[governance] IGF, Hyderabad

Sun Nov 9 02:08:51 EST 2008

There is a giganet business meeting on 1st evening 17 to 1830 hours.

Can we then agree to meet on 2nd  1730 to 1930. Know it is  a bit late but
there isnt any other opportunity IGC gets to meet, other than at IGFs. 

  _____  

From: Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 12:03 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: RE: [governance] IGF, Hyderabad

Either date works for me  early evening to allow those who want to take a
meal together afterwards would probably suit best.

Ian Peter

PO Box 429

Bangalow NSW 2479

Australia

Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773

www.ianpeter.com

  _____  

From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] 
Sent: 09 November 2008 17:26
To: 'Ian Peter'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] IGF, Hyderabad

Ian

After posting a report on IGC at the IGF, the customary IGC meeting at IGF
was the next thing I was going to suggest. How does the evening of 1st (eve
of IGF) or 2nd (day 1 of the IGF) sound to all those who will be attending.

I also was not seeking a statement from the IGC on the way IGF should
evolve, only seeking to orient the group towards starting to engage with
this issue. We have a workshop on this issue at the IGF, and IGF review
process kind of starts from IGF, Hyderabad, onwards.

I agree with what you say, Ian, on starting the election process.

Parminder 

  _____  

From: Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 11:47 AM
To: 'Ian Peter'; governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Parminder'
Subject: RE: OFFLIST RE: [Gov 586] Re:ITU and ICANN - a loveless forced
marriage Re: [governance] ITU & ICANN in Cairo

Oh ***.#### - will I ever learn to check address lines before pressing send.
That was meant to be offlist
. 

Anyway I guess that pre-empts a couple of things we need to discuss in any
case.

Ian Peter

PO Box 429

Bangalow NSW 2479

Australia

Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773

www.ianpeter.com

  _____  

From: Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
Sent: 09 November 2008 17:14
To: 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; 'Parminder'
Subject: OFFLIST RE: [Gov 586] Re:ITU and ICANN - a loveless forced marriage
Re: [governance] ITU & ICANN in Cairo

Hi Parminder,

Not sure we will get much of a statement on this together before Hyderabad,
but should we organize a meeting of IGC say night before IGF starts to
discuss some issues (we may have to get in early and be sure to avoid
GigaNet and other events but something like that seems important). Ill
respond but will be interested to see what others say first.

On another note I am going to begin to call for nominations for your
co-ordinator position mid next week. I am going to release names
periodically as they are received and certainly before Hyderabad. I am going
to leave nominations open until post Hyderabad so that members can review
nominees, talk to them, add names if no-one good is forthcoming etc before
vote starts. I think that might be the way to get the best field.

All the best,

Ian Peter

PO Box 429

Bangalow NSW 2479

Australia

Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773

www.ianpeter.com

  _____  

From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] 
Sent: 09 November 2008 16:51
To: 'WSIS CS WG on Information Networks Governance';
governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Dr. Francis MUGUET'
Subject: RE: [Gov 586] Re:ITU and ICANN - a loveless forced marriage Re:
[governance] ITU & ICANN in Cairo

>Interested in analysis of how we can avoid this. Certainly some parties
wish to avoid meaningful discussion, and are we diplomatically sweeping
under the carpet >all the important issues (lest anyone take offence?)

Ian, you point to an important issue, and danger.

Some of us have been arguing for long that the IGF is civil societys best
bet in many ways. It is a new-age organization that is relatively
representative of people and groups across the world, and still has been
able to maintain some distance from strong statist control on the one side
and corporate control on the other. 

However, many others in the civil society, including within the IGC, have
been over-cautious in putting our weight behind strengthening the IGF in all
ways that we can  whether the issue has been of some substantive (and not
merely advisorial) capacity of the core IGF group (currently named MAG) or
doing substantive inter-sessional work and giving some kind of real, if
non-binding, outputs on key IG issues. 

I think that we as a group may need to revisit our positions on this issue,
or al least discuss them to see if new directions need to be taken in view
of current and emergent realities. 

It is a fact that the IGF may be in real trouble, and in the danger of being
sidelined as an annual conference that no one of any real importance takes
any note of. We must review what would it mean in terms of civil society and
progressive interests. In light of such a review we may need to have clearer
common positions of how we want to engage with the IGF, and how we want to
see it evolve. Such a review is an even more urgent imperative in view of
the forthcoming process of IGF review which will start in earnest
immediately after the IGF, Hyderabad. What gets said and discussed at
Hyderabad may have some important implications for this review.

Parminder 

  _____  

From: gov-bounces at wsis-gov.org [mailto:gov-bounces at wsis-gov.org] On Behalf
Of Ian Peter
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 11:02 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Dr. Francis MUGUET'
Cc: 'WSIS Civil Soc. WG on Information Networks Governance'
Subject: [Gov 586] Re:ITU and ICANN - a loveless forced marriage Re:
[governance] ITU & ICANN in Cairo

The telling statement from ITU being "I am personally of the opinion that
the IGF is continuously going round in circles and avoiding issues  it is
becoming more and more a waste of time."

Interested in analysis of how we can avoid this. Certainly some parties wish
to avoid meaningful discussion, and are we diplomatically sweeping under the
carpet all the important issues (lest anyone take offence?)

My fear here is that the outcomes if IGF doesnt succeed in addressing the
real issues are worse than those if it does succeed. Balkanisation or
globalisation? Take your pick
.

Ian Peter

PO Box 429

Bangalow NSW 2479

Australia

Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773

www.ianpeter.com

  _____  

From: Dr. Francis MUGUET [mailto:muguet at mdpi.net] 
Sent: 09 November 2008 15:44
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Wolfgang
Cc: WSIS Civil Soc. WG on Information Networks Governance
Subject: ITU and ICANN  a loveless forced marriage Re: [governance] ITU &
ICANN in Cairo

Dear Wolfgang

Interesting to notice a press analysis of Touré's speech, most notably about
the IGF.

The statement from Touré has not been unnoticed.

Coming back to what we do with ICANN, we also participate actively in the
work of Internet Governance Forum, which was established as the result of
the multistakeholder deliberations at the WSIS. I personally believe that
the IGF is just going around and around, avoiding the topics, and becomes
sometimes a waste of time. We need to address issues frankly and try to
solve them. And that's why I thought I should be here to talk to you here,
so that we learn to know each other better. Next year, ITU will organize the
World Policy Forum, which addresses a number of Internet-related
public-policy issues, ranging from cybersecurity and data protection to
multilingualism and the ongoing development of Internet. I hope you will not
tell me here, "Don't talk about Internet." It's an issue for everyone.

Best Francis

---------------------------------
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/print/111914

7 November 2008, 12:30

ITU and ICANN  a loveless forced marriage

ITU Secretary General Hamadoun Touré has called for better collaboration
between the International Telecommunication Union[1] (ITU) and the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers[2] (ICANN). "Our members have
unnecessarily attacked and criticised each other and I think we should put
an end to that," said Touré on Thursday at the 33rd ICANN meeting in Cairo.
According to Touré, the two organisations need to get to know each other
better and learn to love each other, as telecommunications and the internet
are ultimately condemned to a "forced marriage".

Despite the outstretched hand, the ITU Secretary General did not spare the
criticism in his first appearance at an ICANN meeting. Touré made it clear
to the assembled experts that he saw his organisation as playing the
dominant role in the forced marriage and made his opinion of the other party
clear  provocatively describing ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee as
purely cosmetic.

The depth of the chasm between the two  the UN organisation, which has its
roots in the telecommunications world, and the quasi-internet-regulator
ICANN  was stressed by a series of further statements in the half-hour talk
given by the head of the ITU. Touré repeatedly spoke of the "war" between
the two organisations. According to Touré, who was elected in 2006, "The
best way to win a war, is to prevent it."

In the course of his 'marriage proposal', he referred extensively to the
ITU's outstanding role. Key topics for his organisation, he noted, include
the internationalisation of domains, something with which ICANN is currently
engaged, the transition to IPv6[3], standardisation for the all-IP Next
Generation Network[4] (NGN), cyber-security, the fight against online
terrorism and child protection online.

Touré rejected concerns that the ITU was appointing itself as global
regulator of internet resources and processes, "The ITU has clear
boundaries. We do not perform the operative business." However, he
underlined the organisation's demand, set out in its Cybersecurity
Agenda[5], to be responsible for a global framework in the fight against
online terrorism and criminality. He also defended the controversial IP
traceback[6] standard proposal. "There is not one country which isn't doing
it, it's just that each country is doing it differently," said Touré.

Touré also rejected criticism that the ITU operates behind closed doors. He
stated that the organisation has around 700 sector members from the
telecommunications industry and also admits NGOs as members. Touré also
praised the ITU's openness  a nod to the World Summit on the Information
Society[7] (WSIS). The summit, organised under ITU auspices, is, according
to Touré, the first UN summit at which civil society has also been invited
to sit at the table, rather than demonstrating outside.

In the same breath, Touré expressed strong criticism of the Internet
Governance Forum[8] (IGF), which was called into being by the WSIS, "I am
personally of the opinion that the IGF is continuously going round in
circles and avoiding issues  it is becoming more and more a waste of time."
Therefore, the ITU is planning a global forum for internet policy next year
as a rival event.

Touré also fired a further undiplomatic broadside at the work performed by
governments within ICANN. "The Governmental Advisory Committee is ICANN's
weak point," said Touré. His criticism was directed at the advisory function
of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) in developing rules for the
domain name system. "If someone gives me advice, I am free to take it or
leave it." The ICANN's GAC is therefore nothing more than "cosmetic", noted
Touré forthrightly.

In a short statement following Touré's speech, the Brazilian government
representative on the GAC demanded, in the name of his and the Argentinian
government, the "strengthening of the GAC". Latvian diplomat Janis Karklins,
re-elected as GAC chairman, by contrast noted that the ITU and ICANN
operated according to very different political models, "From the viewpoint
of an international organisation, the ICANN model may appear weak, because
governments are merely advisory, whilst in an international organisation
they run the show." ICANN is, he opined, based on the novel idea of
collaboration between interested parties. He noted that both models have
their advantages and disadvantages, and that governments need to learn to
operate within both models. 

(Monika Ermert)

(lghp[9])

<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center> 

URL of this Article:
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111914 

Links in this Article:
  [1] http://www.itu.int/
  [2] http://www.icann.org
  [3]
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/OECD-member-states-throw-their-weight-beh
ind-IPv6--/110960
  [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Networking
  [5] http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/cybersecurity/gca/
  [6] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10040152-38.html
  [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSIS
  [8] http://www.intgovforum.org/
  [9] mailto:lghp at heise-online.co.uk

Dear friends

find attached the statement of ITU DG Toure during the recent ICANN meeting
in Cairo and the discussion. This was a very interesting dialogue on the
concept and understanding of the principle of "multistakeholderism". A very
good piece whith very clear and frank language which will certainly provoke
discussion and could be an interesting starting point for a new conceptual
debate on what "multistakholderism" is, why we witness a clash of cultures
in Internet policy development and how the old model of an hierachical top
down IG organisation and the new model of a network bottom up MS
organisation can or can not collaborate and coexist in the global diplomacy
of the 21st century.  

Wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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

-- 

Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.21/1669 - Release Date: 9/12/2008
2:18 PM

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20081109/197528f4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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