[governance] Thoughts welcome on proposed netmundial submission
Imran Ahmed Shah
ias_pk at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 28 00:36:04 EST 2014
+1
I also support this proposal.
Regards
Imran Ahmed Shah
>________________________________
> From: Sonigitu Ekpe <soekpe at gmail.com>
>To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
>Sent: Friday, 28 February 2014, 9:22
>Subject: Re: [governance] Thoughts welcome on proposed netmundial submission
>
>
>
>+1. Very good proposal. Hope to sign on.
>
>
>Sonigitu Ekpe
>
>Mobile +234 805 0232 469 Office + 234 802 751 0179
> "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving"
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:33 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
>Below are some words I have prepared to submit to
NetMundial (acting purely as an individual) before the March 8 deadline. I have
copied them to a couple of lists because I know others think similarly – and I
am more than prepared to amend this and transform it into a sign-on statement if
there is interest.
>>I acknowledge firstly inputs from others on various
lists discussing this which I have adopted. If people are interested in
contributing and signing on, happy to take that on board on list or off list.
But I do want a pragmatic proposal which has a good chance of being adopted, and
will not include suggestions that would be counter to getting some immediate
action on this.
>> I appreciate
there are many other thoughts on this and encourage others to make submissions
direct to Netmundial outlining other solutions if they feel so inclined. But any
inputs to refine this particular widely discussed suggestion are very
welcome.
>> This will have to be finalised
for sign on, if that direction is taken, by about March 4.
>>Ian Peter
>>DRAFT FOLLOWS
>> Roadmap (and
principles) for internalisation of the former IANA functions within the
multistakeholder ICANN model.
>> This roadmap
concentrates on one internet governance issue only – the future of the IANA
functions which have been the subject of much past discussion because current
arrangements are seen by many to be outside of the preferred multistakeholder
model.
>> Indeed, IANA
itself was established in an era
before current internet governance models (multistakeholder) and governance
institutions (eg ICANN) were in existence.
>>
>>ROADMAP
>> This roadmap
suggests that the IANA functions, though necessary processes in the secure and
authoritative functioning of the Internet, no longer need a separate entity and
would more productively merged with similar functions under the auspices of
ICANN. Subject of course to many concerns about details, this direction appears
to have widespread support from governments, civil society, technical community,
and private sector.
>> In order to
achieve this desired change efficiently and productively, the following roadmap
is proposed.
>>1. ICANN should be
requested to prepare a proposal for management of the previous IANA functions
within the ICANN multistakeholder model, bearing in mind the following
criteria:
>>
>>(a) protection of the root zone from political or other
improper interference;
>>(b) integrity, stability, continuity, security and
robustness of the administration of the root zone;
>>(c) widespread [international] trust by Internet users
in the administration of this function; (d) support of a single unified root
zone; and
>>(e) agreement regarding an accountability mechanism for
this function that is broadly accepted as being in the global public
interest."
>>2. Preparation of the proposal should involve discussion
with all major stakeholder groups, with a completion timetable for a first draft
for discussion at the Internet Governance Forum in Turkey in September
2014.
>>3. To expedite completion in a timely manner, it is
suggested that outside consultants be engaged to prepare the discussion paper
(proposal) in consultation with major stakeholders.
>>4. The solution must have the following
characteristics
>>
>>(a) offers a legal structure that is robust against
rogue litigation attacks
>>
>>(b) is aligned with the Internet technical
infrastructure in a way that supports innovative, technology based evolution of
the DNS .
>>
>>
>>(c) is an inclusive model
>>(d) is a demonstrable improvement on current processes
in this area
>>
>>END DRAFT
>>
>>
>>____________________________________________________________
>>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>>For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>>
>>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
>For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140227/85d09749/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list