<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">+1 Lynn.<br>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">Updates highly appreciated</span>.<br>
Thank you.<br>
<br>
Regards.<br>
/Janvier<br>
Isoc Cameroon<br>
<br>
Le 16/11/2013 05:19, Lynn St.Amour a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:42ED9D49-92E4-4232-8251-6725A0537412@isoc.org"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
Dear Chapter leaders,<br>
<br>
Please find the second of what is planned to be regular updates on
key Internet governance activities. Future updates will
be shorter. The background included here is to help layout
today’s overall environment. <br>
<br>
In the last month, there have been many discussions around two
developments that took place just prior to and during the Internet
Governance Forum (IGF) in Bali. One was the <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.internetsociety.org/news/montevideo-statement-future-internet-cooperation">Montevideo
Statement</a>, which was distributed on 7 October and was well
received at the IGF. The other was the unexpected announcement at
the IGF of an Internet Governance Summit, or High Level Meeting,
to be held in Brazil in early May 2014. <br>
<br>
I* CEO Meetings:<br>
<br>
With respect to the Montevideo meeting and the statement that
was issued afterwards, some background might be helpful -- these
I* CEO meetings have taken place regularly for the past three
years (usually twice a year, several days). They were mainly to
build relations/common cause across the I* organizations. We
work to understand our respective positions on key issues (and
hopefully are aligned) or at least to minimize surprises. The
meetings were not meant to be a "standing venue", but rather to
build stronger relations. The meetings are convened and
chaired by ISOC, specifically, by me, as ISOC President & CEO,
at the request of the other I* organizations. This reflects our
broad Mission and the breadth of our organization
and responsibilities. Finally, the I* organizations are: IAB,
IANA functions operator, ICANN, IETF, ISOC, the 5 RIR's, and W3C.<br>
<br>
Unlike past meetings, the I* community felt that the surveillance
issues (and the reactions we were seeing affecting the
Internet and users) were so serious that we needed to go on
record. And, thanks to Raúl Echeberria for his leadership
throughout the meeting around such a statement. As virtually all
(maybe all) of the organizations had previously been on record for
many of these points, we felt it was appropriate to go forward.<br>
<br>
Heading to the IGF week, the I* CEO’s had planned to work together
to “catalyze community-wide efforts towards the evolution of
global multistakeholder Internet cooperation” as called for in the
Montevideo Statement. This took on an added urgency and dimension
with the unexpected announcement of the Brazil meeting.<br>
<br>
Brazil High Level Meeting<br>
<br>
This “Brazil summit” came out of a discussion between ICANN and
the Brazilian government and followed the Montevideo I* CEO
meeting. This announcement caused concern on the part of many of
those present at the IGF for various reasons: it was seen to be
potentially competing with the IGF, the role of governments vs.
other stakeholders was unclear, the timing prior to several
important ITU and UN meetings raised concerns about its
outcomes and their impact on those meetings. There was also a
mistaken assumption that the Brazil meeting was linked to the
collective I* organization’s leadership as an outcrop of the
Montevideo statement.<br>
<br>
In the course of the discussions at the IGF and since, what was
originally labeled a “Summit” evolved to a “high level
meeting.” Discussions are taking place with the Brazilians and a
number of organizations, and the I* organizations are also
involved, including ISOC. While nothing is official, the purpose
of the Conference is expected to address strengthening Internet
cooperation by discussing high-level principles and
institutional frameworks. This conference is not meant to produce
proposals on specific Internet policy issues.<br>
<br>
Montevideo Statement and catalyzing community-wide efforts<br>
<br>
Many of the discussions during the IGF week focused on clarifying
and gaining support for some possible initiatives (and necessarily
included the Brazil meeting), as well as gaining support from
other communities including the private sector, civil society and
governments. These discussions also aimed to clarify/advance: 1)
statements about a shift in leadership away from the United States
as a result of disclosures about surveillance and the subsequent
impact on the principles and reality of the open global Internet,
and 2) continuing discussions about the future of Internet
Governance and what was called Internet Governance gaps.<br>
<br>
Possible Initiatives<br>
<br>
Discussions at IGF and elsewhere seem to be coalescing around the
following initiatives:<br>
<br>
1. Gauging support for a multi-stakeholder
coalition/dialogue/initiative that would help close an “Internet
Governance gap”<br>
a) the purpose of and level of formality/structures to support
this coalition, etc.<br>
b) assessing support for a grass-roots campaign (incl. a
significant online presence)<br>
<br>
2. The possibility of an independent high level panel to make
