<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 Wednesday 09 October 2013 05:20 AM,
John Curran wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:25C56327-B9E2-4080-BFBE-E84C59073511@arin.net"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><snip></div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Again, it is a call for globalization of ICANN and IANA
functions, not a plan for </div>
<div>doing such... I do believe that we're all using the term
globalization to mean </div>
<div>"free from one specific country's jurisdiction/governance".</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks for that clarification. Now that we agree that we are all for
globalisation of ICANN and IANA function, and are building consensus
what we mean by such globalisation, and what we dont mean, it is a
promising start.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:25C56327-B9E2-4080-BFBE-E84C59073511@arin.net"
type="cite">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">Opening a new office in
Africa or China or India is not globalisation - even US has
embassies in all these place, because of which US cannot be
called as having been globalised or internationalised.
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
Agreed.<br>
<snip></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:25C56327-B9E2-4080-BFBE-E84C59073511@arin.net"
type="cite">
<div>Is the new "Internet Technical Oversight and Advisory Board"
a component of </div>
<div>the 'new UN body', or an distinct entity? <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
It is not a new UN body. It is standalone. And we propose novel non-
or semi-political composition of it, or as we call it, a techno-
political composition. I am cut pasting the entire relevant text
below. Advice is welcome. As mentioned one can consider other ways
of filling the membership - say, half the members can be from
regional registries, and other from technical organisations from
countries by rotation.... Many such possibilities exist - to
globalise ICANN/IANA without exposing it to potential political harm.<br>
<br>
The following is the text with regard to the proposed 'Internet
Technical Oversight and Advisory Broad'. We are cognizant that this
isnt the perfect proposal, but one needs to make a start somewhere.
<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<blockquote>
<p style="margin-left: 1.25cm; margin-bottom: 0cm" align="JUSTIFY">This
board
will replace the US government's current oversight role over
the technical and operational functions performed by ICANN<span
style="background: transparent">.
The membership of this oversight board can be of a
techno-political
nature, </span><i><span style="background: transparent">i.e.</span></i><span
style="background: transparent">
consisting of people with specialized expertise but who also
have
appropriate political backing, ascertained through a
democratic
process. For instance, the board can be made of 10/15 members,
with
2/3 members each from five geographic regions (as understood
in the
UN system). These members</span> can perhaps be selected
through an
appropriate process by the relevant technical standards bodies
and/or
country domain name bodies of all the countries of the
respective
region. (Other mechanisms for constituting the techno-political
membership of this board can also be considered.)</p>
<p style="margin-left: 1.25cm; margin-bottom: 0cm" align="JUSTIFY">The
Internet
technical oversight and advisory board will seek to ensure
that the various technical and operational functions related to
the
global Internet are undertaken by the relevant organizations as
per
international law and public policy principles developed by the
concerned international bodies. With regard to ICANN, the role
of
this board will more or less be exactly the same as exercised by
the
US government in its oversight over ICANN. As for the
decentralized
Internet standards development mechanisms, like the Internet
Engineering Task Force, these self organizing systems based on
voluntary adoption of standards will continue to work as at
present.
The new board will have a very light touch and non-binding role
with
regard to them. It will bring in imperatives from, and advise
these
technical standards bodies on, international public policies,
international law and norms being developed by various relevant
bodies. </p>
<p style="margin-left: 1.25cm; margin-bottom: 0cm" align="JUSTIFY">For
this
board to be able to fulfill its oversight mandate, ICANN must
become an international organization, without changing its
existing
multistakeholder character in any substantial manner. It would
enter
into a host country agreement with the US government (if ICANN
has to
continue to be headquartered in the US). It would have full
immunity
from US law and executive authority, and be guided solely by
international law, and be incorporated under it. Supervision of
the
authoritative root zone server must also be transferred to this
oversight broad. The board will exercise this role with the help
of
an internationalized ICANN. </p>
<p style="margin-left: 1.25cm; margin-bottom: 0cm" align="JUSTIFY">This
board
will also advise the afore-mentioned new public policy body on
technical matters pertaining to the Internet policy making, as
well
as take public policy inputs from it. </p>
</blockquote>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
A:link { so-language: zxx }
-->
</style>(ends)<br>
<br>
parminder<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:25C56327-B9E2-4080-BFBE-E84C59073511@arin.net"
type="cite">
<div>
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><br>
</div>
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">For example, there is an "IANA
Function Contract"... how would one globalize the </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2AC933AB-E48E-4E5D-813E-DC51533E0095@arin.net"
type="cite">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">'IANA oversight' function that is
nominally provided today by the USG/NTIA?</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">See the above link......
Set up an international body that takes over this function
with no accountability to the US, or any kind of US
jurisdiction... Simple. What other way is there to
globalise/ internationalise something ?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There are many different possible structures and
mechanisms, for example,</div>
<div>you propose a new UN body, an Oversight Board,
globalization of ICANN,</div>
<div>and maintenance/strengthening of the existing IGF. I can
easily imagine </div>
<div>other methods of solving this problem with different
arrangements of bodies</div>
<div>and mechanisms.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The Montevideo Statement on the Future of Internet
Cooperation does not</div>
<div>propose any particular solution, but only states that
several organizations </div>
<div>which are involved in Internet coordination believe that
the globalization of </div>
<div>ICANN and IANA functions (towards an environment in which
all stakeholders, </div>
<div>including all governments, participate on an equal footing)
is a goal worth </div>
<div>accelerating.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Given your strong expression of concern over the statement,
I guess the </div>
<div>question arises - would you have preferred a statement
which indicated that</div>
<div>the current USG oversight of ICANN and IANA is just fine?
That certainly</div>
<div>would have supported the status quo...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>