[Chapter-delegates] INET meetings - Global INET 2011 and beyond

[Louis Houle]

Bonsoir Sivasubramanian

Can't disagree with that !

Before discussing that, my feeling is that we have to idscuss tue idea 
of creating an event that is both global and regional. Saying that,

1- What (shared) goal do we have in mind in setting an INET event
2- What targets, objectives do we want to reach (down to the ground: 
accessibility, NetNeutrality, high speed development, local barriers, 
digitization of citizens, students, IPv6 availability ?)
3- To reach our objectives, among the core topics, is there a need to 
partner with an IETF, ICANN event. (A win-win approach, fundable and 
less expensive for everybody)
4- What geolocalized priorities (if any) should INET address: Africa- 
what country ? Asia ?

Regards

Louis


Sivasubramanian Muthusamy a écrit :
> Hello Louis Houfe,
>
> 1. The choice of the INET locations needs to be "decided" based on 
> friendly bidding by chapters. Chapters could make a presentation bid 
> to argue on the convenience of the location, the attractiveness of the 
> venue, the capabilities etc. and delegates + ISOC global could 
> evaluate and decide on a venue. If Quebec, PICISOC, New York and 
> Australia ( chapter names are just thrown here) show equal interest 
> INET 1 or INET 2, each of them need to upload a presentation ( along 
> the lines of this example presentation on IGF 2008 prepared by the 
> Government of India - this is not a bid document, but a similar 
> document could be a bid for INET - 
> http://www.intgovforum.org/feb26/IGF-Hyd-2008.v2.pdf  - ( No marketing 
> here either. This link is a public link from the IGF website. ISOC 
> Chennai has so far not been involved in IGF ) . 
>
>
> 2. There in no harm from including ICANN or IETF, but the event needs 
> to be an ISOC event. ISOC needs to be the umbrella. We can go into the 
> agenda later, that would need a larger debate.
>
> 3. We need to move away from the mindset of promoting ISOC to that of 
> actually approaching this event from the position of responsibility. 
> ISOC has enormous responsibilities towards the Internet and a serious 
> conference such as INET is required for ISOC to contemplate and act 
> upon all that needs to be done.
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> ISOC India Chennai.
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 7:41 AM, Louis Houle <louis.houle at oricom.ca 
> <mailto:louis.houle at oricom.ca>> wrote:
>
>     Well, there we go.
>
>     1- OK Siva, INET is a good idea but organizing the event in different
>     geographic locations is a concern. Well, let's use technology, we're
>     promoting the use of the Internet aren't we ? How about considering
>     let's say an event in Québec City (no marketing here, it's for the
>     sake
>     of a simple example of what I have in mind).
>     We can gather North Americans and anybody who gets near passing by at
>     that time. And two years later, let's choose an other continent...as
>     simple as that. On what grounds it should be choosed ? Discussion
>     is open !
>
>     2- I like Fred's point on using or matching the INET with some other
>     ISOC meetings (or ICANN-IETF,...)  accordingly. The point is, as Fred
>     mentions: what is the goal, the target, the objectives, the output
>     ? It
>     has to be grounded on sound topics around three aspects:
>     a) what do we do to help high speed internet to propagate on this
>     globe
>     b) what do we do to encourage a fare use of the internet and to
>     discourage abuses ?
>     c) how do we deal with digital divide
>
>     3- Veni, it's a good point : INET is (partly) to replace the IGF who
>     will comme to an end ! But to me, it is to help ISOC being the most
>     relevant organization in the Internet governance discussions and
>     issues.
>
>     That's my two cents for tonight !
>
>     Salutations,
>     Louis
>
>
>     Veni Markovski a écrit :
>     > (topic changed)
>     > Hi.
>     >
>     > I'd encourage again to start thinking more strategically (which
>     > doesn't mean we have to stop the discussion about possible smaller
>     > meetings), and see if the Chapters can come with a proposal to
>     > ISOC-Reston to start anual Global INET meetings, to replace the IGF.
>     > We have to be ready by mid 2009 with our proposal to start these
>     > meetings from 2011. The last IGF is 2010, but they can be continued
>     > as long as they want (they = UN, mainly). So, if we want ISOC to
>     > become the most relevant organization in the Internet governance
>     > discussions, the best way to do so is to start thinking how to use
>     > the .org money for something really big, and in the public interest.
>     >
>     > I'd like to poll the chapters for volunteers with whom we can form a
>     > little mailing list, and discuss these issues there. I think no more
>     > than 3-5 people would do the job to come to the chapters with a
>     sound
>     > proposal.
>     >
>     > Are there volunteers?
>     >
>     > Best,
>     > Veni
>     >
>     > At 02:11 PM 5/19/2008  -0700, Fred Baker wrote:
>     >
>     >>> 2- An event that would gather IETF, ICANN, NGSO (you can add or
>     >>> delete the one you like) and would cover broadly all topics of
>     ISOC
>     >>> concern.
>     >>>
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Chapter-delegates mailing list
>     > Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>     <mailto:Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
>     > http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>     >
>     >
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Chapter-delegates mailing list
>     Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>     <mailto:Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
>     http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy