<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Arial">Also.. just adding more to this. </font><br>
<br>
<font face="Arial">The other 'agenda' challenge is that already
surveillance seems to have moved into the background. Probably
because NetMundial submissions asked us to respond on principles,
and roadmap for future evolution of IG ecosystem.<br>
<br>
With this transition on the table we can go into the 'future
evolution' into more detail, but what about coming up with mechanisms
for addressing mass surveillance?<br>
<br>
Anriette<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 17/03/2014 10:28, Anriette
Esterhuysen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5326B23E.8040809@apc.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font face="Arial">Dear Jeanette<br>
<br>
What I meant was that should now focus much more on how the
transition should take place, and what we want to transition to,
rather than just making a convincing argument that the
transition should happen.<br>
<br>
This is probably just a subtle difference, as the NTIA
announcement is not a huge surprise. But there is still a big
difference between civil society having clear proposals for how
we think these functions should be managed, and by whom, and
based on which principles as opposed to just emphasising that we
we want the status quo to change.<br>
<br>
We might also want to differentiate between general principles
for IG, and specific principles for DNS and root zone
management... but I need to think about that more...and also
think in a more differentiated way about further evolution of
the IG eccosystem. Different types of decisions and
coordination need not be made in the same way, or in the same
places. We always say that the system is distributed, and some
of us say that is a good thing. I think having the US oversight
issues out of the way makes it possible for us to spend more
time taking about what replaces it. </font><br>
<br>
<font face="Arial">Civil society tends to lump all its concerns
together, which is often not very helpful</font>. If we want to
get concrete outputs from NetMundial we need to propose solutions
and new models which are achievable and creative. This is not so
easy. But there are a few on the table. If we can get consensus,
more or less, on those before the event it will make us much more
influential.<br>
<br>
<font face="Arial"><font face="Arial">But I guess I am simply
stating the obvious.<br>
<br>
</font>Anriette<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/03/2014 00:11, Jeanette Hofmann
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5324D021.7080706@wzb.eu" type="cite"> <br>
<br>
Hi Anriette, <br>
<br>
why do you think we need to rethink the agenda for NetMundial?
Hasn't the future of the IANA functions always been part of it?
<br>
<br>
jeanette <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Personally I think that the really
interesting, but also challenging <br>
outcome of this is that it means we need to rethink the
NetMundial <br>
Agenda and what we really want to get out of it. <br>
<br>
What is so good though is that the conversation with
governments, and <br>
private institutions, the technical community etc. can now
focus on the <br>
substance of how decisions are made, and how participation is
ensured, <br>
and accountability and transparency maintained, and what
principles are <br>
used in making these decisions. <br>
<br>
The location of ICANN in the US and the relationship with the
US has <br>
been a bottleneck in talking about 'enhanced coopration' etc.
etc. This <br>
is not going to make it easier. <br>
<br>
The challenge of dealing with governments who desire more
control, and <br>
those nongovernmental institutions involved in inernet
governance who <br>
are not sufficiently accountable, and not operating based on
commonly <br>
understood public interest and rights-based principles,
remain.. and is <br>
even greater actually. And a further challenge will be to
ensure that <br>
ICANN, while I think has been positively proactive, and in
some senses <br>
opportunistic (which is not a bad thing) since the NSA
revelation, does <br>
not, riding on increased legitimacy, unduly expand its scope,
reach, power. <br>
<br>
Anriette <br>
<br>
<br>
*DRAFT Best Bits welcomes NTIA announcement on transition of
key <br>
internet domain name functions* <br>
<br>
Members of the Best Bits coalition welcome the announcement
made by the <br>
United States Commerce Department’s National
Telecommunications and <br>
Information Administration (NTIA) of its ‘intent to transition
key <br>
internet domain name functions to the global multi-stakeholder
community <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-functions"><http://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2014/ntia-announces-intent-transition-key-internet-domain-name-functions></a>.'**
<br>
<br>
NTIA’s responsibility under current agreements means it has
served as <br>
the “historic steward” of the DNS (internet domain name
system). The <br>
fact that a single government currently plays this role, even
if it has <br>
not been a particularly “hands-on” role, has been cause for
concern and <br>
debate among governments and other stakeholders for more than
a decade. <br>
<br>
We commend the NTIA for committing to the transition to a <br>
multi-stakeholder process that needs full involvement of civil
society, <br>
governments, business and the internet technical community (to
mention <br>
just some of the current stakeholders affected by internet
decision <br>
making) and for requiring that the resulting transition plan
maintains <br>
the openness of the internet. <br>
<br>
This is however not trivial, as mechanisms for democratising
internet <br>
governance, and ensuring really effective and inclusive
participation of <br>
all who are affected by internet policy making and standard
setting are <br>
still evolving. A transition away from US government oversight
does not <br>
in itself guarantee inclusion, transparency and accountability
or <br>
protection of the public interest in the management of DNS and
the root <br>
zone. Nevertheless, this is a very constructive step,
definitely in the <br>
right direction, and a unique opportunity to make progress in
the <br>
evolution of the internet governance ecosystem. This is
particularly <br>
important for stakeholders from developing countries. <br>
<br>
We recommend that ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and <br>
Numbers), to which the NTIA is entrusting the development of
the <br>
transition plan, look beyond its own internal
multi-stakeholder <br>
processes in bringing together the larger community for the
necessary <br>
consultations on how this transition should be undertaken. We
also <br>
recommend that ICANN consider the submissions about how this
transition <br>
can take place that were made to the upcoming NetMundial:
Global Meeting <br>
on the Future of Internet Governance ‒ <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.netmundial.br">www.netmundial.br</a> <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="http://www.netmundial.br/"><http://www.netmundial.br/></a>
‒ to be held in Brazil in late April 2014. <br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:anriette@apc.org">anriette@apc.org</a>
executive director, association for progressive communications
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.apc.org">www.apc.org</a>
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:anriette@apc.org">anriette@apc.org</a>
executive director, association for progressive communications
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.apc.org">www.apc.org</a>
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692</pre>
</body>
</html>