policy Development
Fellowship
Addressing policies
Internet community
Code of Conduct
Technical Assistance
Root servers
Security at APNIC
ISIF Asia
APNIC Foundation
NRO Number Council (NC)
Blog
Help Centre
About
APNIC Region
APNIC Membership
Executive Council
Service updates
Team
Annual Reports
Transparency
APNIC Survey
Corporate Documents
Publications Archive
Careers
Glossary
Contact
Community
Resource Policies
Developing policies that meet the changing needs of the Asia Pacific Internet industry
Process
|
Policy Proposals
|
Current Policies
Participation
The APNIC community is open to anyone with an interest in Internet number resources in the Asia Pacific Region.
Elections
|
Attend events
|
Join discussions
|
Code of Conduct
Community Technical Support
APNIC supports infrastructure deployments, Network Operator Groups and represents the community in regional and global forums.
APNIC in the Internet ecosystem
APNIC has an important role in the Internet community as part of the multi-stakeholder management of the global Internet.
I* Organizations
|
AP* Organizations
|
Intergovernmental organizations
Security at APNIC
APNIC coordinates with several organizations in the region to raise awareness, build capacity, and support Members’ efforts to maintain network security for a stable and secure Internet.
Resource Certification
|
DNSSEC
|
LEAs
|
CERTs
IPv6@APNIC
The IPv6 Program responds to the community’s request for APNIC to support deployment of IPv6 in the Asia Pacific region.
Apply for IPv6
APNIC Foundation
The APNIC Foundation is a registered charity in Hong Kong which will raise funds, independently from APNIC membership contributions, to support and expand regional Internet development efforts into the future.
About
|
Challenges
|
How the Foundation works
See also
APNIC Conferences
Community demographics
Community Consultations
Send us feedback
Resource Policies
Fellowship
APNIC in the Internet ecosystem
Participate
Community Technical Support
Security at APNIC
IPv6@APNIC
APNIC Foundation
APNIC IPv4 post-exhaustion
APNIC Home
Connect with us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Weibo
Slideshare
LinkedIn
RSS
©
2026
APNIC
ABN 42 081 528 010
Privacy
Contact
Help Centre
NRO News
Service Status
Careers
Feedback


RFC 8890: The Internet is for End Users

RFC 8890
The Internet is for End Users
Abstract
This document explains why the IAB believes that, when there is a conﬂict between the interests
of end users of the Internet and other parties, IETF decisions should favor end users. It also
explores how the IETF can more eﬀectively achieve this.
Stream: Internet Architecture Board (IAB)
RFC: 8890
Category: Informational
Published: August 2020
ISSN: 2070-1721
Author:  M. Nottingham
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track speciﬁcation; it is published for informational
purposes.
This document is a product of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and represents information
that the IAB has deemed valuable to provide for permanent record. It represents the consensus
of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). Documents approved for publication by the IAB are not
candidates for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback
on it may be obtained at .https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8890
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identiﬁed as the document authors. All rights
reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF
Documents ( ) in eﬀect on the date of publication of this
document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions
with respect to this document.
https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info
Nottingham Informational Page 1

Table of Contents
1.  Introduction
2.  Who Are "End Users"?
3.  Why the IETF Should Prioritize End Users
4.  How the IETF Can Prioritize End Users
4.1.  Engaging the Internet Community
4.2.  Creating User-Focused Systems
4.3.  Identifying Negative End-User Impact
4.4.  Handling Conﬂicting End-User Needs
4.5.  Deprioritizing Internal Needs
5.  IANA Considerations
6.  Security Considerations
7.  Informative References
IAB Members at the Time of Approval
Acknowledgements
Author's Address
1. Introduction
Many who participate in the IETF are most comfortable making what we believe to be purely
technical decisions; our process favors technical merit through our well-known mantra of "rough
consensus and running code."
Nevertheless, the running code that results from our process (when things work well) inevitably
has an impact beyond technical considerations, because the underlying decisions aﬀord some
uses while discouraging others. While we believe we are making only technical decisions, in
reality, we are deﬁning (in some degree) what is possible on the Internet itself.
