ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [ga] RE: Sponsorship of IGF Workshops

  • To: <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Roberto Gaetano'" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Karl Auerbach'" <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ga] RE: Sponsorship of IGF Workshops
  • From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 22:14:11 +0100
  • Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <398351.56338.qm@web52203.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Thread-index: AcfA2YCFx5KeQ7g6SMalrvKK2Nyy6AAATKZg

Danny wrote:

> From the Tunis Agenda:

>58. We recognize that Internet governance includes more than Internet
naming and addressing. It also includes other significant public policy
issues such as, inter alia, critical Internet resources, the security and
safety of the Internet, and developmental aspects and issues pertaining to
the use of the Internet.

>70. Using relevant international organizations, such cooperation should
include the development of globally-applicable principles on public policy
issues associated with the coordination and management of critical Internet
resources. In this regard, we call upon the organizations responsible for
essential tasks associated with the Internet to contribute to creating an
environment that facilitates this development of public policy principles. 

I think these points (although made in relation to the IGF charter) support
ICANN being involved in IGF. Specifically: "We recognize that Internet
governance includes more than Internet naming and addressing. It also
includes..." and "In this regard, we call upon the organizations responsible
for essential tasks associated with the Internet to contribute to creating
an environment that facilitates this development of public policy
principles. "

IMHO, ICANN staff should be there and I do not think that ICANN are acting
ultra vires in this regard. At this point in time (having not looked into
the matter) I can form no opinion as to whether IGF are acting beyond their
charter and I don't think that is the issue anyway. 

Best regards

Debbie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
> Sent: 07 July 2007 21:24
> To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Karl Auerbach'
> Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ga] RE: Sponsorship of IGF Workshops
> 
> Re:  IGF itself is going out of its charter and discussing 
> alternate ways to deal with "critical resources"
> 
> Roberto, I think you're quite wrong on this point:
> 
> From The Tunis Agenda:
> 
> 72. We ask the UN Secretary-General, in an open and inclusive 
> process, to convene, by the second quarter of 2006, a meeting 
> of the new forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue-called 
> the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). The mandate of the Forum is
> to:
> 
> j.  Discuss, inter alia, issues relating to critical Internet 
> resources. 
> 
> 58. We recognize that Internet governance includes more than 
> Internet naming and addressing. It also includes other 
> significant public policy issues such as, inter alia, 
> critical Internet resources, the security and safety of the 
> Internet, and developmental aspects and issues pertaining to 
> the use of the Internet.
> 
> 70. Using relevant international organizations, such 
> cooperation should include the development of 
> globally-applicable principles on public policy issues 
> associated with the coordination and management of critical 
> Internet resources. In this regard, we call upon the 
> organizations responsible for essential tasks associated with 
> the Internet to contribute to creating an environment that 
> facilitates this development of public policy principles.
> 
> 
> 
> --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > > 
> > > Given that ICANN has a limited charter and is
> > funded, if
> > > indirectly, out of the pockets of users of the
> > internet, it
> > > does seem that for ICANN to expend money and staff
> > to
> > > participate in the IGF efforts is ultra vires.
> > 
> > In principle, I agree with Karl, it definitively would be the case.
> > But unfortunately the IGF itself is going out of its charter and 
> > discussing alternate ways to dela with "critical 
> resources", which is 
> > intended to be domain names and addresses. And this subject 
> is exactly 
> > the charter of ICANN, so I believe that it is necessary that ICANN 
> > participates to the debate.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Roberto
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> ______________________________________________________________
> ______________________
> Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative 
> vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
> http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ 
> 
> 
> 






<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>