[ccwg-internet-governance] Follow-up to Call of 9 Feb 2016

Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond ocl at gih.com
Wed Feb 10 17:38:02 UTC 2016

Dear Bill,

On 10/02/2016 13:05, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Olivier
> On this piece,
>> On Feb 10, 2016, at 01:11, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>> 3. Discussion about Fragmentation vs. Openness (30 minutes)
>> This is a discussion about Internet fragmentation in the context of
> Suggest the framing be fragmentation a] generally, for context of the discussion, and b] re: names and numbers, and ICANN’s contributions to mitigating/managing.
> The text below relates only to b] but the inputs you mention pertain to a]. So perhaps balance across.

Yes - good point. So a balance of both, at least in the introduction, so
as to give a fuller picture.

>> As we know, there has been concern about the single root, about
>> universal acceptance of IDN ad other new gTLDs, about demands for
>> Country Internet Registries, amongst a lot of other things.
> One of the things worth flagging here might be blocking?

+1 - an unfortunately growing trend. Blocking/filtering. I am now also
hearing of ideas to compel users to only have access to a "local"
nameserver. Thus the DNS is being turned into a machine for censorship.

>> This part of
>> the session is aimed at stimulating a good discussion about these issues
>> in the ICANN Community. Several inputs are proposed to trigger discussions:
>> Inputs:
>> WEF - fragmentation paper (presented by Bill Drake?)
> I can overview the debate and issues addressed by the paper and by other sources 


>> OECD debate on this topic - with possible topics of discussions in the
>> forthcoming meeting in Cancun. (Presented by who?)
>> The process of the World Internet Conference (WIC), Wuzhen Summit
>> (Presented by who?)
> Wolfgang?

If he has attended it. I know George Sadowski & Rinalia Abdul Rahim
have, as members of the ICANN Board.

>> Other Contexts in the names and numbers (Presented by who?)
> Avri or someone else GNSOish who can overview issues related to acceptance, conflicts, blocking, etc?

Avri's excellent for explaining issues in an exciting way.

> Conversation starters should shoot for under 15 min together and then open to floor for 15+.  Will be cramped but maybe could still plant a few seeds...

Oh yes -- very slim starters. Absolutely no lecturing. But let's not
impose hardwall time limits like 1 minute or whatsoever. I've noticed
that when time strictness is enforced too rigidly, participants end up
focussing on the time rather than on what's being said, especially if
people are being cut in mid-sentences or mid-arguments.
Kindest regards,


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list