This impact has become signiﬁcant. As the Internet increasingly mediates essential functions in
societies, it has unavoidably become profoundly political; it has helped people overthrow
governments, revolutionize social orders, swing elections, control populations, collect data about
individuals, and reveal secrets. It has created wealth for some individuals and companies while
destroying that of others.
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 2

All of this raises the question: For whom do we go through the pain of gathering rough consensus
and writing running code?
After all, there are a variety of parties that standards can beneﬁt, such as (but not limited to) end
users, network operators, schools, equipment vendors, speciﬁcation authors, speciﬁcation
implementers, content owners, governments, nongovernmental organizations, social
movements, employers, and parents.
Successful speciﬁcations will provide some beneﬁt to all the relevant parties because standards
do not represent a zero-sum game. However, there are sometimes situations where there is a
conﬂict between the needs of two (or more) parties.
In these situations, when one of those parties is an "end user" of the Internet -- for example, a
person using a web browser, mail client, or another agent that connects to the Internet -- the
Internet Architecture Board argues that the IETF should favor their interests over those of other
parties.
Section 2 explains what is meant by "end users", Section 3 outlines why IETF work should
prioritize them, and Section 4 describes how we can do that.
2. Who Are "End Users"?
In this document, "end users" means human users whose activities IETF standards support,
sometimes indirectly. Thus, the end user of a protocol to manage routers is not a router
administrator; it is the people using the network that the router operates within.
End users are not necessarily a homogenous group; they might have diﬀerent views of how the
Internet should work and might occupy several roles, such as a seller, buyer, publisher, reader,
service provider, and consumer. An end user might browse the Web, monitor remote equipment,
play a game, videoconference with colleagues, send messages to friends, or perform an operation
in a remote surgery theater. They might be "at the keyboard" or represented by software
indirectly (e.g., as a daemon).
Likewise, an individual end user might have many interests (e.g., privacy, security, ﬂexibility,
reachability) that are sometimes in tension.
A person whose interests we need to consider might not directly be using a speciﬁc system
connected to the Internet. For example, if a child is using a browser, the interests of that child's
parents or guardians may be relevant. A person pictured in a photograph may have an interest
in systems that process that photograph; a person entering a room with sensors that send data to
the Internet may have interests that may be involved in our deliberations about how those
sensor readings are handled.
While such less-direct interactions between people and the Internet may be harder to evaluate,
this document's concept of "end user" nonetheless includes such people.
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 3

3. Why the IETF Should Prioritize End Users
Even before the IETF was established, the Internet technical community has focused on user
needs since at least , which stated that "One of our goals must be to stimulate the
immediate and easy use by a wide class of users."
And, while we specialize in technical matters, the IETF is not neutral about the purpose of its
work in developing the Internet; in "A Mission Statement for the IETF" , the deﬁnitions
include:
The IETF community wants the Internet to succeed because we believe that the
existence of the Internet, and its inﬂuence on economics, communication, and
education, will help us to build a better human society.
Later, in "The Scope of the Internet" ( ), it says:
The Internet isn't value-neutral, and neither is the IETF. We want the Internet to be
useful for communities that share our commitment to openness and fairness. We
embrace technical concepts such as decentralized control, edge-user empowerment and
sharing of resources, because those concepts resonate with the core values of the IETF
community. These concepts have little to do with the technology that's possible, and
much to do with the technology that we choose to create.
In other words, the IETF develops and maintains the Internet to promote the social good. The
society that the IETF is attempting to enhance is composed of end users, along with groups of
them forming businesses, governments, clubs, civil society organizations, and other institutions.
Merely advancing the measurable success of the Internet (e.g., deployment size, bandwidth,
latency, number of users) is not an adequate goal; doing so ignores how technology is so often
used as a lever to assert power over users, rather than empower them.
Beyond fulﬁlling the IETF's mission, prioritizing end users can also help to ensure the long-term
health of the Internet and the IETF's relevance to it. Perceptions of capture by vendors or other
providers harm both; the IETF's work will (deservedly) lose end users' trust if it prioritizes (or is
perceived to prioritize) others' interests over them.
Ultimately, the Internet will succeed or fail based upon the actions of its end users, because they
are the driving force behind its growth to date. Not prioritizing them jeopardizes the network
eﬀect that the Internet relies upon to provide so much value.
[RFC0001]
[RFC3935]
Section 4.1 of [RFC3935]
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 4

4. How the IETF Can Prioritize End Users
There are a few ways that the IAB believes the IETF community can prioritize end users, based
upon our observations. This is not a complete list.
4.1. Engaging the Internet Community
The IETF community does not have any unique insight into what is "good for end users", and it is
not uncommon for us to be at a further disadvantage because of our close understanding of
some -- but not all -- aspects of the Internet.
At the same time, we have a culture of considerable deference to a broader "Internet
community" -- roughly what this document calls end users -- in our decision-making processes.
Mere deference, however, is not adequate; even with the best intentions, we cannot assume that
our experiences of the Internet are those of all of its end users or that our decisions have a
positive impact upon them.
Therefore, we have not only a responsibility to analyze and consider the impacts of the IETF's
work, but also a responsibility to consult with that greater Internet community. In particular, we
should do so when one of our decisions has a potential impact upon end users.
The IETF community faces signiﬁcant hurdles in doing so. Our work is specialized and often
esoteric, and processes for developing standards often involve very long timescales. Aﬀected
parties are rarely technical experts, and they often base their understanding of the Internet upon
incomplete (and sometimes inaccurate) models. Often, even when we try to engage a broader
audience, their participation is minimal -- until a change aﬀects someone in a way they don't like.
Surprising the Internet community is rarely a good outcome.
Government-sponsored individuals sometimes participate in the IETF community. While this is
welcome, it should not be taken as automatically representative of end users elsewhere, or even
all end users in the relevant jurisdiction. Furthermore, what is desirable in one jurisdiction (or at
least to its administrators) might be detrimental in others (see Section 4.4).
While some civil society organizations specialize in technology and Internet policy, they rarely
can participate broadly, nor are they necessarily representative of the larger Internet
community. Nevertheless, their understanding of end-user needs is often profound, and they are
in many ways the best-informed advocates for end-user concerns; they should be considered a
primary channel for engaging the broader Internet community.
A promising approach to help ﬁll these gaps is to identify and engage with speciﬁcally aﬀected
communities when making decisions that might aﬀect them, for example, one or more industry
associations, user groups, or a set of individuals, though we can't formally ensure that they are
appropriately representative.
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 5

In doing so, we should not require them to "come to us"; unless a stakeholder community is
already engaged in the IETF process eﬀectively, the IETF community should explore how to meet
with them on their terms -- take the initiative to contact them, explain our work, and solicit their
feedback.
In particular, while IAB workshops, BOFs, and Bar BOFs can be an eﬀective mechanism to gather
input within our community, they rarely have the visibility into other communities that is
required to solicit input, much less eﬀective participation.
Instead, an event like a workshop may be more eﬀective if co-located with -- and ideally hosted
or co-hosted by -- a forum that's familiar to that stakeholder community. We should also raise the
visibility of IETF work (or potential IETF work) in such fora through conference talks, panels,
newsletter articles, etc.
For example, the IAB ESCAPE workshop  solicited input from Internet publishers and
advertisers about a proposal that might aﬀect them. While the workshop was considered
successful, participation might have been improved by identifying an appropriate industry
forum and working with them to host the event.
When we engage with the Internet community, we should also clearly identify tailored feedback
mechanisms (e.g., subscribing to a mailing list may not be appropriate) and assure that they are
well known in those communities.
The Internet Society can be an invaluable partner in these eﬀorts; their focus on the Internet
community, policy expertise, and resources can help to facilitate discussions with the
appropriate parties.
Finally, we should remember that the RFC Series contains Requests For Comments; if there are
serious implications of our work, we should document them and ask for feedback from the
Internet community.
