<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 29 March 2013 10:00 PM, Adam
Peake wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFabd1LTbpvh2q2576Otm96thaD24OwAeT=81G5a-8PnzwndiQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Wow, Gotcha...
On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 1:18 AM, parminder <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On Friday 29 March 2013 08:03 PM, McTim wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
<snip>
you are incorrect. The folk who are involved in Internet2, amongst
other REN projects are EXACTLY those people that the FP would include.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
So you are saying that members of Internet2 fit the definition of technical
(and academic) community that the focal point gave us which is "community of
organizations and individuals who are involved in the day-to-day operational
management of the Internet and who work within this community" ? You think
that Internet2 is involved in 'day to say operational management of the
Internet'?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I think probably yes <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.internet2.edu/membership/index.cfm"><http://www.internet2.edu/membership/index.cfm></a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
What I hear is that Adam, Mctim, and perhaps one another are saying
that Internet2 project members meet the definition of 'those
involved in day to day operational management of the Internet' and
thus would be eligible as representatives of 'tech and academic
community' on the WG on enhanced cooperation and such bodies, as per
what we have heard from the concerned focal point.<br>
<br>
I will be happy if ISOC as the focal point can confirm this. Let
them tell us whom all did they distribute the call for nominations
to, and we will indirectly get out answer. BTW, the initial mandate
of the focal points was simply to 'assist the CSTD Chair in reaching
out
to the interested parties in their respective regional or
stakeholder groups and to facilitate consultations
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-->
</style>'.<br>
<br>
Let ISOC give a report on whom all did they reach out to and held
consultations with. Such a report is a basic requirement to be made
public. The WG on IGF Improvements clearly instructs documentation
and publication of such processes by those involved in stakeholder
rep selection, and there is no reason it should not be done in this
case. This is a basic requirement of transparency, isnt it. <br>
<br>
Meanwhile, I do not see how Internet2 members can be considered as
being 'involved' in day to day operational management of the
Internet.... There are various kinds of techies there working on
technology innovation, there are universities involved, there are
even two music schools involved there....<br>
<br>
But if indeed, those who work on Internet related innovations in the
field are to be included, why was Michael's nomination rejected -
not on intrinsic merit, but on non eligibility.... Michael works
with various field based Internet innovations, including for
instance projects involving setting specific technical
configurations for facilitating tele medicine for aboriginal
communities.... Community informatics is lot about such kind of
stuff. And so, Michael should have even qualified for the tech part
of tech-academic community, what to say about the 'academic'
part....<br>
<br>
<br>
I think ISOC is clear when they say that they only include those
working with organisations involved in day to day operation of the
Internet - and these are ICANN, ISOC perhaps for IETF/ IAB etc,
RIR, root servers and perhaps country cctlds.... <br>
<br>
And if one is working with any of these organisations, it is not
even necessary to be either a techie or an academic. You just must
be working with these above organisations, Perhaps you know that
Constance, who is now on the WG, is neither a techie nor an
academic, she is policy and law professional. She is there just
because she is with ISOC. And so ISOC is rather consistent with a
narrow interpretation of their definition. <br>
<br>
The creteria used by concerned Focal Point ISOC is rather clear -
even if I strongly disagree with it. And Internet2 members would in
no case make to their list. Evidence of it would be in the fact that
- although they are on OECD Technical Community Advisory Committee
- I am relatively sure that the Focal Point did not reach out to the
Internet2 group, and such others, when it was asked to do
stakeholder outreach. If I am wrong on this, I am happy to be
corrected and ISOC may publish the process documentations telling us
whom all did they out reach to.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFabd1LTbpvh2q2576Otm96thaD24OwAeT=81G5a-8PnzwndiQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Adam
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">And that therefore Internet2 members could have been considered as nominees
from the technical and academic community by the focal point for the WG on
EC?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Strange that they qualify for OECD body as technical community but not
for
the UN system.....
Evidently, the definition of even the technical community part of the
'technical and academic community' employed by the Focal point is
erronoeus,
what to say about the 'academic community' part which seem to have simply
been banished.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
but they haven't been, you are simply mistaken.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
How am I mistaken? Who is the academic community member in the final list?
Like someone not closely associated with ISOC and not running a country tld
whereby one qualifies through the above definition of being engaged in 'day
to day operational management of the Internet'?
parminder
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>