[bestbits] [governance] Ad hoc Best Bits strategy meeting tomorrow lunchtime

[John Curran]

On Nov 6, 2013, at 2:47 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> On Thursday 07 November 2013 01:06 AM, John Curran wrote:
>> Parminder - 
>> 
>> For my education - where is the distinction made in the Tunis agenda?
> John
> 
> The para 69 of Tunis Agenda and I quote
> 
> "69. We further recognize the need for enhanced cooperation in the future, to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities, in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-to-day technical and operational matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues. "
> 
> This para explicitly excludes all elements of global Internet governance that pertains to technical operations and do not impact international public policy issues. Therefore RIR, IETF, ICANN and such of the I* group remain 'safe' and excluded from enhanced cooperation discussions and any ' institutional solutions' that may emerge out of them. 

Thanks for the reminder.

So on the question of terminology - 
>> Do we have commonly accepted terminology for referring to "Internet 
>> substantive public polices" vs "Internet operational matters"?

these are "Internet _public policy_ issues", as opposed to "Internet policy development issues"...

Are we all using the phrase "Internet public policy" consistently, when referring to matters of 
norms and customs on the Internet?   (e.g.  there are likely aspects of globalization of ICANN
and IANA which pose Internet public policy issues, and others aspects which are operational
matters)

/John

Disclaimers:  My views alone.   No public policy proposed in this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131106/d88c8cfb/attachment.htm>