<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
'Having been the remote moderator of many sessions this year, I'm
afraid that this is a little premature yet. I have encountered more
than a fair share of technical problems, which I am planning on
writing a report on, as a part of my ISOC Ambassador project.'<br>
<br>
Thanks for continuing the discussion. These ideas are indeed
hypothetical future possibilities, not actual proposals for the next
IGF. Part of our discussions and strategy is envisioning future
scenarios. Although, as you note, some meetings are already held
with only a small <i>in situ</i> core, with most participants in
their home offices, joining the discussion online, we do have to
build a practical strategy for the IGF. <br>
<br>
We appreciate and will study your comments, and I invite you
(Olivier) and others to continue the discussion here, or in the
forum we will open online using the WS 126 transcript as a
foundation. I will post a link here as soon as the transcript is
uploaded to the DISCUSS site. I hope you will send the Remote
Participation Working Group (and me) a copy of your report.<br>
<br>
Thanks! Best, Ginger<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
Ginger (Virginia) Paque<br>
IGCBP Online Coordinator<br>
DiploFoundation<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.diplomacy.edu/ig">www.diplomacy.edu/ig</a><br>
<br>
<b>The latest from Diplo...</b>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://DISCUSS.diplomacy.edu">http://DISCUSS.diplomacy.edu</a> is a space for discussing ideas and
concepts from Diplo’s teaching and research activities. Our
activities focus on three main areas: Internet governance,
diplomacy, and global governance. In September, we DISCUSS: a)
network neutrality: hype and reality, b) the IGF experience: what
can policy makers learn from the IGF, and c) the history of the
Internet. Let us know if you have suggestions about ideas and
concepts that should be discussed.</div>
<br>
On 9/28/2010 8:46 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4CA1EAA8.20007@gih.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
Dear Ginger,<br>
<br>
thank you for your message regarding remote participation at the
IGF Vilnius 2010. It was indeed a great success, and thanks to all
of the hard work by all concerned.<br>
<br>
In his recent reply to your message, Izumi Aizu made a
particularly interesting suggestion:<br>
<br>
<pre>>How about, making things "upside-down"?
>I mean at physical meeting of the IGF, how about making the
>main speakers and participants all remote? So far, the remote
>participation and participants are regarded as supplementary,
>but not given a front-seat status. But think of online chat or
>conference call where no one is physically present and taking
>floors as main participants. Everyone is remote. At IGF, we can
>have the physical participants there, but making most speakers
>and interactions online, webcast, chat etc.
</pre>
Having been the remote moderator of many sessions this year, I'm
afraid that this is a little premature yet. I have encountered
more than a fair share of technical problems, which I am planning
on writing a report on, as a part of my ISOC Ambassador project. <br>
<br>
In short, I believe that the technology is not mature enough yet.
The difficulty does not stem from a single system; it is the
inter-connection of the variety of technologies used, which
hinders a smooth flow of information. <br>
Conducting work in a timely manner using 100% teleconferencing and
a virtual room has been demonstrated on many an occasion at ICANN.
I recently found out in two large working teams, the "Special
Trademark Issues team", and the "Community Working Group on New
gTLD Rec-6", that, provided with an excellent and experienced
leadership (Dave Maher for the first group, and Chuck Gomez for
the second), it is possible to work on some of the most
controversial subject and reach consensus, even without a face to
face meeting.<br>
<br>
However, the moment you introduce a segment of the conference
participants to attend physically, serious technical problems
hinder progress. <br>
<br>
The first problem is that of the reliability of the Internet
connection. In my interactions, I noticed remote participants and
hubs timing out due to network problems somewhere along the line.
