1. To what extent has the IGF addressed the mandate set out for it in the Tunis Agenda?
The IGF has proven successful and a valuable tool for increasing mutual understanding of Internet Governance among all stakeholders. It marks the first time a platform has been made available for all
stakeholders to come together as equals to discuss and debate issues related to Internet governance. The first three IGF events have provided valuable opportunities for education, communication and
networking amongst participants, from which all have benefited. The maturing processes of the IGF have allowed for successful open dialogue and debates between stakeholders that had previously not
engaged with one another.
2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
The NRO is satisfied that the IGF has embodied the principles coming out of the WSIS. The tenets of the Tunis Agenda are reflected through the open and inclusive processes by which the IGF operates. The WSIS and IGF have helped to clearly identify the many stakeholders involved in Internet governance, as well as the important roles that each of these stakeholders play in ensuring the continued success of the
Internet.
3. What has the impact of the IGF been in direct or indirect terms? Has it impacted you or your stakeholder group/institution/government? Has it acted as a catalyst for change?
The IGF has afforded the NRO an opportunity to expand existing outreach activities and identify new opportunities for cooperating with other stakeholder groups. Various technical bodies, including the
NRO, have used the IGF events to reach out and address much of the confusion and misunderstanding that exists in the areas of IP addressing, DNS and root servers. The multi-stakeholder dialogues
fostered by the IGF, promoting security, safety, equitable access and continued development, have been of benefit to all who use the Internet. Another positive impact has been the improved involvement of
government and other stakeholder in Regional Internet Registry (RIR) policy development process.
4. How effective are IGF processes in addressing the tasks set out for it, including the functioning of the Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), Secretariat and open consultations?
The NRO believes that the existing Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (or MAG) plays a vital role in ensuring the IGF achieves the goals set forth in the Tunis Agenda and should continue as the primary guiding
body of the IGF. Setting up a group such as the MAG has been a valuable learning experience for all involved, and should be seen the first step of many in establishing an effective multi-stakeholder
dialogue. While the MAG has matured a great deal since its inception, the NRO would like to see it continue to refine and streamline its processes, as both the MAG members and stakeholder groups gain
experience.
5. Is it desirable to continue the IGF past its initial five-year mandate, and why/why not?
The NRO supports the IGF's continuance as a forum to facilitate multi-stakeholder policy dialogue (as outlined in Paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda). While much has been accomplished over the last three
years, we believe there is still significant work ahead for the IGF. There remain barriers to be removed and issues to be addressed if the ideal of multi-stakeholder policy dialogue laid out in the Tunis
Agenda is to be achieved. The NRO advocates continued IGF focus on community issues, such as equal access and development, where collaboration by all parties involved is vital to finding a positive way forward.
6. If the continuation of the Forum is recommended, what improvements would you suggest in terms of its working methods, functioning and processes?
The NRO supports the evolutionary improvement of the IGF's content and format. The IGF forum is a valuable resource in assisting participants as they make decisions in their own respective organizations and
jurisdictions, but the IGF should no decision-making role of its own.
While continuing to rotate meetings geographically, the NRO would suggest scheduling IGF events back-to-back with meetings of other organizations that deal with related issues. Further development of
on-line discussions and remote participation in face-to-face meetings should also be a prioritized as a means of encouraging wider participation.
7. Do you have any other comments?
The NRO supports the IGF as a space to facilitate multi-stakeholder discussion. The IGF must continue to stress the need for all stakeholders to work together in ensuring the continued growth, security, and stability of the Internet. That the Internet has grown so quickly and proved so adaptable is a direct result of its many stakeholders being able to contribute meaningfully to the dynamic processes of Internet policy creation and discussion. Multistakeholder engagement with the processes and structures of Internet governance, as facilitated by the IGF, is vital to the ongoing growth and innovation in the Internet community.