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

Nigel Hickson nigel.hickson at icann.org
Thu Jun 18 06:20:26 UTC 2015


Avri 

Good morning; very grateful as always; yes (re ITU) will fix and add IXPs
(re consultation). 

Best

Nigel 



On 17/06/15 21:40, "Avri Doria" <avri at acm.org> wrote:

>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.asp
>x
>
>
>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 haven¹t.
>>
>>     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 we¹re 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
>>             we¹ve 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 d¹horizon of
>>             other developments, Peter moderating, referencing Nigel¹s
>>             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
>>             d¹horizon 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 don¹t 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, I¹m happy with
>>             whatever gets some consensus.
>>
>>             And for conversation starters, we¹d 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
>
>_______________________________________________
>ccwg-internet-governance mailing list
>ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-internet-governance
-------------- 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/20150618/759fb111/smime.p7s>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list