Text chatting is usually most resilient to this, because it does
not require much bandwidth, but in order to fully engage remote
participants in discussions, you need to give them the ability to
speak, rather than only type.<br>
<br>
And this is where the main problem lies: the interfacing of many
different systems (a public address system in the physical
location, a Webex session, a telephone bridge etc.), you end up
with problems like feedback loops, distorsion, unaudible speech
and seriously distorted speech which breaks the concentration of
participants and hinders their ability to devote 100% of their
mind to elaborate a constructive argument.<br>
Public address systems are designed to automatically suppress
instantaneous feedback, either by digital or analogue analysis of
the speech. Webex performs the same thing too. Ditto for telephone
bridges. But when you interface all three, unquantified delays
outside the tolerance of these suppression systems start
appearing, and you end up with loops - sometimes several seconds
long. The equipment used to broadcast the sessions automatically
introduces delays. In some sessions, for example, we ended up with
infinite echoes, sometimes 6 seconds long - and a dialogue with a
remote participant became confusing - bordering on the impossible.
We tried so many different ways to remove this, and it appeared to
be impossible with the current set-up.<br>
<br>
A lot of work and testing will therefore need to be done, if we
ultimately wish to make things "upside down". The fact that we're
already engaged in testing this, is very good news indeed, but I
don't think that we're there yet.<br>
<br>
Finally, let me also mention that the IETF's "VMEET" group is also
looking at this problematic. Like many other organisations relying
on a multi-stakeholder input, the subject of remote public
participation has been a concern for some time. Thomas Narten has
drafted an interesting Internet Draft document (sadly now expired,
so I encourage Thomas to follow-up on this), which can still be
found on: <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-narten-ietf-remote-participation">http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-narten-ietf-remote-participation</a><br>
<br>
In some way, the IGF's remote participation this year appears to
have surpassed this stage already, and has been the first wide
scale, global experiment of such kind. I really hope that this
will encourage everyone to continue testing new technologies. I
hope it will encourage remote conferencing software manufacturers,
and not only Webex, to capitalise on this experience and improve
their products. You and your team have reached "proof of concept".
Let's hope, for the sake of the millions of people out there who
would like to participate, and not only for the lucky few of us
who are funded to attend physically, that in some years to come,
technology will allow us to participate fully from the four
corners of our planet.<br>
<br>
Last but not least, I hope that there will be cross-linking of
knowledge and experience in this area, whether ISOC, IETF, IGF or
ICANN... or any other group for that matter. We, the privileged
few, have a duty to work overtime to promote this digital
inclusion. Without it, we're just a déjà-vu pot-pourri of "The
usual suspects".<br>
<br>
Kindest regards,<br>
<br>
Olivier<br>
<br>
Le 25/09/2010 12:56, Ginger Paque a écrit :
<blockquote cite="mid:4C9DE370.9040108@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<font face="Verdana">Remote participation at the IGF Vilnius
2010 raised the bar for remote participation in international
public policy meetings. Not in sheer volume, although 600+
individuals is a good number, but in actual inclusion and
participation, with 33 registered remote hubs and dozens of
remote panelists, this IGF was indeed a global success.</font>
While there was successful remote observation with excellent
webcast, audiocast and captioning, there was also the
possibility of real remote <i>participation</i> for those who
wanted to comment, ask questions and respond, with the same
privileges and priorities as those who attended in person. <br>
<br>
The next step will be to ensure that remote participants take
advantage of this possibility, and that remote moderators learn
to transmit the interest and personal power of the comments so
that their impact is tangibly felt in the meeting room.<br>
<br>
An interesting (unforeseen) development was chat exchanges
between remote hubs on the WebEx platform, as remote hubs gave
feedback to presentations or comments by other remote hubs. <br>
<br>
Pre-IGF preparations were better than ever, with strategy,
planning, training and information from the first 2010 OC in
Geneva.<br>
<br>
I would like to thank the volunteer remote moderators from the
panels, DiploFoundation fellows and the ISOC ambassadors
program for their engagement and precious time and energy; the
Lithuania host for their support and their tech teams; the IGF
Secretariat for their support and follow-up, DiploFoundation for
constant backup, and my fellow RPWG members for their year-round
worry, work and dynamic involvement.<br>
<br>
Thanks to all of the hub organizers for their work to include
people from all over the world in this meeting too.<br>
<br>
The RPWG will publish a report later this year. We look forward
to your comments and suggestions. <br>
<br>
Warm regards,<br>
Ginger
<div class="moz-signature">-- </div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.gih.com/ocl.html">http://www.gih.com/ocl.html</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>