The following text is excerpted from an ongoing discussion on the IGF Advisory Group mailing list. The only changes made relate to an effort to anonymize the comments in respect of the Chatham House rule and separate issues related to logistics and internal procedures. The discussion took place between 1 - 30 November, 2008.
(Writer A)
Dear Markus:
That week is Carnival. It is holiday in some parts of the world.
Beside that, as Writer B pointed out, it is very close from Mexico ICANN
meeting.
Could we move the meeting to the previous week?
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I am pleased to inform you that I have been able to block the dates
> for the meetings in February 2009.
>
> Our ITU colleagues kindly agreed to let us have their conference
> facilities for our meetings. As agreed, we will start with two days
> of open consultations, followed by two days of MAG meetings.
>
> The dates are the following:
>
> 23-24 February 2009: open consultations
>
> 25-26 February 2009: MAG meeting.
>
> All meetings will take place at the ITU. (The details will be
> communicated in due course.)
>
> We are also in touch with all actors involved in the WSIS follow-up
> with regard to the dates for the meetings in May. I will let you
> know as soon as we have fixed the calendar for the WSIS cluster of
> events.
>
> I hope that this will facilitate your planning for the coming year.
>
> Best regards
>
> Markus
(Writer C)
Markus;
Myself I support that we have the meeting during the proposed dates (Feb. 23rd-26th). Moving the meeting to the previous week will make it clash with the ITU study group 17 meeting scheduled for that week. And having the meetings back to back makes it economical for some of us to attend.
Regards;
(Writer D)
Markus KUMMER wrote:
> Dear Writer B,
>
Dear Markus,
I want to support your view. This "single-trip-approach" is very
helpful and time saving. Thank you.
> The dates were chosen for precisely this very reason, as it is easier
> for some far away MAG members to combine two back-to-back meetings in
> Switzerland and Mexico into a single trip instead of having two long
> journeys with just one week in between at home.
>
> I am aware that other people might have different preferences. However,
> weighing the pros and cons, I thought it would make sense to take into
> account the concerns of those who have to travel the longest distances.
>
> Choosing a date is always a compromise. All in all, I hope that the
> February slots are acceptable to most.
>
> Best regards
> Markus
>
>
(Writer E)
I would prefer a single trip approach as well as it would reduce cost commitments.
PS. On a lighter note we could hold the meeting in Rio as a compromise J
(Writer F)
I also support the dates, and concur with facilitating a single trip approach.
(Writer G)
I am OK with the dates as proposed....thanks
(Writer H)
Dear friends
find attached the statement of ITU DG Toure during the recent ICANN meeting in Cairo and the discussion. This was a very interesting dialogue on the concept and understanding of the principle of "multistakeholderism". A very good piece whith very clear and frank language which will certainly provoke discussion and could be an interesting starting point for a new conceptual debate on what "multistakholderism" is, why we witness a clash of cultures in Internet policy development and how the old model of an hierachical top down IG organisation and the new model of a network bottom up MS organisation can or can not collaborate and coexist in the global diplomacy of the 21st century.
ATTACHED: ICANN Cairo.doc
(Writer H)
FYI
The ITU SG Report for the preparation of the WTPF which will take place now in April 2009 in Lisbon.
ATTACHED: SECOND DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY.doc
(Markus Kummer)
Dear colleagues,
We have prepared a synthesis paper of all contributions received during the preparatory process for the Hyderabad meeting. The paper will be translated into all six UN languages. As we are waiting for the translations, we have posted the English version on our Web site:
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/sec_papers_08/IGF.SynthesisPaper.Final.30.10.2008.pdf
You may recall that after the Athens and Rio meetings, there was a general feeling that it was useful to make such a paper available in all languages. However, there was also some criticism, as the view was held that better use could have made of the paper during the meeting itself. There were suggestions that the paper should be linked to the main sessions and that its content should be taken up by the substantive sessions.
May I therefore suggest that all the session organizers bring the paper to the attention of moderators and panellists. This would provide a valuable reality check, not least in view of whether it makes sense to repeat the exercise next year.
Many thanks and best regards
Markus
(Writer H)
Dear friends
last week the cyberworld crossed another historical line: Since November 5, 2008 we have now more than 1.5 billilon Internet users in the world (http://www.50x15.com/en%2Dus/) <http://www.50x15.com/en%2Dus/> .
When WSIS ended in December 2005 we had just crossed the one billion line. With other words: half a billion new users in the last three years. Probably we will reach to two billion line in 2010 which makes it rather realistic to reach the WSIS goal of "half of mankind until 2015".
BTW, we have nearly 4 billion mobile phones in the world. If all these phone will be connected to the Internet the digital opportunities will look rather different.
(Markus Kummer)
Dear colleagues,
As suggested earlier, we have posted a 'call for questions' on our Web site, hoping thus to invigorate the open dialogue sessions. Please pass on the information on to the lists you are subscribed to and let's hope we will get a good feed-back.
Best regards
Markus
(Writer I)
Dear Markus,
As I'm thinking more about how to co-facilitate the 3 hour-long open
dialogue session on [EDITED], I'd like to propose that we solicit from
the dynamic coalitions pre-prepared questions for the different
afternoon sessions. And I imagine the same request for questions can
go to all the remote participation hubs. Getting some questions in
earlier will facilitate structuring/managing the dialogue. These
questions can also be usefully introduced if/when there is a lull in
the proceedings (should that happen). Obviously that should/would not
preclude people from posing questions in response to particular points
made in the course of the open dialogue.