[RFC8752]
4.2. Creating User-Focused Systems
We should pay particular attention to the kinds of architectures we create and whether they
encourage or discourage an Internet that works for end users.
For example, one of the most successful Internet applications is the Web, which uses the HTTP
application protocol. One of HTTP's key implementation roles is that of the web browser -- called
the "user agent" in  and other speciﬁcations.
User agents act as intermediaries between a service and the end user; rather than downloading
an executable program from a service that has arbitrary access into the users' system, the user
agent only allows limited access to display content and run code in a sandboxed environment.
End users are diverse and the ability of a few user agents to represent individual interests
properly is imperfect, but this arrangement is an improvement over the alternative -- the need to
trust a website completely with all information on your system to browse it.
[RFC7230]
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 6

Deﬁning the user agent role in standards also creates a virtuous cycle; it allows multiple
implementations, allowing end users to switch between them with relatively low costs (although
there are concerns about the complexity of the Web creating barriers to entry for new
implementations). This creates an incentive for implementers to consider the users' needs
carefully, which are often reﬂected into the deﬁning standards. The resulting ecosystem has
many remaining problems, but a distinguished user agent role provides an opportunity to
improve it.
In contrast, the Internet of Things (IoT) has not yet seen the broad adoption of a similar role;
many current systems require opaque, vendor-speciﬁc software or hardware for the user-facing
component. Perhaps as a result of this, that ecosystem and its end users face serious challenges.
4.3. Identifying Negative End-User Impact
At its best, our work will unambiguously build a better human society. Sometimes, we will
consciously be neutral and open-ended, allowing the "tussle" among stakeholders to produce a
range of results (see  for further discussion).
At the very least, however, we must examine our work for negative impact on end users and take
steps to mitigate it where encountered. In particular, when we've identiﬁed a conﬂict between
the interests of end users and other stakeholders, we should err on the side of protecting end
users.
Note that "negative impact on end users" is not deﬁned in this document; that is something that
the relevant body (e.g., working group) needs to discuss and come to consensus on. Merely
asserting that something is harmful is not adequate. The converse is also true, though; it's not
good practice to avoid identifying harms, nor is it acceptable to ignore them when brought to our
attention.
The IAB and IETF have already established a body of guidance for situations where this conﬂict
is common, including (but not limited to)  on ﬁltering,  and  on
pervasive surveillance,  on host ﬁrewalls, and  regarding privacy
considerations.
Much of that advice has focused on maintaining the end-to-end properties of a connection
. This does not mean that our responsibility to end users stops there; decisions might
aﬀect them in other ways. For example, data collection by various applications even inside
otherwise secure connections is a major problem on the Internet today. Also, inappropriate
concentration of power on the Internet has become a concerning phenomenon -- one that
protocol design might have some inﬂuence upon.
[TUSSLE]
[RFC7754] [ RFC7258] [ RFC7624]
[RFC7288] [RFC6973]
[RFC3724]
4.4. Handling Conﬂicting End-User Needs
When the needs of diﬀerent end users conﬂict (for example, two sets of end users both have
reasonable desires), we again should try to minimize negative impact.
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 7

[RFC0001]
[RFC3724]
[RFC3935]
[RFC6973]
[RFC7230]
7. Informative References
, , , , April 1969,
.
,
, ,
, March 2004, .
, , , ,
, October 2004, .
, , ,
, July 2013, .
,
, , , June 2014,
.
For example, when a decision improves the Internet for end users in one jurisdiction, but at the
cost of potential harm to others elsewhere, that is not a good trade-oﬀ. As such, we design the
Internet for the pessimal environment; if a user can be harmed, they probably will be,
somewhere.
There may be cases where genuine technical need requires compromise. However, such trade-
oﬀs are carefully examined and avoided when there are alternate means of achieving the
desired goals. If they cannot be, these choices and reasoning ought to be thoroughly documented.
4.5. Deprioritizing Internal Needs
There are several needs that are very visible to us as speciﬁcation authors but should explicitly
not be prioritized over the needs of end users.
