CCWG IG Weekly Teleconference - 2014.3.7 - Adobe Chat

Sarah Falvey - RYSG:Hi All -

  Sarah Falvey - RYSG:I am in an airport so I will be on mute for the meeting and using chat. Apologies

  kristina rosette:greetings!  I'm on mute, too.  At the bus stop.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I just joined via Adobe.  I won't be able to call in.  

  Kiran Malancharuvil:Thanks!

  Philip Corwin:can you send the link to the doc, please?

  rafik:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BOpCmeE4YL3cat_6oN5RaNvDgvEYO-HS82gRzc_aRjo/edit#

  Philip Corwin:Thanks

  Keith Drazek (RySG):Hi all, apologies for joining late.

  Michele Neylon:where is she?

  Keith Drazek (RySG):@Rafik, yes, that works for me. The RySG looks forward to reviewing the final draft as submitted and will provide any further comment as needed.

  Michele Neylon:I'm apparently an anonymous dinosaur

  Michele Neylon:why not just delete the number?

  Michele Neylon:and move on

  Michele Neylon:"involved people from"

  Michele Neylon:without specifying how many

  Keith Drazek (RySG):works for me, Michele

  Alain Bidron:OK

  Sarah Falvey - RYSG:makes sense

  kristina rosette:fine with me

  Keith Drazek (RySG):I support Marilyn's edit, thanks.

  Greg Shatan:Agree

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Michele, I am okay with your suggestion to cut the number. the revised language would then be ... involved people from each of these groups?

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Marilyn /I proposed 'changes and enhancements'. I can see that we are getting out of sync with comments , so I will try to be specific about what I am commenting on in the Adobe.

  Keith Drazek (RySG):+1 Marilyn

  kristina rosette:If we're talking about the first sentence of 2.1, how about "The ICANN multi-stakeholder, bottom up consensus driven model best serves the ICANN community" (and use the same language to start the first sentence.)

  Michele Neylon:Marilyn - yes - we had people from different groups - we can list who in an annex or whatever

  kristina rosette:can't.  on mute. at the bus stop

  kristina rosette:very loud.  lots of kids.  sorry.

  Keith Drazek (RySG):The key is to reinforce the importance of the Bottom Up Consensus Based Multi-Stakeholder Model as a principle for ICANN and any other organization tasked with IG functions.

  Michele Neylon:Keith +1

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I dpm

  Keith Drazek (RySG):It's not a question of whether ICANN is committed to it or not, it's about the principle that the MSM must be bottom up and consensus based to be legitimate.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I don't mind suggesting that it also is important for IG mechanisms, but not all mechanisms are operational, and a range of mechanisms will be needed in Internet Governance. I am spending huge amounts of time in many other settings where IG is being developed, and ICANN is only one of the mechanisms.

  kristina rosette:good point, greg.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:exactly. And I tiotally agree with Greg

  Keith Drazek (RySG):+1 Greg

  Leon Sanchez:Agree

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:if we restrict this to ICANN we're basically wasting our time on red herrings

  Keith Drazek (RySG):Completely agree. Bottom Up Consensus Based MSM best serves the Internet and its users.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:My comments are not about multi-lateral, though, but about various flavors of MS-ism. Could you repeat your proposed language?

  kristina rosette:fine with me, Greg.  Good idea. If we keep the beginning of my suggestion and then use "Internet" instead of "ICANN", we tie the two concepts together nicely.

  Alain Bidron:agree with  greg

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think Greg's formulation was gaining support..

  Keith Drazek (RySG):+1 Kristina

  kristina rosette:The ICANN multi-stakeholder bottom up consensus based model best serves the Internet.  (with appropriate commas)

  Keith Drazek (RySG):+1 Kristina

  Michele Neylon:agreed

  Michele Neylon:oh dear

  Michele Neylon:agreeing with Kristina

  HECTOR MANOFF:+1

  Michele Neylon:don't tell anyone

  Michele Neylon:/me ducks

  kristina rosette:I left the commas out just to drive Michele crazy. :-)

  Michele Neylon:lol

  Michele Neylon:you know me too well

  kristina rosette:I don't  know if we have any ISP folks, but I know that they believe quite strongly that they are separte from business so suggest we replace (in the first sentence) "such as" with ","

  Alain Bidron:ISPs are represented YES

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I have a concern about a sentence in the second paragraph: Initiatives emerge in the [new language: communities of stakeholders], advised by ICANN's Advisory Committees, and supported by staff.

  Marilia Maciel:Hello, all sorry for being late. Could someone enable my mic, please?

  Alain Bidron:I agree that there is a difference between Business as registrar registry ISPS and Business using the internet

  Petya Minkova:@ Marilia : ur microphone is enabled

  Michele Neylon:shouldn't it be "from the" not "in the"

  Sarah Falvey - RYSG:I agree with Marilyn's edit

  kristina rosette:Advisory Committees advise the Board, not stakeholders.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I agree with Marilyn's edit too

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:with an edit according to Kristina's point

  kristina rosette:How about "Initiatives emerge in the communities of stakeholders and the ICANN Advisory Committees, and supported by staff."  That covers my point and Marilyn's.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:YES!

  kristina rosette:and are supported by staff.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I like Kristina's suggestion

  kristina rosette:yes, that was the point I was trying to make

  Leon Sanchez:sounds like a plane landing

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Kristina gets the votes from me for typing at a bus stop!

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:excellent. Next!

  Michele Neylon:What the hell si that noise?

  Alain Bidron:Landed

  Michele Neylon:at least it didn't crah

  Michele Neylon:crash even

  Leon Sanchez:LOL

  Michele Neylon:that would have really been a buzz kill

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Can staff scroll up so that we can see if Kristina/s edits are accepted?

  Michele Neylon:Marilyn - they were AFAIK

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:On the Adobe it is impossible to see the changes

  kristina rosette:um, I haven't been making any edits in the document.  Is someone else holding the pen (er, keyboard)?

  Leon Sanchez:it makes sense. I agree to the proposal

  Marilia Maciel:Yes

  Petya Minkova:@ Marilyn it is impossible to see any new updates on the doc.... not as a PDF file

  Alain Bidron:If you refresh google doc you see the changes

  kristina rosette:like it.

  Marilia Maciel:I tried to draft the first point on the paragraph above

  Marilia Maciel:Yes, I agree with Marilyn

  kristina rosette:Concerned that saying "seeking to inlcude all stakeholders" implies that ICANN does not currently include all stakeholders, which isn't true and isn't what we mean.

  Leon Sanchez:How about saying "ICANN has continuously improved its multi-stakeholder model"?

  Alain Bidron:agree with Kristina

  kristina rosette:+ 1 to Leon

  Alain Bidron:Yes this +1 to Leon

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I like Leon's suggestion.

  Kiran Malancharuvil:I'm sorry, I have to drop off early.  I'll review the document when I return from my next meeting.  Thank you.  

  Alain Bidron:and will?

  marilyn Cade - CSG:We are finalizing probably on this call, due to lack of time?

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:thx Kiran

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@alain: these are plans, so should is probably better

  Alain Bidron:Ok

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:So what do we do with the paragraph starting "Ideally ICANN Should Srtive?é

  Marilia Maciel:Yes, that is why I striked the text, drafting the para above. I think point 1 is covered at least

  Alexandra Dans:Just a quick comment on the RIRs: Arin also provides services in the Caribeean. In fact, both LACNIC and ARIN are serving different countries in that region.

  Alain Bidron:True LACNIC is Part of the Caribbean

  Alain Bidron:pr-ovide services in part of the caribbean

  Marilia Maciel:Yes agreed

  marilyn Cade - CSG:There are numerous multistakeholder mechanisms. We offer two examples below, noting that this is not an inclusive list.

  Marilia Maciel:1

  Alain Bidron:My view is that having other examples than ICANN is not bad

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:option 1: keep RIR & IGF text where they are and preamble them with Marilyn's text.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Option 2: move the RIR & IGF texts to Appendix

  Alain Bidron:option 1

  Marilia Maciel:1

  Sarah Falvey - RYSG:1

  Leon Sanchez:1

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:thanks that's great

  Aparna Sridhar:HI - I suggest deter rather than prevent

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Strike the word: Admittedly. That isn't needed.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:+1

  Sarah Falvey - RYSG:Apologies but I need to drop and board a plan

  Sarah Falvey - RYSG:plane

  marilyn Cade - CSG:swap order. Unique Internet.

  Alain Bidron:I like unique internet

  Marilia Maciel:Yes

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Thanks for joining Sarah

  Marilia Maciel:No need I think unique says

  Marilia Maciel:already

  marilyn Cade - CSG:a unique Internet.

  Greg Shatan: a single Internet>

  marilyn Cade - CSG:It isn't a single Internet, though. :-)

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think we should rely also on language that has stood the test of time and debate...

  Aparna Sridhar:If intergovernmental discussions touch on aspects of Internet governance, then they should be conducted in full, inclusive, and transparent consultation with the affected nongovernmental stakeholders.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I do want to offer a slight modification though on this, as it seems to imply that it is never proper to have government to government discussions.

  Greg Shatan:I agree with Marilyn's concern.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I like Aparna's wording

  kristina rosette:"then they should be supported by full, inclusive . . .. . or "then they should be conducted in coordination with full, inclusive. .  . ... "

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I like it!

  Aparna Sridhar:supported by is fine

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:+1 to Kristina's amendment

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think it would then read: . ... , supported by full, inclusive and transparent consultations with affected non governmental stakeholders.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I support Mariela's comment: this is areally about how hard it is to participate, I think.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:hmm -- you have to be careful because discussions between alw enforcement agencies will not want to conduct transparent discussions for obvious reasons

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:and I cannot see businesses conducting transparent discussions when it involves a business deal

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think there are areas where transparency isn't appropriate, and I see two noted here...

  Aparna Sridhar:Here is my proposal:

  Aparna Sridhar:The Cross community Working Group supports Transparency in Internet Governance discussions All discussions on aspects of Internet governance should be supported by full, inclusive, and transparent consultation with all affected stakeholders.

  Marilia Maciel:Yes, I agree, it was nor my point

  Marilia Maciel:I like the proposal

  Michele Neylon:I do see the link

  Michele Neylon:I'm going to have to drop off shortly - I need to eat :)

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I would suggest preambling the text with "except in circumstances where confidentiality is needed (law enforcement or business reasons).

  Marilia Maciel:Yes

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think is much improved, Aparna, thanks. I can spport Olivier's add.

  Marilia Maciel:I think it is not actually needed since we are talking about IG

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:in fact -- (for example, law enforcement or business reasons)

  Aparna Sridhar:yeah but I don't think that trade secret discussions really impact Internet goverance

  Marilia Maciel:But would not object

  Aparna Sridhar:but if people are really concerned, it's fine

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:would governments ever do something transparent as far as national security is concerned?

  kristina rosette:With apologies, I have to drop off the call.  I'm happy to take a final run through the document for capitaliziation/grammar/etc.  (I think Greg and I had volunteered to do that.)  I have to be offline tomorrow, but have some time later this evening.

  Leon Sanchez:I made a comment to the document. What do you think about that wording? Makes sense?

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I don't think I mentioned national security

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Leon, where do I see the statement?

  Michele Neylon:Where's the current version of this ?

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:*everything in your life is national security* :-)

  Michele Neylon:I'm getting confused

  Greg Shatan:If I discuss Internet Governance at the bar in SIngapore, I will make sure that it is supported by full, inclusive and trasparent consultation with all affected stakeholders....

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Michele: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BOpCmeE4YL3cat_6oN5RaNvDgvEYO-HS82gRzc_aRjo/edit?usp=sharing

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:work in progress

  Leon Sanchez:@Marilyn at the right side column in the document

  Michele Neylon:Isn't one of the main reasons we're even here the fact that some governments decided that their "security" gave them permisiosn to spy on everyone else?

  Aparna Sridhar:Agree with marilyn

  Marilia Maciel:Ok

  Michele Neylon:strike "aspect of"

  Michele Neylon:it's superflous

  Leon Sanchez:My proposal for the 2.5 header is to re word it so it states "The CCWGcalls for greater Transparency in intergovernmental discussions that relate to internet governance issues ?

  marilyn Cade - CSG:To Michele, we are here for a variety of reasons, one of them being concerns about implications of acts called by some governments [not a single government, as we all are increasing learining], but shouldn't we have [as the CCWG ] been 'here' anyway, trying to give input and guidance to the CEO, Board, and staff about their actions, and activities, that need stakeholder support. :-)

  Aparna Sridhar:I think we shouldn't try to interpret what Naresh was thinking

  Greg Shatan:Agree with Aparna -- we are out of time.

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:I agree with Marilyn.

  Aparna Sridhar:Everyone, I have to drop.  Thanks for the collaboration.  I look forward to reading the next version.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Olivier/Rafik: could you send a note to Naresh, welcoming his submitting ideas along with others, into the CCWG session in Singapore?

  rafik:@marylin yes I asked petya to take of this action to follow-up

  marilyn Cade - CSG:THANKS, Rafik.

  Marilia Maciel:ok

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I don't like the idea that the Board is sheparding, as today, they are totally unconnected, unfortunatley, and apparently, so according to the bylaws.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:ICANN's contuning evolution must be driven by ICANN's Stakeholders

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Keep the next sentences under that bullet.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Keep a bullet that says: ICANN's Board should perform its functionss after ongoing consultation with ICANN Stakeholders, and with continuing improvements in transparency and accountability

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Keep the bullet on evolution of participation. cut the Sheparerding bullets.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Keep the last bullet on transparency but change it to Transparency and Accountability, which should always be interlinked..:-)

  Greg Shatan:Agree that Accountability is key.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:then add Globalizatoin plans for ICANN must be developed with stakeholder support and taking impact on stakeholders into account.

  Marilia Maciel:ok by me

  Philip Corwin:works for me

  marilyn Cade - CSG:If we were to make a statement about ICANN, I would be critical of the closing of the Board but tis is not the place for that statement. ::-)

  Marilia Maciel:The brackets mean disagreement?

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think the facts are 1998, though.  At least that was when we founded ICANN.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I actually don't think that any proposal has broad and diverse support, so I would make a few edits, but we need to actually be fact based. the AoC i snot a contract, for instance.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I strongly agree that there is no clearly defined roadmap to changes, and I think that if we clear up language just to be clear when is a contract, when is an agreement,

  Michele Neylon:ICANN needs to respect local law

  marilyn Cade - CSG:US oversight did end with AOC/Phil is right. IANA Functions agreement - there are multiple elements. I think that the based in California /and subject to California law, may be also a question that some are concerned about.

  Michele Neylon:it's not globalised until it starts doing that

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Michele is raising a concern about the issues of compliance with local law. and I understand the concern you raise, Michele.

  Michele Neylon:Michele is very angry with ICANN at the moment

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:The Google Doc is not automatically updated on the Adobe COnnect. The Adobe is just a snapshot of the Google Doc. For updated text, please see the Google Doc directly.

  Michele Neylon:+1

  Leon Sanchez:yes. Challenges

  Philip Corwin:+1

  Michele Neylon:challenges / challenging

  Michele Neylon:works better

  Michele Neylon:less negative nuance

  Alain Bidron:Good

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Amazing work by the team. thanks to Rafik and Olivier for excellent stewardship /leadership to brign such diversity of views together.  All of the groups have up to 4 reps able to participate, and I think we have also offered the opportunity for further improvements during the Singapore meeting.

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I think w ealso to have to also send in that request still that our public session is not scheduled against the name collision session, or the main panels. How is that goign to happen?

  Marilia Maciel:Could someone quickly clarify what will be the procedure to discuss this doc in Singapore?

  Philip Corwin:Those Netmundial inaccuracies are a good argument against "crowdsourcing" of policy issues

  Michele Neylon:Happy to share a "final" text with the RrSG - if Olivier / Rafik can post to list

  marilyn Cade - CSG:Marilia: the group plannign the open session Monday was proposing that this be a major part of that session, but ICANN has presently scheudled Name collision against our scheduled public session. That was raised by the planning group as a problem but we havne't resolved it yet.

  Alain Bidron:I think we have to challenge the fact that the session will be in parallel with the Names collision topic

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:@Marilia: this is what we will discuss & decide next week!

  Marilia Maciel:Thanks, Marilyn

  Marilia Maciel:Great

  Philip Corwin:We don't want to collide with name collisions

  Marilia Maciel:hahaha... yes too much collision

  Alain Bidron:Name collision and CCWG are two major topics

  marilyn Cade - CSG:I support Alain's comment, it is also important to the Business folks, and to others, and was amazing to me to see that 'collision'. :-)

  Alain Bidron:have a good WE

  Olivier Crepin-Leblond:Thanks everybody this was a very good and productive session!

  Alain Bidron:Thank you all

  Philip Corwin:Ciao

  Michele Neylon:bye

  Leon Sanchez:thanks everybody

  Martin J. Levy @ Hurricane Electric:Hasta!

  Marilia Maciel:Thanks, bye!