[133886] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: UN mulls internet regulation options
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Sun Dec 19 20:32:28 2010
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: Eric Brunner-Williams <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 01:28:51 +0000
In-Reply-To: <4D0EA6AE.8020609@nic-naa.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 19, 2010, at 7:43 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> fred, and others with (misspent) wsis++ / ig++ travel nickles,
>=20
> it would _really_ help me if you provided more context, off-line if neces=
sary, as i spent the week before last more involved with the gac than at an=
y prior point in my decade of icann involvement.
Eric (et al) -=20
On Tuesday, December 14th, I spoke in NYC on behalf of the Number Resource =
Organization (NRO) at the "Open Consultations on the process towards Enhanc=
ed Cooperation on International Public Policy Issues pertaining to the Inte=
rnet" held by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs =
(UN DESA). This consultation was being held to get multistakeholder inputs=
regarding the "process towards the implementation of enhanced cooperation =
in order to enable governments, on an equal footing to carry out their role=
s and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to =
the Internet". This was specifically not about the Internet Governance For=
um, but a second initiative for a more decisional body regarding the Intern=
et that some governments assert was already agreed to by means of the UN Wo=
rld Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Tunis Agenda in 2005[1].
I presented an NRO prepared statement[2] which outlined the considerable p=
rogress that had been made in enhanced cooperation between governments, bus=
iness, and Internet technical organizations in dealing with Internet policy=
issues, emphasized the increasingly complex nature of the Internet, and as=
ked keeping these factors in mind when considering next steps. I also inte=
rvened twice requested clarification of exactly how a government-only decis=
ion body for Internet policy would fulfill the "consultation with all stake=
holders" paragraph specified in the Tunis agenda. The answer from several c=
ountries was not encouraging, suggesting the consultation could be done in =
the UN manner through their Member State delegations. This government-only=
view is being asserted by several countries, but India, Brazil, South Afri=
ca and Saudi Arabia are carrying it most strongly, and it is likely to resu=
lt in a recommendation in this matter from the Under Sec General to the UN =
General Assembly sometime next May. While we had many interventions speaki=
ng in favor of a more multistakeholder approach (including the US and UK, t=
he Internet Society on behalf of itself and the IETF, and ICANN), several o=
ther presenters did not stay on topic of enhanced cooperation and fulfillin=
g the Tunis Agenda, but instead explored a wide range of topical Internet c=
oncerns (those interested in detailed positions of presenters are recommend=
ed to review the filed positions, statements as presented or listen/view th=
e UN archives all of which are available online [3].
Overall, I believe that the Internet community did well in presenting its p=
oints, and am hopeful that if a more decisional intergovernmental body is f=
ormed for addressing these matters, some functional mechanism for consultat=
ion with non-governmental parties will receive some consideration. I do not=
believe that there is much more that can be done until we see the draft re=
commendation that emerges from this process early next year.
I hope this helps provide some context as you requested.
Happy Holidays,
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
=3D=3D=3D REFERENCES
[1] WSIS Tunis Agenda: http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html
[2] NRO statement: http://www.nro.net/documents/pdf/StatementbyJohnCurran.p=
df
[3] DESA / WSIS Folloup website: http://www.unpan.org/dpadm/wsisfollowup