These include convenience for document editors, IETF process matters, and "architectural
purity" for its own sake.
5. IANA Considerations
This document has no IANA actions.
6. Security Considerations
This document does not have any direct security impact; however, failing to prioritize end users
might well aﬀect their security negatively in the long term.
Crocker, S. "Host Software" RFC 1 DOI 10.17487/RFC0001 < https://
www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1>
Kempf, J., Ed., Austein, R., Ed., and IAB "The Rise of the Middle and the Future of
End-to-End: Reﬂections on the Evolution of the Internet Architecture" RFC 3724
DOI 10.17487/RFC3724 < https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3724>
Alvestrand, H. "A Mission Statement for the IETF" BCP 95 RFC 3935 DOI
10.17487/RFC3935 < https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935>
Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J., Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R.
Smith "Privacy Considerations for Internet Protocols" RFC 6973 DOI 10.17487/
RFC6973 < https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6973>
Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed. "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1):
Message Syntax and Routing" RFC 7230 DOI 10.17487/RFC7230
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 8

[RFC7258]
[RFC7288]
[RFC7624]
[RFC7754]
[RFC8752]
[TUSSLE]
, , ,
, , May 2014,
.
, , , ,
June 2014, .
,
, , , August 2015,
.
,
, ,
, March 2016, .
,
,
, , March 2020,
.
,
, , August 2002,
.
IAB Members at the Time of Approval
Internet Architecture Board members at the time this document was approved for publication
were:
Farrell, S. and H. Tschofenig "Pervasive Monitoring Is an Attack" BCP 188 RFC
7258 DOI 10.17487/RFC7258 < https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/
rfc7258>
Thaler, D. "Reﬂections on Host Firewalls" RFC 7288 DOI 10.17487/RFC7288
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7288>
Barnes, R., Schneier, B., Jennings, C., Hardie, T., Trammell, B., Huitema, C., and D.
Borkmann "Conﬁdentiality in the Face of Pervasive Surveillance: A Threat
Model and Problem Statement" RFC 7624 DOI 10.17487/RFC7624
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7624>
Barnes, R., Cooper, A., Kolkman, O., Thaler, D., and E. Nordmark "Technical
Considerations for Internet Service Blocking and Filtering" RFC 7754 DOI
10.17487/RFC7754 < https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7754>
Thomson, M. and M. Nottingham "Report from the IAB Workshop on Exploring
Synergy between Content Aggregation and the Publisher Ecosystem (ESCAPE)"
RFC 8752 DOI 10.17487/RFC8752 < https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/
rfc8752>
Clark, D., Sollins, K., Wroclawski, J., and R. Braden "Tussle in Cyberspace:
Deﬁning Tomorrow's Internet" DOI 10.1145/633025.633059
<https://groups.csail.mit.edu/ana/Publications/PubPDFs/Tussle2002.pdf>
Jari Arkko
Alissa Cooper
Stephen Farrell
Wes Hardaker
Ted Hardie
Christian Huitema
Zhenbin Li
Erik Nordmark
Mark Nottingham
Melinda Shore
Jeﬀ Tantsura
Martin Thomson
Brian Trammell
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 9

Acknowledgements
Many discussions inﬂuenced this document, both inside and outside of the IETF and IAB. In
particular, 's comments regarding the priority of end users at IETF 93 and the
HTML5 Priority of Constituencies were both inﬂuential.
Many people gave feedback and input, including , ,
, , , , , , and
.
