[ccwg-internet-governance] WSIS FORUM AT ITU; ICANN

Nigel Hickson nigel.hickson at icann.org
Sun Apr 26 21:35:53 UTC 2015


Colleagues 

Good evening; have been reading this constructive dialogue; have until
tomorrow (around this time) to put in bid; personally think idea would be
excellent (and a great dress rehearsal for IGF). We can put names down as
Bill has suggested (and suspect we can add nearer time).

For clarity the session is time for Thursday (28th) at 16.45.

Best

Nigel 

 

From:  Holly Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net>
Date:  Sunday 26 April 2015 06:27
To:  William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com>
Cc:  CCWG <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
Subject:  Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] WSIS FORUM AT ITU; ICANN

This does make a lot of sense.  But I also agree with Olivier¹s reservation:
given the fairly rocky road of Œglobalisation of ICANN to date, will the
session be a positive one, or one where lots of shall I say less than clean
laundry is washed? 

Just a thought

Holly
On 25 Apr 2015, at 6:07 pm, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi 
> 
> Olivier raises a valid concern.  While the cluster of activities often
> referred to as ICANN globalization‹transition, offices/staff around the world,
> expanding and diversifying participation, etc‹need to be raised, if this is
> the framing of the whole event one can easily imagine a line of interventions
> from the floor that fixates on the limitations thereof.  Indeed, as a Geneva
> denizen who attends a lot of IG events and has done multiple WSIS Forum
> sessions, I would predict that the first hand to go up would be from a certain
> ex-WCIT maestro who would merrily problematize this.  The critique likely will
> be made irrespective of when and how such issues are addressed, but setting
> globalization as the overarching theme would provide a fatter target. Bear in
> mind too the wider context that¹d help make it resonate, including the meme
> that¹s been fostered in the local media and meetings about how ICANN will or
> should relocate to Switzerland.  So I¹d think it would be better not to look
> like we¹re trying to dispense kool aid and oversell‹stick to the facts and be
> prepared to acknowledge limitations.
> 
> An option to consider: People may recall that we talked about whether the
> CCWGIG should submit an IGF workshop proposal.  While that conversation didn¹t
> fully blossom, Olivier and Jordan did submit proposal No. 163
> Multi-stakeholder Internet Governance -IANA Stewardship, described thusly:
> 
> The transition of Stewardship of the IANA Contract from the US to the Global
> Community is, arguably, this year's most significant change for the Internet.
> This session (which will not focus on the substance of the debate or on any
> transition proposal) will provide behind the scene insights from participants
> in the IANA Stewardship Transition; including:
> 
> - how the bottom-up multistakeholder model has been used to make tough
> operational decisions that will affect the whole Internet
> - how initial positions held by stakeholders were examined
> - how these positions evolved in the course of discussions, both on-line and
> in face to face meetings
> - the lessons to be learnt for other Internet Governance issues from the
> experience of participants in this process?
> 
> The session will include personal insights from community members who started
> out with very diverse, conflicting views which reflected the views of their
> Community, finally finding consensus in building together the best solution
> for the operational stability and continuity of the Internet.
> This session will seek to demonstrate the maturity of the multistakeholder
> model of governance; relevant - not least - in the forthcoming UNGA discussion
> on the WSIS+10 Review.
> Participants (in a roundtable format) will be drawn from across the Community
> including representatives from ISOC, the IETF and the RIRs.
> The Cross Community Working Group on Internet Governance is a formal body
> within the ICANN Community Structure drawing membership from nearly all of the
> different Constituency bodies.
> (https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43984275)
> 
> Why not simply do the same thing at the WSIS Forum?  There are arguably
> several advantages:
> 
> *It'd be the path of least resistance since we already have a text.
> 
> *It'd be interesting to use the WF to preview/practice the IGF session (if
> it¹s approved) and see how the discussion evolves similarly/differently in the
> two venues with their respective audiences.  I did this in 2011, organized
> parallel WF and IGF sessions on Institutional Choice in Global Communications
> Governance, and it proved to be rather instructive.
> 
