Come design the future of IANA
By Kieren McCarthy.
By Kieren McCarthy.
We are planning to provide some kind of formal input to the NetMundial meeting in April.
And so we have specifically developed a statement and process to meet the tight deadline for submitting input.
The statement is built from the Montevideo Statement and split up into the two themes of the NetMundial meeting.
And we want your views on it. We have an online survey that gives you the opportunity to review each sentence within the draft statement.
Due to time constraints, the survey will only be open until midnight UTC tomorrow so please take five minutes out today to take the survey.
The leaders of organizations responsible for coordination of the Internet technical infrastructure globally have met in Montevideo, Uruguay, to consider current issues affecting the future of the Internet.
The Internet and World Wide Web have brought major benefits in social and economic development worldwide. Both have been built and governed in the public interest through unique mechanisms for global multistakeholder Internet cooperation, which have been intrinsic to their success.
The leaders discussed the clear need to continually strengthen and evolve these mechanisms, in truly substantial ways, to be able to address emerging issues faced by stakeholders in the Internet. In this sense:
Efforts to continuously strengthen the dialogue on Internet cooperation, as part of the global multistakeholder processes and mechanisms are important.
On 8 October 2013 the leaders of organizations responsible for coordination of the Internet technical infrastructure globally met in Montevideo, Uruguay, to consider current issues affecting the future of the Internet.
The outcome of that meeting was the Montevideo Statement, following which, the community met at the 2013 IGF meeting in Bali to further discuss community wide efforts towards achieving these objectives and engaging with the broad community, including civil society, business, technical community, governments, and academia.
This website, and the discussions it leads, seek to contribute to strengthening the Dialogue on Internet Cooperation. This dialogue doesn’t have a set time line, and is a contributor to initiatives including the upcoming meeting to be hosted in Brazil in April 2014, as well as other forums.
The Dialogue does not replace existing organizations, it does not replace existing discussions or forums, but rather it seeks to bring together different views contributing to a range of discussions. It seeks to reaffirm the strength of decentralized mechanisms that together evolve to address emerging issues and strengthen the multistakeholder approaches to Internet governance. It is also critical to note this dialogue does not replace the IGF, rather the IGF is an important forum to be strengthened as part of this dialogue.
São Paulo is to host an international conference to discuss the new model of the Internet’s global governance.
The Federal Government's proposal was announced, on November 18th, by the ministers of Communications, Paulo Bernardo, of Science and Technology Marco Antonio Raupp, and Foreign Relations, Luiz Alberto Figueiredo.
The idea of the meeting, to take place on April 23rd and 24th April, came from the speech of President Dilma Rousseff at the opening of the UN General Assembly, prompted by recent revelations about the NSA.
According to Mr Bernardo, the event will have a "nongovernmental nature" and will have a wide remit. "Governments are invited to participate, but will be mostly a multisectoral meeting also involving representatives of civil society and the private sector," he said.
The Foreign Minister, Mr Figueiredo, said that the goal of the meeting is to hold a broad debate with all concerned sectors.
"The idea is to build international governance that can above all ensure individual freedom and protecting human rights in order to use the new media with the internet as its centerpiece," he said.
More on this announcement on the Brazilian Ministry for Communications website (in Portuguese).
By John Curran
There have been many significant Internet Governance developments in the last several weeks, and so I'd like to take this moment to provide a framework in which to consider these recent events. For the last several years, the leadership of several recognized Internet organizations (ISOC, ICANN, IAB/IETF, IANA, the 5 Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), and W3C; sometimes referred to as the "Internet technical organizations") have met periodically to promote better coordination between these groups. While there have been brief statements issued in the past after such meetings, the statement issued after this years' meeting (known as the Montevideo Statement on the Future of Internet Cooperation) made some observations about the Internet which were fairly obvious but hadn't been documented previously in a clear and consistent manner. High-level points from the Montevideo Statement include:
By Paul Wilson
APNIC is a signatory to the Montevideo Statement, a declaration from members of the Internet technical community about the current state of Internet technical coordination, cooperation and governance. The statement conveys in particular an agreement on "the need for ongoing effort to address Internet Governance challenges", and a commitment to "catalyze community-wide efforts towards the evolution of global multi-stakeholder Internet cooperation".