Edward Snowden
Harald Alvestrand Mohamed Boucadair Joe
Hildebrand Lee Howard Russ Housley Niels ten Oever Mando Rachovitsa John Klensin
Eliot Lear
Author's Address
Mark Nottingham
  Prahran VIC
Australia
 mnot@mnot.net Email:
 https://www.mnot.net/ URI:
RFC 8890 The Internet is for End Users August 2020
Nottingham Informational Page 10


Dynamic Coalition on Digital Financial Inclusion (DC-DFI) | Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
Skip to main content
Welcome to the United Nations
|
Department of Economic and Social Affairs
English
English
Menu
Quick links
I am new to the IGF
Subscribe to our mailing list
Register for an IGF activity
Donate to the IGF
Find/Become a Resource Person
Search
Feed me
Log in
Header Menu
About
About
About IGF
FAQs – About IGF & IGF 2025
Get Started
Team
IGF Donors
Work With Us
IGF Mailing Lists
Contact Us
IGF Leadership Panel
Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group
Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group
MAG Terms of Reference
MAG Chair Terms of Reference
MAG Chair's Blog
MAG Members
MAG Members
Previous MAG Members
MAG Working Groups
MAG Meeting Records
MAG Activities
MAG Member Dashboard
IGF 2026 MAG Renewal
UN Global Advocate
IGF Expert Group Meeting (2026)
IGF Expert Group Meeting 2026
EGM Report
The IGF and UN Processes
Code of Conduct
Newsletter
Press
Support the IGF
Donate
IGF Trust Fund
Donors' Contributions to Main Trust Fund
Global South Contributions
Host the IGF
Share Your Experience - "Voices of the IGF"
IGF 2026
IGF 2026 Entry Page
IGF 2026 Call for Session Proposals
IGF 2026 Call for Village Booths
IGF 2026 Call for Remote Hubs
IGF 2026 First Open Consultations & MAG Meeting
IGF 2026 Timeline
IGF 2026 Intersessional Work Proposals
IGF 2026 Proposed Thematic Inputs
IGF 2025 Stocktaking & 2026 Improvements
IGF 2026 Call for MAG Nominations
IGF 2026 Call for NRI Grants
IGF 2026 Judiciary Engagement
IGF 2026 Parliamentary Track
IGF 2026 Youth Track
IGF 2026 Business Engagement
Intersessional Work
Thematic Intersessional Work
Dynamic Coalitions
Dynamic Coalitions
DC Coordination Activities
Terms of Reference
Best Practice Forums
Policy Networks
Policy Network on Artificial Intelligence
Policy Network on Cybersecurity
Policy Network on Open Digital Infrastructure
Policy Network on Digital Inclusion
Previous Work
Capacity Development
Intersessional News
National and Regional IGFs
Overview
NRIs FAQs
NRIs Toolkit: How to Start Your IGF Initiative?
Youth Initiatives
Regional IGF Initiatives
National IGF Initiatives
All National Initiatives
Africa
Asia Pacific
Eastern Europe
GRULAC
WEOG
NRI Dashboard
NRIs Library
NRIs Collaborative Work
IGF 2026 NRIs Preparatory Process
Brochures about NRIs
IGF NRIs Call for Grants
NRIs Meetings - overview
Publications and Reports
IGF Brochures and Select Publications
Publications and Reports
IGF Annual Meeting Proceedings
IGF Intersessional Work
CSTD Reports
UN GA Resolutions on ICT for SD
Calendar
Breadcrumb
Home
Dynamic Coalition on Digital Financial Inclusion (DC-DFI)
Introduction
In today’s interconnected world, financial inclusion has emerged as a critical pillar of sustainable development and equitable growth. The Dynamic Coalition on Digital Financial Inclusion is dedicated to addressing the multifaceted challenges of financial exclusion. This coalition aims to bridge the gap between technological advancements in finance and the segments of society still alienated from these developments, recognizing that access to financial services, facilitated by open and interoperable protocols, offer the potential to connect existing, diverse financial systems and to build new solutions from the ground up. This is the foundation for inclusive economic participation and growth.
The Global Challenge of Financial Exclusion
Globally, a significant portion of the population remains unbanked or underbanked. This systemic exclusion has profound implications for individuals and communities, particularly in low and middle income economies. The inability to access financial services not only hampers individual prosperity but also impedes broader economic progress and exacerbates inequality. The coalition seeks to shine a light on these disparities and spearhead initiatives to foster inclusive, open, and interoperable financial systems that work for more people. These technologies directly contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goals #8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and #9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure). By enabling efficient, accessible, and affordable financial transactions, they foster a conducive environment for decent work opportunities and catalyze innovations in industry and infrastructure.