> *Bearing in mind the concerns raised above, focusing on the MS process
> followed in the transition would be a propitious framing in the particular
> institutional/discursive context of this event.
> 
> The line-up of speakers would be different from their IGF proposal because
> we¹re presumably talking about a Panel of 4-6 people rather than a Roundtable
> with 16 participants, many of whom probably won¹t be in Geneva in May.  Given
> the Monday submission deadline we¹d need to do some quick poking around to see
> who will be here, but at a minimum I¹d expect Nigel, Tarek, Marilyn and myself
> would be options.  The more MS and internationally diverse the panel is, the
> better. Nigel or Tarek could moderateŠ?
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Best
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Apr 24, 2015, at 7:45 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for this Nigel. All - please spend some time over the week-end
>> thinking about this.
>> 
>> I do think that the proposed topic is both of interest with everyone in the
>> wider Internet Governance space and also highly topical right now. The only
>> concern is that at the moment I cannot see any "Globalisation of ICANN" when
>> it comes to IANA Stewardship transition. In fact, I cannot see any
>> Globalisation of ICANN this year that goes further than any plans that were
>> already in place prior to the IANA Stewardship transition proposals.
>> As a result, with such a title, are we just not setting the session to be
>> criticised openly, as in stepping into a shooting range?
>> 
>> Kindest regards,
>> 
>> Olivier
>> (own views)
>> 
>> On 24/04/2015 08:36, Nigel Hickson wrote:
>>> Colleagues 
>>> 
>>> Good morning; on the CCWG-IG call yesterday we discussed the opportunity for
>>> the WG to be involved in a Workshop Session at the WSIS Forum hosted by ITU
>>> later May (see https://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2015/)
>>> 
>>> A placeholder for a Session was made and ITU have issued a slot for
>>> Thursday; 28th April at 16.45 until 18.15 (see
>>> https://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2015/Agenda/Session/269) on ³ICANN
>>> Contribution to implementation of WSIS Action Lines².
>>> 
>>> We have a ability to amend / add to the description of this Workshop and on
>>> Call yesterday a suggestion was made to discuss Globalisation of ICANN,
>>> including the IANA Stewardship Transition.
>>> 
>>> On behalf of co-chairs would welcome views on scope and format of Workshop
>>> of Session.  We have a deadline of close (23.00 UTC) on Monday 27th April to
>>> submit to ITU (see form at
>>> http://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2015/Agenda/Organizers/Add)
>>> 
>>> Best
>>> 
>>> Nigel 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Renate DeWulf <renate.dewulf at icann.org>
>>> Date: Thursday 23 April 2015 20:27
>>> To: "'ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>>> <mailto:%27ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org> '"
>>> <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>>> Subject: [ccwg-internet-governance] NMI Consultation - deadline May 1st
>>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>>  
>>> Further to today¹s CCWG IG call, Olivier has asked me to forward to your
>>> attention the link hereunder and has asked that you send in your comments to
>>> this mailing list prior to the deadline of May 1st.
>>> http://ow.ly/LZ9Cd
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Renate
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> Renate De Wulf
>>> Executive Assistant
>>> ICANN 
>>> Rond Point Schuman 6,
>>> 1st floor 
>>> B-1040 Brussels
>>> Belgium 
>>>  
>>> Telephone: +32 2 894 7411
>>> Mobile: +32 479 40 07 44
>>> Fax: +32 2 280 1221
>>> Skype: renate.dewulf
>>> Email: renate.dewulf at icann.org <mailto:renate.dewulf at icann.org>
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg
>>> -internet-governance
>> 
>> -- 
>> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
>> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
> 
> *********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
>   Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>   University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
>   ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org/>
> william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
>   www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org/>
> Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q
> *********************************************************
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20150426/40849140/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5027 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20150426/40849140/smime-0001.p7s>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list