Last week during ICANN 48 in Buenos Aires, there were numerous discussions about the Montevideo Statement: about the Internet cooperation clause and its relation with the Internet Governance Forum; about the global meeting which will take place in Brazil in April 2014, and yet another new issue, the "1net” initiative.
It is of course fundamental that the Internet should continue to be driven from the bottom up, by all sectors of our multistakeholder community. But after these recent initiatives, and the high level of interest shown by the community, it seems useful to offer some personal perspectives, to explain how I at least (as head of APNIC), understand both their individual intent, and how they are related to one another.
This statement was released in October 2013 after a meeting convened by the Internet Society to discuss current Internet technical issues. Participants included chairs and executives of ISOC, ICANN,IAB, IETF, W3C and the 5 RIRs (of which APNIC is one), a group which has been referred to loosely as "I*" (though this is not a name that any of us particularly likes).
This latest I* meeting was unusual in that for the first time, the participants agreed on the need for a public statement about a number of specific issues. Several factors prompted this action, among them the various recent revelations of Internet surveillance, and the more recent call in a speech to the UNby Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff calling for increased multilateral (as opposed to Multistakeholder), oversight of Internet matters.
The Brazil Meeting
After the Montevideo meeting, it was known that Fadi Chehadé, President and CEO of ICANN, was going on to Brasilia to meet with the Communications Minister. It was during those meetings that the idea then emerged for a new international Internet conference to be held in Brazil in 2014, an event now known as the "Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance".
The Brazil meeting was big news: suddenly, both the Montevideo Statement and the proposed meeting were being discussed widely, but they were also conflated and perceived as part of a single plan, whereas in fact they were conceived quite independently
The Internet Governance Forum in Bali followed soon after these events and it became a focal point for further discussions. Efforts were made by members of the I* group to explain the Montevideo Statement, and its relationship with the still-unformed Brazil meeting. It seemed an opportunity to build support for a broad coalition or movement, just as we had resolved in Montevideo: "to catalyze community-wide efforts towards the evolution of global multistakeholder Internet cooperation".
During this time, ICANN proposed the name of "1net" as a banner of sorts, under which this movement could be formed.
The discussions in Bali were not conclusive. For a variety of reasons, they left many in the community confused about the many issues which had been discussed, unsure of their implications and of the intent behind them. However, there was consensus at least to continue discussions, to allow unanswered questions to be addressed and develop a vision and scope for the initiative, however it was to emerge. As a practical contribution, the NRO established a mailing list called i-coordination, where discussions could continue in the free and open fashion which was expected.
During the opening of ICANN 48, Fadi announced that www.1net.org had been established as a platform for the "coalition/movement" which had been discussed during IGF. In response to questions and concerns, he also announced a special 7am session, at which the topic could be openly discussed.
I spoke during that session, and encouraged those with questions to also propose the answers that they hoped to hear; to contribute constructively to the creation of 1net. For many in the ICANN audience, the key issues were already being addressed within that forum; leading them to question the need for another. The point is, however, that ICANN is only a small subset of a much wider Internet community, for whom there are many outstanding issues that are well outside the scope of ICANN.
During the week in Buenos Aires, various other initiatives and developments were announced, including latest news on the CEO's "strategy panels”, and on the new "Panel on the Future of Global Internet Cooperation”, independent from ICANN, which will release a report in early 2014, presumably in time for the Brazil meeting.
What does it all mean for our Community?
I firmly believe that these various recent events do represent significant developments and opportunities in the short history of Internet Governance. My hope is that they also represent, or will lead to, an ongoing convergence of opinion on a number of important points: