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

Fri Nov 22 20:30:21 PST 2013

+1 Lynn.
Updates highly appreciated.
Thank you.

Regards.
/Janvier
Isoc Cameroon

Le 16/11/2013 05:19, Lynn St.Amour a écrit :
> 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 
> <http://www.internetsociety.org/news/montevideo-statement-future-internet-cooperation>, 
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20131123/99150a23/attachment.htm>