The Digital Divide and Financial Services
The digital divide presents a formidable barrier to financial inclusion. While digital financial services offer unprecedented opportunities for inclusion, the lack of access to connectivity and by extension technology, or mechanisms of identifying oneself, continues to exclude vast populations. This gap widens the chasm between the financially included and excluded, making it imperative to address digital access alongside financial services. The coalition recognizes the critical need to integrate digital strategies in its pursuit of financial inclusion.
Systemic Issues and Regulatory Landscapes
Financial exclusion is further compounded by a myriad of systemic issues, including insufficient financial literacy, inadequate infrastructure, and often restrictive or unclear regulatory environments. These barriers prevent the effective implementation and scaling of financial inclusion initiatives. However, the opportunities that interoperable payment protocols present — such as reduced transaction costs, faster processing speeds, and immutability — are substantial and under-explored. The coalition aims to navigate these challenges while maximizing the potential benefits for all stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, and civil society.
Financial Inclusion Communities Must Learn About Internet Governance
Internet governance processes have been effective because of multistakeholderism: everyone comes together, in good faith, to contribute to the development of standards, protocols, and policies to ensure that the Internet and its many building blocks are available to others on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory terms. While this coalition will advocate for embedding the principles of financial inclusion within the broader framework of Internet governance, it will not seek to disrupt or ignore what the Internet community already does so well. The coalition will promote a technology-agnostic approach that emphasizes universal access, regulatory support for fintech innovations, and the need for robust digital literacy and consumer protection, while acknowledging the importance of the multistakeholder model and the generosity of existing institutions in making available space for this dialogue.
Setting the Stage for Collaborative Action
As we embark on this mission, the coalition’s action plan is centered primarily around responding to one research question:
How can the adoption of open, global interoperable payments networks overcome existing barriers and leverage opportunities to enhance financial inclusion across diverse stakeholder groups, and how will this shape the evolution of the Internet and
digital economy
by 2030?
We are now organizing a symposium on digital financial inclusion and Internet governance to be held in April in São Paulo as a pre-event to NetMundial +10, which will result in the production of an issue paper that will inform the coalition’s activities throughout 2024. In addition, the Dynamic Coalition will participate in the Responsible Finance Forum in Fortaleza, Brazil in July 2024 as well as the Interledger Summit in Cape Town, South Africa in October 2024.
The Interledger Foundation will support this Dynamic Coalition in its inaugural year, and will provide funding to support the various activities.
We invite interested stakeholders from across the Internet governance community to join our efforts, and encourage you to contact us for more information or to collaborate with us. It is our vision to work within the existing Internet Governance Forum (
IGF
) ecosystem to collaborate with existing Dynamic Coalitions to to address policy areas that are not currently within their charter’s scope, and we also seek to engage with traditionally-excluded communities to provide them a hope within the
IGF
structure for their voices to be heard.
Action Plan
Participation Modalities
The coalition operates as a non-hierarchical, independent, and inclusive collective of individuals and organizations dedicated to integrating digital financial inclusion themes, concerns, and solutions within Internet governance and digital policy frameworks. Recognizing the vital role of open, global interoperable payment networks, this coalition is committed to representing the diverse interests and voices of those affected by financial exclusion in Internet governance discussions. The coalition relies on the active participation of its volunteers and has a Chair to provide structured leadership. While the coalition speaks with a unified voice, it acknowledges the diversity of perspectives within its membership and will provide space for dissenting opinions. The coalition will meet virtually once a month, with meeting agendas circulated by the Chair in advance of discussions, and will share written
updates on its mailing list and on the community forum of the Interledger website. Furthermore, the coalition shall convene in-person annually at the global
IGF
to ensure the coalition’s perspectives are effectively presented in all relevant discussions.
Key Activities
To address the coalition’s goals, it will:
Conduct independent research to understand the impact of interoperable payment protocols on digital financial inclusion. This research will be shared with external stakeholders, including policymakers, to support evidence-informed policymaking.
