[Chapter-delegates] Internet Governance Update - Nov. 15, 2013

[rihogris at gmail.com]

+1, thanks for the update
Enviado desde mi BlackBerry de Movistar

-----Original Message-----
From: Elver Loho <elver.loho at gmail.com>
Sender: chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 22:02:37 
To: Lynn St.Amour<st.amour at isoc.org>
Cc: ISOC Chapter Delegates<chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Internet Governance Update - Nov. 15, 2013

Aye, this was a good update. Thank you and please keep em coming :)

Best,
Elver

elver.loho at gmail.com
+372 5661 6933
skype: elver.loho


On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 6:19 AM, Lynn St.Amour <st.amour at isoc.org> wrote:
> Dear Chapter leaders,
>
> 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.
>
> 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 Montevideo Statement, 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.
>
> I* CEO Meetings:
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> Brazil High Level Meeting
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> Montevideo Statement and catalyzing community-wide efforts
>
> 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.
>
> Possible Initiatives
>
> Discussions at IGF and elsewhere seem to be coalescing around the following
> initiatives:
>
> 1.     Gauging support for a multi-stakeholder coalition/dialogue/initiative
> that would help close an “Internet Governance gap”
> a)     the purpose of and level of formality/structures to support this
> coalition, etc.
> b)     assessing support for a grass-roots campaign (incl. a significant
> online presence)
>
> 2.     The possibility of an independent high level panel to make
> recommendations on IG principles and recommend frameworks/institutions for
> IG
>
> 3.     Less directly, gauging need for developing a possible new
> framework/mechanisms/institution for Internet governance
>
> IANA and ICANN Globalization
>
> 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.
>
> Status of Initiatives
>
> 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:
>
> 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.
>
> 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: http://www.1Net.org) 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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).
>
> It is now meant to be only one possible input and has a more Internet
> informed panel.    There will be additional information available shortly.
>
> IMPORTANT - NEW!!  Issues Framework: Internet Challenges: A framework for
> tackling the hard political, technical, operational and social problems
> facing the Internet
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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:
>
> http://www.internetsociety.org/internetstrong
>
> 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.
>
> Closing:
>
> 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.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Lynn St.Amour
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
_______________________________________________
As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org