AW: [governance] Agenda for IGF Nairobi - IGC proposals

Tue Jan 18 03:49:25 EST 2011

Hi

good issue and worth to investigate deeper. Isn`t it also part of the "fragmentation" debate. 

In the 1990s, the risk for fragementation came with the alternative roots. This was rejected both by the market and also by ICANN in its famous Policy Paper "ICP-3: A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS", in:  http://www.icann.org/en/icp/icp-3.htm

Later the risk for fragmentation came with the iDNs when China started a test in 2002 with an own root server system with TLDs with Chinese characters. Thanks to the fast track on iDN ccTLDs this was avoided and now TLD Zone Files with Chinese, Cyrillic and other Non-ASCII charatcers are in the "authoritative root".

Is W2 at NN-debate now the third wave of the fragmentation discussion? Do will have different rules (including rules for numbering?) for fixed and mobile Internet?`

Good subject for an IGF workshop. And a good issue also for forming new coalitions :-)))

Wolfgang 

________________________________

Von: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Bertrand de La Chapelle
Gesendet: Mo 17.01.2011 20:02
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; parminder
Cc: Jeremy Malcolm
Betreff: Re: [governance] Agenda for IGF Nairobi - IGC proposals

Just briefly, I think Parminder raises an interesting question regarding different rules (or not) for the mobile Internet and the fixed one. 

Basically, this is about a significant change from the Internet initial incarnation (mostly PCs, connected by wires, with browsers) to  the diversification of platforms and infrastructures, not to mention social services that become quasi-territories with their own rules, and the emergence of apps on mobiles and tablets (putting some actors as new gatekeepers). 

Another element is the impact of regulations in some countries that have major operators and the possible spillover/percolation effect in other countries. 

I suppose his suggestion would mean having such subjects as key themes in the main sessions - or in the emerging issues one - in complement to possible workshops. 

I am not sure what the best formulation would be. But there clearly is an important issue there worth exploring. There is a need for a neutral formulation that does not prejudge the solution but presents the issue as a common question/problem. Suggestions welcome. 

Best

Bertrand 

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:20 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

	Hi Jeremy

	I think we should two separate threads for the next IGF's agenda, which hopefully will be taken up in the Feb MAG meeting, and for our inputs into the WG on IGF improvements. Both are very distinct issues and separately quite important . So excuse me to have this thread on 'agenda for IGF Nairobi'.

	I am particularly eager to get this discussion going, because I feel that IGC should be doing much more on substantive issues, and its almost singular focus on process issues is what has kept it insulated from much of the civil society outside the IG realm, which compromises its legitimacy. 

	In middle of the hot discussions on composition of the WG on IGF improvements, Sala posted an email on the (globally) historic FCC decision on network neutrality. While there are some good points there, there has been a sellout on excluding mobile Internet from regulations disallowing pay-for-priority. (To read this in the context of my earielr emails pointing to how mobile Internet in India is already breaching NN boundaries.)

	This FC decision has the potential of splitting up the Internet into the open fixed line variety and corporate content dominated mobile Internet. Why should there be two kinds of Internet? Why do freedoms and rights count on one kind and are not so important on the mobile Internet? What does this mean for developing countries where mobile is slated to become the by far the dominant platform for Internet?

	I also consider it very significant that it is perhaps the first time ever in any substantial policy matter of such huge consequence that the policy framework was largely written up as a result of negotiations between two largest corporate players in the area - google and verizon - and then the government rubber stamped it. If this the new global governance model we are moving towards? I keep getting this picture in my mind of our health policy frameworks soon being written by drug companies and health insurance companies, and maybe the large private hospital chains, if they are big enough, before plaint governments rubber stamp it. That is exactly what happened in the present instance vis a vis the new communication infrastructure of the Internet that came with such egalitarian promises. 

	Anyway back to the topic,

	The next IGF just must take up 'Network Neutrality' or in fact ' Mobile Network Neutrality' as its key plenary theme. Otherwise IGF and the real world IG would be two very different worlds. 

	It should also continue with the plenary topic - 'development agenda for IG'

	And I propose a third topic

	'Cross border Issues and implications of IG'

	CoE is discussing it, no reason why IGF should not.

	Parminder 

	Jeremy Malcolm wrote: 

		I would like us to move towards preparing a submission about the
		programme of the 2011 IGF meeting.  Simultaneously, we can discuss IGF
		improvements, which if minor could go into that submission, but
		otherwise can be input for our new CSTD working group on the IGF.

		This is an exercise that we have, of course, gone through before.  So it
		is useful for us to look at some previous submissions on the programme
		of the IGF and on improvements, and see what we can simply rewrite and
		reuse.  Here are relevant links:

		PROGRAMME:

		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/8 (Hyderabad)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/5 (Sharm)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/26 (Sharm)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/32 (Sharm)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/34 (Vilnius)

		IMPROVEMENTS:

		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/6 (funding, deeper discussion, WGs)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/7 (format improvements, IGF as town-hall)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/9 (MAG improvements)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/30 (MAG, funding, intersessional work)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/33 (MAG, outputs, intersessional work)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/41 (MAG improvements, links from IGF)
		http://www.igcaucus.org/node/45 (outputs, difficult issues, virtual IGF)

		I would suggest that people go through these and pick out the highlights
		that they would like to reiterate... as well, of course, as contributing
		any new points in light of the changed landscape since last November.

	-- 
	PK   

	____________________________________________________________
	You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
	    governance at lists.cpsr.org
	To be removed from the list, visit:
	    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

	For all other list information and functions, see:
	    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
	To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
	    http://www.igcaucus.org/

	Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t