SV: [governance] Re: [cir] [igf_members] IGF 2012 - CIR?

"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wolfgang.kleinwaechter at
Sat Mar 3 05:52:58 EST 2012

Hi all
Bill is right in making some critical observations with regard to the CIR session ion Baku. However we have to see all the WGs in a certain interdependence. 
I am engaged in the "emerging issues" WG, chaired by Romolo. Here we want to discuss in detail the emerging political and legal frameworks for the global Internet. Our plan is to go beyond rather general discussions (as we had in Nairobi) around proposed "principles" (COE, OECD) and various "projects" (IBSA, Shanghai) but to look forward towards the emergence of a general (multistakeholder) "Framework of Commitments" in which the various governmental activities at the national and international level (as WCIT, ACTA, SOPA, CIRP, CoC, G8 etc.) - are embedded. This should not be the outdated version of "Governmental Control vs. Private Sector Leadership", but it should try to figure out what the respective roles of the stakeholders in the Internet of tomorrow could and should be, based on shared principls and policies. It is still vague, but input is more than welcome. 
Best wishes


Fra: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at]
Sendt: lø 03-03-2012 10:30
Til: igf-cir at
Cc: Carlos A. Afonso; igf-cir at; IGF Members; governance at
Emne: [governance] Re: [cir] [igf_members] IGF 2012 - CIR?

Hi Tulika

 There is a MAG + working group that is actively debating the topics and questions for the CIR session.  Jennifer Warren of Lockheed Corp, Is the facilitator. The discussion unfortunately has fallen short of being consensual, with Avri and I arguing for inclusion of the WCIT and other geopolitical topics like enhanced cooperation, contentious string selection, and jurisdiction and extraterritoriality (SOPA, ICE, etc) we think are likely to be of broad interest in November, while business folks have been less receptive to these matters and are plumping instead for more narrow gauge and technical topics like Internet of Things, IPv6 (again!), migration of resources to IP nets, and spectrum/mobile. I don't know Where this end up, but my hope is that we can arrive at a balanced compromise on four topics that gives each side a bit of what it wants,  the government reps on the list have been silent, and it would be helpful to hear their thoughts either way.  Since you are not on the (still active) 2011 MAG I don't know if you can join, but you might try,  otherwise I'd be happy to pass along any statements from you as inputs.



On Mar 2, 2012, at 18:02, TULIKA PANDEY <tulika at> wrote:

	Dear All, 

	I would like to hear some response to Carlos's concerns and inputs for the CIR session as I tend to agree with all his suggestions, especially his inputs on ITU initiatives.

	Tulika Pandey
	On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at> wrote:

		Dear people,
		The February synthesis paper of the open consultations published in the
		IGF official site mentions the following regarding "critical Internet
		--- begin doc citation ---
		25. In terms of Critical Internet Resources it was seen by several
		commentators that further debate is needed around issues such as the
		institutional structure of IG, including the future of ICANN, IP
		addressing, root servers and Internet exchange points.
		26. Several suggestions were made for the Critical Internet Issues
		theme, including, inter alia;
		* Best Practices for eliminating barriers to access to the Internet;
		* IPv6 and the impact and opportunities for the developing world that
		may result from the transition to IPv6 and how does the coming depletion
		of IPv4 addresses affect developing countries?
		* What is the effect of the deployment of multilingual domain names,
		i.e. IDN.IDN?
		* Issues of ICANN's naming policy and the impact of the new gTLDs and
		IDN gTLDs;
		* Technical issues such as DNS blocking and how such technical issues
		drive or impact policy.
		--- end doc citation ---
		In light of the ongoing ITU process leading to WCIT 2012 aiming at,
		among other goals, radically revising the 1988 ITR to try to take
		account of the ICT challenges posed by the Internet, I think the above
		points are far from sufficient.
		At a minimum, IGF's CIR "track" should include a review of the ITU
		meetings' outcomes.
		fraternal regards
		igf_members mailing list
		igf_members at

	Tulika Pandey
	Additional Director
	Department of Information Technology
	Room 3089, Electronics Niketan
	6 CGO Complex, New Delhi - 110 003
	Tel(0): 91-11-24364739
	Mob: +91- 9810670981

	igf-cir mailing list
	igf-cir at

-------------- next part --------------
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at
To be removed from the list, visit:

For all other list information and functions, see:
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

Translate this email:

More information about the Governance mailing list