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

Marilyn Cade marilynscade at hotmail.com
Thu Feb 11 14:27:40 UTC 2016


Of course, ICANN staff should be in attendance and involved in such discussions. 
Not sure that was what was being proposed, though. 


> To: ccwg-internet-governance at icann.org
> From: avri at acm.org
> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 23:30:11 -0500
> Subject: Re: [ccwg-internet-governance] Follow-up to Call of 9 Feb 2016
> 
> 
> 
> On 10-Feb-16 17:06, Nigel Hickson wrote:
> > so when the ITU or UN is discussing critical Internet resources we (as
> > staff) should not be involved? 
> 
> 
> this would seem weird and be a bit of a pity;
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> ---
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20160211/101c783d/attachment.html>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list