[Random-bits] Adam Peake from WSIS meeting

[James Love]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] some thing WSIS/domain names!
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 21:13:16 +0900
From: Adam Peake <ajp@glocom.ac.jp>
To: <discuss@icann-ncc.org> .....

YJ, thanks very much.

Could you tell us about the Internet Governance Caucus.  Current
members, charter, who you represent in the group, etc.

For those who don't know how how WSIS works -- everything happens at
very short notice, situations have to be reacted to immediately, and
it is very difficult for civil society to respond with the
transparency and inclusiveness that we would hope. There simply is
never time.

But the Internet Governance Caucus is important to many of us, so I
hope the group will now begin to explain what it's about. I am in
Geneva, and heard that the group had been formed, but there hasn't
been much information about the group even here. The first I'd heard
about the group's opinions was when YJ spoke yesterday morning.  But
as said, it's very difficult to be as transparent as we'd all like.
This is not intended as a negative comment on the new caucus, it's
good that people take initiative, but I think we need to start to
hear about it.

I have one major concern. We should be very careful about how we
raise issues around Internet governance in the WSIS process.  We
(civil society, private sector, Internet users) have a very weak
voice in the process.  WSIS is run by the States. Our only
opportunity to speak, with *no* guarantee of being listened to, is in
1 or at best 2 10 minute sessions each day. ITU are the secretariat
of the process and so have a very direct role in drafting text and
framing arguments for the States to consider (for example the
original text of paragraph 58.)

I think we need to discuss fully whether this is a good environment
in which to discuss issues such as root server operation and
administration, ccTLD coordination, etc. I suspect it is not.

For example.  I am now in the main plenary hall listening to
governments discussing action items.  One government (I think it was
one of the Arab states) just proposed creating a new international
organization to coordinate ccTLD operations and management and the
assignment of IP addresses. I have no idea how these issues got on
their agenda. Anyway, we should be clear: any such organization
coming out of WSIS would be run by member states. Another government
seems to have supported this statement. This is not what we want.

Brazil just used the words, [security comes from] intergovernmental
governance of the Internet.

We need to think more about the implications of some of the things
being suggested.  Let's not be politically naive and understand that
this is not ICANN, it's a UN process where we have very little power.

Thanks,

Adam

Adam Peake
GLOCOM Tokyo







At 7:26 PM +0900 2/27/03, YJ Park wrote:
>Dear all,
>
>This was the presentation made during Sub-Committee 2 of WSIS
>PrepCom II in Geneve yesterday.
>
>
>Feb. 26 2003
>Sub-Committee 2, WSIS
>
>Principle 1. PPP, Public Private Partnership Model
>
>Internet Governance caucus of Civil Society Groups supports full
>participation
>of all partners, civil society organizations, public, and private sectors at
>all levels
>of local, national, regional and international decision-making related to
>the
>information society as addressed in the section 41 from the dated as of
>February 25th. Therefore, we would like to suggest Sub-Committee 2 of WSIS
>to consider following action item.
>
>Action Item 1:
>To ensure full participation of all partners of Information Society in a
>substantial
>manner in identifying challenges of global nature of Information Society and
>in sharing collective global actions to form better Information Society,
>Sub-Committee 2 should consider more time slots for civil society and
>private sector in establishing consensus as partners to encourage
>substantial
>participation.
>
>Principle 2. Globally Shared Responsibility of Root-Server management
>
>Internet Governance Caucus shares the key principle expressed in the section
>58 from the declaration dated as of February 25th,
>
>"The responsibility for root directories and domain names should rest with a
>suitable international organization and should take multilingualism into
>consideration Countries' top-level-domain-names"
>
>Based on the key principle expressed, Internet Governance Caucus proposes
>several related action items for your consideration.
>
>Action Item 2:
>Sub-Committee 2 of WSIS, in consultation with Civil Society Plenary and
>ICANN, sets up "Root Server Task Force" to enhance regular communication
>with the "Root Server Advisory Committee" in the ICANN who is in charge of
>the global Root Server management. The Root Server Task Force is to be
>composed of multi-stakeholders from the civil society groups, private
>sectors
>and the governments respecting geographically diversified representation.
>
>Action Item 3:
>Sub-Committee 2 of WSIS, in consultation with Civil Society Plenary and
>ICANN, sets up "Multilingual TLD Task Force" to facilitate regular
>communication with IETF, IAB, Root Server Advisory Committee and
>other grass-roots efforts. The Multilingual Task Force is to be composed of
>multi-stakeholders from the civil society groups, private sectors and the
>governments respecting geographically diversified representation.
>
>Action Item 4:
>
>Sub-Committee 2 of WSIS, in consultation with Civil Society Plenary
>and ICANN, sets up "Country Code Top Level Domain (ccTLD) Task Force"
>in each region. The regional task forces are composed of the current
>ccTLD managers and the representatives from local Internet community,
>the civil societies, the private sectors and the government representative
>respecting geographically diversified representation.
>
>On the other hand, we have some reservation in the same section.
>We understand the current Internet Protocol(IP) Address assignment
>has been operated beyond sovereign right therefore, the brackets
>should be made for Internet Protocol(IP) address assignment. We also
>suggest the same sentence should add "Internet Communities in"
>in front of those countries. Therefore, the sentence can be read as follows;
>
>Countries' top level domain names [and Internet Protocol(IP) address
>assignment ] should be the sovereign right of the government and
>the Internet Communities in those countries.
>
>Principle 3. Democratic and transparent Internet Governance
>
>Internet Governance caucus of Civil Society Groups would like to
>emphasize the democratic and transparent Internet Governance
>principle elaborated in the section 58 from the declaration dated
>as of February 25th.
>
>"Internet Governance should be multilateral, democratic and transparent
>and should take into account the needs of the public and private
>sectors as well as those of the civil society."
>
>Action Item 5:
>
>Sub-Committee 2 of WSIS is expected to consult with Civil Society
>Plenary, ICANN and its regional At-Large organizations and/or At-Large
>Advisory Committee which explore At-Large participation in the
>global policy decision-making process, and sets up "At-Large Participation
>Task Force". The At-Large Participation Task Force is to be composed of
>multi-stakeholders from the civil society groups, private sectors and the
>governments as advisory status respecting geographically diversified
>representation.
>
>Lastly, Internet Governance Caucus of Civil Society Groups, strongly
>urge you to consider three additional principles. First, the principle of
>stability and security of the Internet, the second, the principle of free
>and fair accessibility to Internet resources such as domain names and
>IP addresses and the third, bottom-up policy development both for
>technical and public policy issues through at-large participation.
>
>Presented by YJ Park, Internet Governance Caucus of Civil Society Group
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss@icann-ncc.org
>http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


-- 
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@icann-ncc.org
http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



-- 
James Love, Director, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:james.love@cptech.org
tel. +1.202.387.8030, mobile +1.202.361.3040