Engage with communities at the local, regional, and global levels to understand their specific needs and challenges. This grassroots approach will help tailor the work, and recommendations, of the coalition to ensure our activities are culturally and contextually appropriate and respectful.
Encourage innovation in financial technologies by proactively engaging with fintech startups and established financial services institutions who are implementing, or could implement, open and interoperable payment protocols.
Engage with national policymakers in international fora to promote the adoption of ethical, interoperable payment protocols.
Publish an annual report that highlights our work over the year.
April 2024
Schedule monthly working group meetings.
Chair to draft and publish coalition website.
Chair to undertake literature review and share some relevant summaries of materials with working group members.
Chair to develop meeting agenda and Issues Report with background information for review ahead of formal call in May.
Hold symposium at NetMundial+10 (April 29-30, São Paulo) to raise awareness of coalition and inform preliminary issues paper.
May 2024
Coordinate with guest speakers to preview presentations and refine messaging for clarity + confirm attendance with members
Conduct external engagement at the 20th anniversary of the United Nations World Summit on the Information Society (
WSIS
+20) and present work of the Dynamic Coalition.
Dynamic Coalition call #1 and #2
June 2024
Coordinate with guest speakers to preview presentations and refine messaging for clarity + confirm attendance with members
Chair to develop meeting agenda and Issues Report with background information for review ahead of formal calls
Dynamic Coalition call #3 and #4
Begin preparations on initial draft of the annual report.
July 2024
Coordinate with guest speakers to preview presentations and refine messaging for clarity + confirm attendance with members.
Chair to develop meeting agenda and Issues Report with background information for review ahead of formal call.
Dynamic Coalition call #5
August 2024
Dynamic Coalition takes summer vacation “reading month” and opens public consultation seeking input on annual report.
September 2024
Update report based on comments received.
Share updated draft of the final report with coalition.
Dynamic Coalition call #6
October 2024
Update report based on comments received.
Share updated draft of the final report with coalition.
Dynamic Coalition call #7
November 2024
Send final report to graphics designer for layout.
Finalize draft annual report and work on plan for
IGF
engagement.
Dynamic Coalition call #8
December 2024
Hold in-person coalition meeting at the UN
IGF
in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to present annual report, and to ensure other
IGF
activities are familiar with the coalition’s work.
Mailing List
Mailing list address:
[email protected]
Subscribe to the mailing list:
https://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/dc-dfi_intgovforum.org
Stakeholders
Government
Neema K. Lugangira - member of Parliament, Tanzania
Ayobangira Safari - member of Parliament, Democratic Republic of the Congo
Private Sector
Dr Andrés Arauz - The People's Clearinghouse
David Higgins - Mifos Initiative
Dr Stephanie Perrin - Digital Discretion
Caroline Sinders - Convocation Design + Research
Technical Community
Ian Peters - W3C
Jeremiah Lee - Independent Expert
Civil Society
Ayden Féderline - Interledger Foundation
Smriti Parsheera - CyberBRICS
Vineel Reddy Pindi - Interledger Foundation
Raashi Saxena - Accessibility Lab
Nasser Eledroos - Color of Change
Amali De Silva-Mitchell - Independent Expert
Dr Wei Wang - University of Hong Kong
Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only. Members participate in the activities of the Dynamic Coalition in their individual capacity.
Documents/Reports
Annual Report 2025
Annual Report 2024
Contacts
Contact Persons:
Ayden Férdeline - Research Fellow, Interledger Foundation - ayden [at] ferdeline [dot] com
UNITED NATIONS
Contact information
United Nations
Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
Villa Le Bocage
Palais des Nations,
CH-1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
igf [at] un [dot] org
+41 (0) 229 173 411
Additional Information
Donate to the IGF
Participant Funding
Vacancies
Multilingualism
Accessibility Statement
Resources
Publications
Press
Glossary
CONNECT WITH US
Donate
Footer menu
Copyright
Privacy Notice
Terms of Use
Accessibility menu
Contrast settings
Font size
Letter spacing
Line height
Images
Font
Reset the settings