[governance] Comments on latest version of chairs paper

[Adam Peake]

Ian,

As Robert indicated, the chair's food for thought document was issued 
late and if I remember correctly was not accepted by the 
sub-committee as the basis for further discussions.  At least not as 
the sole basis for further discussion: it was accepted by the meeting 
and would go forward as one of a number of proposals on section 5, 
they should be read together and are linked from here 
<http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2135|2136|2137|2138|2139|2140|2141|2142|2143>

African Common Position; Argentina; Brazil; Canada; European Union 
(UK); Iran; Japan; Russian Federation / Azrbaijan / Belarus / 
Moldova; Saudi Arabia (Arab Group)

http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt17.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt18.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt19.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt20.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt20.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt21.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt22.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt23.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt24.html
http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/pc3/working/dt25.html


Adam


>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