recommendations on IG principles and recommend
frameworks/institutions for IG<br>
<br>
3. Less directly, gauging need for developing a possible new
framework/mechanisms/institution for Internet governance<br>
<br>
IANA and ICANN Globalization<br>
<br>
An additional topic of discussion was the globalization of IANA
and ICANN. This is largely (but not unanimously) seen to be
separate from the Internet governance topics above. There is a lot
of work being done on this by the I* CEO’s and ICANN, and separate
updates will be sent on this going forward.<br>
<br>
Status of Initiatives<br>
<br>
There have been many meetings held during and since the IGF (some
I* CEO meetings and many other smaller group meetings), and it has
been quite a moving target. To cut to the current status:<br>
<br>
Coalition/Dialogue: With respect to the first “initiative” above,
the emerging purpose seems to be: catalyse a multi-stakeholder
movement to develop, through an open processes, a framework for
evolving, broadening and
strengthening Internet Governance/Cooperation arrangements, and to
advocate for its adoption.<br>
<br>
In discussions since the IGF with a small group from Industry,
Civil Society, I*, and others there seems to be support for a
global dialogue (not a Coalition) and a name was agreed
1Net. ICANN has put up the basic website (see: <a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.1Net.org">http://www.1Net.org</a>)
and the NRO/AfriNIC CEO is the lead. There are discussions
underway with respect to finalizing the purpose/charter, the
management going forward and a possible steering committee.
Other open questions remain about the grassroots campaign, what
will actually be done with the “dialogue/website”, etc. And,
all of these should be resolved by the broader community.<br>
<br>
There are important funding implications as well, and this is
expected to be a point of discussion not only within the broader
“Dialogue”, but with the I* CEO’s as well. <br>
<br>
ISOC is watching this space carefully to see what might be useful,
while being mindful that each organization needs to thoroughly
engage its own communities. This Dialogue should not be a
substitute for that engagement. Our independent and yet aligned
voices are very important components of any Internet governance
dialogue, and were clearly instrumental in our considerable
success throughout WSIS I and II.<br>
<br>
Independent high level panel – this has been modified
significantly since it was first moved at the Montevideo I* CEO
meeting (where in full transparency, virtually all gathered had
significant objections to an All Star high level panel – for all
the reasons one would expect in our community). <br>
<br>
It is now meant to be only one possible input and has a more
Internet informed panel. There will be additional information
available shortly.<br>
<br>
IMPORTANT - NEW!! Issues Framework: Internet Challenges: A
framework for tackling the hard political, technical,
operational and social problems facing the Internet<br>
<br>
Finally, I would like to point to a resource ISOC rcently
developed in order to better inform various discussions on
Internet Governance Issues. This framework for tackling Internet
issues was developed by Leslie Daigle and myself in advance of
ISOC’s opening speech at the IGF. We pulled it together over the
course of a day and a half, so please help us improve it.<br>
<br>
The framework is, in part, a response to what I believe are
somewhat cavalier statements being made about Internet governance
gaps and so-called orphan issues which entirely belie the
underlying complexity of the issues, and/or ignore efforts already
underway to help address them. We felt we needed to engage the
broader community in a more thoughtful discussion. This was well
received in the IGF, and at the recent IETF meeting where it was
also featured. <br>
<br>
The objective is to categorize possible solution paths for the
various IG challenges we all see. This is expected to help in
subsequent discussions of roles or new mechanisms.<br>
<br>
We are looking for input across many communities and would very
much appreciate any comments you may have. Over the next few
weeks you will see more specific requests and opportunities to
inform, use, and further develop this framework. Find out more at:<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.internetsociety.org/internetstrong">http://www.internetsociety.org/internetstrong</a> <br>
<br>
and please do start discussions on this “framework/taxonomy” on
our lists, with members, as well as on other lists. We need broad
input and review, these are cross-cutting issues and require the
engagement of many different stakeholders. <br>
<br>
Closing:<br>
<br>
We will post regular updates to our members, and on our
website/blogs, etc. We look forward to working together to
help make the Internet stronger and we encourage everyone to get
engaged in these discussions – locally, nationally, regionally
and, of course internationally. And, bring your friends and
colleagues – the more voices the better.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
Lynn St.Amour<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
Chapter Portal (AMS): <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://portal.isoc.org">https://portal.isoc.org</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>