[governance] new paper on the Hyderabad programme [sic]

[Milton L Mueller]

Thanks, Adam, 
Very helpful. I understand the policy regarding merging with main
sessions, and it seems fair and sensible. But we find taking practical
followup steps somewhat confusing. I think the key question mark here is
who we communicate with in the Secretariat, how, and when. 

Knowing the limitations on staff and resources do we try to call people
in Geneva (time zone difference makes the window small), email them
(just dump it in the igf at unog.ch pile?), email you and/or Avri and you
act as intermediaries, modify our workshop proposal using the web site
resource, hunt down Markus with bloodhounds ;-), etc? 

In terms of our approach to cooperation/merger on the RIR panel, our
main concern is that we invested substantial effort in getting some new
private sector actors involved, and possibly also some govt actors,
beyond the "usual suspects," and we want to make sure that effort isn't
wasted. Main session panels look like they will be a
bit....complicated....given the number of actors involved, but it might
be the best option. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:07 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme
> 
> At 10:22 AM -0400 6/11/08, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> >I share some concerns with Vittorio here about the absence of the
words
> >"freedom" or "rights" from the agenda, although I am less concerned
> >about the abandonment of the "U"-word.
> >
> >What I would like to know is whether there is a chance to change
> >anything in this agenda or are we just letting off steam?
> 
> 
> is a good question.  The paper is described as a rolling document
> "and will be updated as appropriate."  I do not know if we can modify
> it now, the themes in generally similar form have been available for
> comment since the February meeting (which also made the call for
> workshops) but as people feel strongly I would encourage sending
> comments as soon as possible.  Send direct to the secretariat, they
> are pretty good at making sure all comments appear in synthesis
> papers, etc.
> 
> I understand the agenda has already been sent to the secretary
> general so he can prepare an invitation to all stakeholders (as seems
> to be the process, he still needs to convene the IGF) so I think too
> late for that.  But changes will be made in September. The programme
> has to be fleshed out, pages 10-15 of the paper describe the
> programme to date, these of course have the be explained, they aren't
> any use as a programme at the moment.
> 
> As Avri wrote yesterday, workshops that are related to the main
> session themes can volunteer to join with the MAG and other similar
> workshop organizers to help arrange the main sessions. These will
> have a great impact on the programme.
> 
> For example, IGP proposed a workshop "Regional IP Address Registries:
> The New Epicenter of Global Internet Governance?"  There will be a
> session "Arrangement for Internet Governance".  IGP could volunteer
> to merge its session with those of others who have proposed workshops
> that are an equally good fit with the session theme to create a new
> "main session workshop".  The volunteer workshop organizers and the
> MAG will arrange this session, and I expect (though mechanics have
> not been worked out) they will also be involved in the main session
> debate (debate: really is hoped that it can be a debate and not a
> stage full of panelists.)
> 
> There's also a session on IPv4/v6 which IGP might find more
> attractive, but that's IGP's choice.
> 
> If IGP chooses to help arrange the main session workshop, it will
> loose the ability to hold an independent session on the "Regional IP
> Address Registries: The New Epicenter of Global Internet Governance?"
> Can't do both, there isn't time, space etc.  Unfortunately, for some
> sessions, there aren't many workshop proposals that are as good a fit
> as the IGP example. But as proposals can be modified up to June 30,
> there is time to do some tailoring.
> 
> BTW  -- I subscribe to the list so don't need to be cc'd!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> >--MM
> >
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance