[governance] Comments on latest version of chairs paper

[ian.peter at ianpeter.com]

Well here's a few comments on the sections you suggested.

52 "We recognise the need for legitimate, multilateral, transparent and
democratic publicy policy setting and oversight over the root zone system and
its future development"

People won't believe I am saying this after all the fuss I have made over
unilateral control of root zone authorisation, but I suggest strike 
this clause
altogether. Instead, include root zone system in 53 which would make it read

53. "We recognise the need for development of further development of public
policies for the root zone system and generic top level domains"

Reasons? I believe the best future for the authorisation function currently
undertaken by USG is for it to disappear in favour of clear procedures and
policies for changes that governments are prepared to accept. In other words,
the IANA/ICANN process determines changes with all stakeholders involved.
Period.

(I also have in mind here the previous debate we have had here in which we
cannot agree USG is acceptable for this function, any other government
unilaterally would be acceptable, and multilateral authorisation would be at
least equally problematic. Get USG out of the root and I believe we 
have a good
system government by checks and balances in a transformed ICANN).


66 (the square bracketed security section). If it looks like it is sticking it
would be good to include "technical developments" in with "co-operation to
facilitate" areas mentioned (outreach, exchange of info and best practice
practice etc) . this is as much a technical development issue as it is a
communications one.

71. can't see any point in supporting the bracketed (g).


76 on - hard to comment without words - might come back to that later.

Ian




Quoting ian.peter at ianpeter.com:

>
> I'll have a look, Adam.
>
> One thing though - are there changes that we are aware governments are
> going to
> want in the sections that are still not agreed? One of the 
> difficulties is its
> easy to comment on the draft, but not so easy to prepare in advance positions
> on issues that are like to be raised...
>
> I guess this particularly applies to 76 on. In this respect is the 
> chairs Food
> for Thought at
> http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2125|0
> at all relevant to your needs at present? It covers forum etc to a
> larger degree
> - do we need to comment on it as well at this stage?
>
> Ian
>
>
> Quoting "Adam Peake (ajp at glocom.ac.jp)" <apeake at gmail.com>:
>
>> Ian, thanks.
>>
>> Chair's paper.
>>
>> <http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2130|0>
>>
>> PDF or MS word document from that URL.  And we are looking at the open
>> paragraphs, which are:
>>
>> * Public policy issues relevant to Internet governance:  Section 3,
>> para 48-59
>> * cybercrime: para 61
>> * Internet security: para 66
>> * Interconnection costs for LDCs: para 71, sub section g (only)
>> * Follow-up and possible future arrangements: Section 5, para 76 on
>> (section not done at all.)
>>
>> Rest is marked as agreed, probably a waste of time commenting, but if
>> you think something so obviously out of place, then we might think
>> about saying something.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/18/05, ian.peter at ianpeter.com <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>>> Happy to provide some comments on this -
>>>
>>> But can someone post a reference to the document you would prefer 
>>> we discuss
>>> -are we talking about the latest "Food for Thought" document posted
>>> September
>>> 30 or can someone refer me to something more recent?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ian Peter
>>> Senior Partner
>>> Ian Peter and Associates Pty Ltd
>>> PO Box 10670 Adelaide St
>>> Brisbane 4000
>>> Australia
>>> Tel +617 3870 1181
>>> Fax +617 3105 7404
>>> Mob +614 1966 7772
>>> www.ianpeter.com
>>> www.internetmark2.org (Creating Tomorrow's Internet)
>>> www.nethistory.info (Winner, PC Mag Top 100 Sites Award Spring 2005)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> governance mailing list
>>> governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Email from Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
>> Email from my Gmail account probably means I am travelling.  Please
>> reply to  <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> Thanks!
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>



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