[governance] IGF, Hyderabad IGC meeeting

Ian Peter ian.peter at ianpeter.com
Mon Nov 17 00:21:58 EST 2008 

Can people give an idea of their preference for a meeting? The choices seem
to be

2nd (day before IGF) at 1830 (after Giganet business meeting)
3rd (after 1st day of IGF) probably about 1745 after sessions finish

I'm tending towards the 2nd - if so, we should try to keep the meeting to no
more than one hour as it will have been a long day for some. But please give
an idea of which you prefer.





Ian Peter
PO Box 429
Bangalow NSW 2479
Australia
Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
www.ianpeter.com
 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:marzouki at ras.eu.org]
> Sent: 11 November 2008 06:04
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] IGF, Hyderabad
> 
> Hi Anja and all
> 
> You're right, the IGF starts on the 3rd (Wednesday), and GigaNet
> symposium is held on the 2nd, until 18:30.
> Having an IGC meeting right after GigaNet business meeting (i.e.
> 18:30-20:30) could be an option, especially since, most probably, we
> could keep the same room (Parminder, I can ask if you want me to do
> so, since I'm anyhow in contact with the IGF secretariat and with
> HICC event manager re: logistics issues).
> 
> Best,
> Meryem
> 
> --
> Meryem Marzouki - http://www.iris.sgdg.org
> IRIS - Imaginons un réseau Internet solidaire
> 40 rue de la Justice - 75020 Paris
> 
> 
> Le 10 nov. 08 à 08:32, Anja a écrit :
> 
> > Param, doesn't the IGF start on the 3rd?
> >
> > Anja
> >
> > Parminder wrote:
> >>
> >> 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 1^st (eve of IGF) or 2^nd (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). I’ll 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
> >> society’s 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 doesn’t 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-behind-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 <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> >> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org <mailto: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
> >>
> >> 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
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Anja Kovacs
> > Senior Research Associate
> >
> > IT for Change
> > Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
> > Tel: (00-91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
> >
> > www.ITforChange.net
> > www.IS-Watch.net
> > http://India.IS-Watch.net
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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

More information about the Governance mailing list