Would it be possible for you to request from DCs and remote
participation hubs that they prepare and submit some questions in
advance?
I presume there is a central email address already (or being) set up
to monitor questions coming in from the remote participation hubs ...
and could also be used to capture early questions from the DCs?
A thought. Comments from other MAG members are most welcome.
Regards,
(Markus Kummer)
Dear Writer I,
Many thanks for your reflections. I could not agree more - there will be need to structure these sessions.
We have issued a call for questions, but so far we have not received any input. In addition, I can send an email to the remote hub list and encourage them to send in their question.
I would also be grtafeul for you as well as all the other MAG members to promote this idea on their respective lists.
Best regards
Markus
(Writer A)
Dear Markus:
Is the date for the Cairo Meeting 2009 already decided?
(Markus Kummer)
Dear Writer A,
It is expected that Minister Kamel will communicate venue and date of the 2009 meeting in his speech at the closing ceremony at Hyderabad.
Best regards
Markus
(Writer J)
Dear Markus,
I've sent a call for participation to the Brazilian Internet Governance caucus list and to the Brazilian Hub organizers, but I'm sure that a message from the IGF Secretariat to the Hub list would be very helpful to stimulate the preparation for participation in advance.
One question that was raised among people from Latin America is about the possibility of sending questions in Spanish - it is not clear in the IGF website if questions sent in other languages will be accepted or taken into consideration. I assume that participants from LAC can send messages in Spanish - and, if this is right, I believe that clarifying it will promote a wider participation.
regards,
(Writer K)
In IGF Río I volunteered to receive questions in Spanish and read them or translate them if needed. I volunteer again to do the same in Hyderabad if the email or chat for questions in Spanish is available. Best
(Writer L)
Dear all,
Picking up on what Writer K mentions, we have also indicated to the members of the WSIS LAC civil society caucus list that we are able to receive questions from LAC people (in Spanish), and pass them to the respective spaces. It would be great to organize ourselves to cover different groups interested in reflecting their views through MAG members.
(Writer M)
Dear all,
Olaf Kolkman, Chair of the Internet Architecture Board, advises that
the IAB/IETF response to the UN Under-Secretary's request for a report
on enhanced cooperation is now posted to their web site:
http://www.iab.org/documents/correspondence/2008-11-26-IETF-response-UN-enhanced-cooperation.pdf
(Writer N)
Writer M,
any news from other organizations? I know that ISOC and ICANN posted their
responses long ago.
Markus, maybe - even despite extremely heavy workload - you have collated
all responses sent to the UN Under-Secretary?
Yours,
(Writer M)
Good question, Writer N. I pulled the following together to
circulate to the panelists in the critical Internet resources
"arrangement" session, with what I know to this point, in addition to
the IETF response I just sent.
===================
As promised, I am sending you a reference to one of ISOC's web pages
where you can find the ISOC, ICANN and W3C responses to the United
Nations' request for a report on enhanced cooperation. I posted this
information for the ISOC Ambassadors -- 14 people who we've selected
from all parts of the world to take part in the IGF Hyderabad. The
website is public (as far as I know).
But, lest you have trouble linking to the responses, the links are
reproduced separately below I understand that the Internet Numbering
Resource Organization responded with a pretty comprehensive printed
document, and I've just found a copy of their letter, posted below:
ISOC: https://wiki.tools.isoc.org/Policy_Activities/UN_report_request
ICANN: http://www.icann.org/correspondence/twomey-to-zukang-06aug08.pdf
W3C: http://www.w3.org/2008/10/dd-unigf.html
NRO: http://www.nro.net/archive/news/UN_letter.pdf
Others who were asked to report are:
Council of Europe
ITU
OECD
UNESCO
WIPO
To my knowledge, the reports (if any) from these organizations are not
public. If that is not the case, and if any of you know where they
can be found, please let me know.
Thanks
(Markus Kummer)
Writer N,
The IGF Secretariat is not involved in this exewrcise - this is handled directly by UNHQ in New York.
Best regards
Markus
(Markus Kummer)
Dear colleagues,
As you are converging towards Hyderabad, I would like to update you on the state of play:
Security must be foremost in your minds: we received a threat assessment from the Andra Pradesh security forces, assuring us that the overall situation in Hyderabad is peaceful.
We will officially be in charge of the conference facilities from 2-6 December. The traditional flag raising ceremony will take place on 2 December, 0930 Hours. You are all cordially invited to attend, if you are already in Hyderabad by then.
Several pre-events have been cancelled. This gives us more time to prepare for the meeting itself. I would therefore like to suggest a
meeting on 2 December from 1400-1600 hours
to go through the programme and to decide who does what.
(Meeting room 2.03-2.04 on the second floor of the HICC.)
The synthesis paper of all contributions is now up on our Web site in all six UN languages. In the past we were criticized for not making sufficient use of the paper as an input into the discussions. I would therefore urge all of you who are involved in the organization of the main sessions to make use of the paper. (This will also be helpful to interpreters.) The paper will be made available as a hard copy.
We will try to make the most of remote participation to compensate somewhat for the cancellations. The necessary infrastructure will be provided in all meeting rooms, includig workshop rooms.
We hope to receive some feed-back in response to the call for questions we have posted and we would grateful for your promoting this initiative.
In addition, we have uploaded on our Web site an IGF YouToube channel and would like to encourage you to record your comments and questions and encourage others to do the same.
Two rooms will be set aside for the preparation of the morning sessions (unfortunately, they will not be adjacent as some of you had hoped for).
I look forward to seeing many of you in Hyderabad.
Best regards
Markus