[ccwg-internet-governance] Agenda for the Public Session on IG?

Avri Doria avri at acm.org
Thu Jun 18 00:40:20 UTC 2015


hi,

decnet summry. thanks.

Though this made me chickle:

> ICANN have offered to host an Open Forum session at the IGF to discuss
> topical and strategic issues; such progress on the IANA stewardship
> transition process.
>

I thought it was a matter of ICANN having requested a slot to do so.

On the ITU, you might want to fix the reference  CANN.  Also would it be
reasonable to mention the open consultation of the ITU CWG IPP on IXPs?

 "With a view to discussing the establishment of Internet Exchange Points
    (IXPs) to advance connectivity, improve service quality and increase
    network stability and resilience, fostering competition and reducing
    interconnection costs, as proposed by Opinion 1 of WTPF-13 and
    consistent with PP-14 Resolutions 101 and 102, stakeholders are *invited
    to elaborate and exemplify on the challenges faced and identify widely
    accepted best practices for the design, installation and operation of
    IXPs*."

    The deadline for submissions is *August 28^th *.*  *To submit inputs or
    for further information, please visit the following link:
    http://www.itu.int/en/council/cwg-internet/Pages/consultation-june2015.aspx


Not that this is an ICANN issue, just thought for completeness sake.


avri



On 17-Jun-15 10:02, Nigel Hickson wrote:
> Marilyn cc as above 
>
> Good morning (from BA); please see attached; as sent to Chairs
> yesterday; we can make minor changes before printing etc for session; 
>
> Many regards 
>
> Nigel 
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com
> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>>
> Date: Wednesday 17 June 2015 10:48
> To: Young-eum Lee <yesunhoo at gmail.com <mailto:yesunhoo at gmail.com>>,
> William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>>
> Cc: ccwg <ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Agenda for the Public Session
> on IG?
>
> Is there a document from ICANN staff that I have missed? I apologize. 
> IF so, can you reforward, Renate? and if it is still due to arrive,
> can we have an estimated time of arrival? 
>
> M
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 12:23:06 +0900
> From: yesunhoo at gmail.com <mailto:yesunhoo at gmail.com>
> To: wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>
> CC: ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Agenda for the Public Session
> on IG?
>
> All,
>
> Thanks for your input. My understanding of the public session, based
> on the calls and the previous messages is as follows.
>
> First, we agreed that we would have a relatively lengthy discussion
> regarding the WSIS review. This is where Bill would moderate and
> Marilyn, Marilia and others would present their observations.
>
> Second, we need to try to get a feel of the 'community consensus' on
> future IG issues and Peter would lead. The second part could start
> with a brief review of the draft document by Nigel touching on topics
> related to other global events but that we would mainly discuss future
> IG principles and either our Netmundial submission or other ICANN
> public statements could be used as basis.
>
> I think the confusion regarding the second session is because the
> following issues were not clearly differentiated. 
>
> - other 'events' oriented discussion vs. IG principles oriented discussion
> - try to come up with ICANN position vs. 'community feeling' of IG issues
> - use our Netmundial submission vs. use the various ICANN statements
> made in other fora.
>
> - kind regards,
> - Young-eum.
>
>
>
> Young-eum Lee
> Dept. of Media Arts & Sciences <http://mas.knou.ac.kr/>, Korea
> National Open University <http://www.knou.ac.kr/>
> Dept. of Media Arts and Visual Contents <http://macgrad.knou.ac.kr/>,
> KNOU Grad School <http://grad.knou.ac.kr/>
> ICANN <http://www.icann.org/> ccNSO <http://ccnso.icann.org/> Council
> member <http://ccnso.icann.org/council-members.htm>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:32 AM, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
> <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Nigel
>
>         On Jun 16, 2015, at 10:25 AM, Nigel Hickson
>         <nigel.hickson at icann.org <mailto:nigel.hickson at icann.org>> wrote:
>
>         Bill
>
>         Good afternoon.  While clearly up to colleagues on approach we
>         do owe it to audience to at least discuss WSIS review as that
>         is what was on draft agenda.
>
>
>     Which is why my message repeated my understanding of the prior
>     calls that this is to be the first half of the session.
>
>         Also several here at UK IGF have said how looking forward to
>         discussion on IG issues. 
>
>
>     Me too, so we should decide which and how, if we haven’t.
>
>     Best
>
>     Bill
>
>
>
>
>         On 16 Jun 2015, at 14:24, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com
>         <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             Hi
>
>             As the event is less than a week away, we need to get
>             clear on what we’re doing inter alia so Nigel can finalize
>             the place holder text
>             at http://buenosaires53.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-ig.
>
>             If I have understood correctly, there have been two
>             approaches floated.  The first, which could be called the
>             path of least resistance model, is to do pretty much what
>             we’ve done in the past.  As discussed on the last call,
>             this would be to have a two part agenda. First part is
>             WSIS+10 and I moderate. Second part is tour d’horizon of
>             other developments, Peter moderating, referencing Nigel’s
>             background paper. Topics to be touched upon could include
>
>             *Our WSIS Forum session on IANA process
>             *ITU Council and IPP WG
>             *NMI
>             *IGF Best Practice Forum on Multistakeholder Practice
>             *If time allows, misc other, eg. GCIG, UNESCO, GCCS, GIPO,
>             GFCE, WEF, etc.
>
>             And the F2F later in the week would discuss whether and if
>             yes what to do about a community input into the WSIS+10
>             review, i.e. evolving the text we used for the NM meeting.
>
>             The second approach would be to dispense with the  tour
>             d’horizon and instead begin to discuss the idea of a
>             community input in the public session:
>
>
>                     On May 11, 2015, at 5:06 PM, Peter Dengate Thrush
>                     <barrister at chambers.gen.nz
>                     <mailto:barrister at chambers.gen.nz>> wrote:
>
>                     The second half could then be spent presenting a
>                     draft document for discussion ( as to principles,
>                     not for wordsmithing the text) by those present,
>                     being a statement that ICANN can take into the
>                     processes leading up to the UNGA in December.
>
>                     I dont think the text is going to be very
>                     problematic - versions of ICANN positions have
>                     already been given at the various meetings, and I
>                     see no real changes as likely.
>
>
>                     Session II would be spent with an inevitable
>                     amount of repetition of the background materials,
>                     but could move swiftly on to adopting the
>                     statement ( some wordsmithing also inevitable).
>
>
>              
>             While we don’t have such a draft document, I suppose we
>             could link our 2014 NM input off the site and direct folks
>             to use that as a starting point for discussion.  
>
>             Suggest we decide so Nigel can update the session
>             description accordingly.  Per previous, I’m happy with
>             whatever gets some consensus.
>
>             And for conversation starters, we’d discussed Wolfgang,
>             Marilia, Janis, Marilyn, and Megan and another person from
>             the global South.  I know OCL sent out some invites, not
>             sure whether all have responded. But Nigel should list the
>             heads that will be talking on the site as well.
>
>             Best
>
>             Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>             ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>             <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>             https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>     ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>     <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> <mailto:ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
> ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list