[governance] Ideas that this mailing list has agreed to

[Adam Peake (ajp@glocom.ac.jp)]

Is there any chance, remote I suspect, that we agree to the following?

Regarding the WGIG report:

42. The caucus finds model one to be unworkable and not in keeping
with the inclusive processes recommended throughout the WGIG report.
We also find certain aspects of Model 4 to be not in keeping with the
WGIG recommendations. Model two is clearly the most workable as a
starting point, and is favored by most civil society participants.
However, aspects of model 3, particularly the importance of a host
nation agreement and provisions for tackling developmental issues,
merit greater attention.

[43. deleted referes to action suggested for prepcom 3 Geneva]

44. An acceptable oversight framework would
- Allow multi-stakeholder input into policy development
- Ensure meaningful participation of all stakeholders from developing countries
- Focus on shared responsibility rather than oversight and control

45. We believe that this broad issue and in particular the issue of
governance structures as regards the root zone authorisation function
should be addressed with some urgency.

46. The acceptance of a single root for the DNS is an important
enabler of the Internet's international reach Governance arrangements
for the root zone file should be outside the control of any individual
government, and broadly acceptable to all stakeholders. If this issue
is not addressed, it will lead to an increase in the number of
alternative root structures that could impact negatively on the
Internet's security, stability and interoperability.  Under the
current naming scheme, this could lead to the fragmentation of the
Internet and the user community.

END

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance