| Attendees | |
| Attendees staff | Bart Boswinkel, Joke Braeken, Maria Otanes |
| Apologies | Mary Uduma, Lianna Galstyan |
| Agenda |
|
| Documents | slide deck |
| Recordings | https://icann.zoom.us/recording/share/FPxrgz9oe_yexCW1LhFhesyn_YXh8g8BAjj94sv_P_4 |
| Chat | |
| Notes | ACTION ITEMS
Q1. How to increase participation and input of ccTLDs in IG-related discussions and processes? NOTES These high-level notes included below are designed to help the IGLC navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at https://community.icann.org/display/ccnsowkspc/IGLC+Conference+calls+-+2019
Introduction by Joke Braeken, introducing the ccNSO Secretariat staff, the IGLC Group members. Overview of the scope and goal of the IGLC Bart introduced Manday Carver to the IGLC, who is in the Government and IGO Engagement department working with Tarek Kamel and she supports the Board WG on IG Last week Monday, Pierre, Mandy, Joke had a preliminary conversation, where they identified some interesting characteristics from a ccTLD and ICANN eco system perspective CCWG IG | CCWG Engagement Group. Mostly driven by the atlarge and non contracted party house by GNSO. activity of ccNSO was limited. Why was it so interesting for those present in Barcelona, to set up the IGLC? positioning of ccTLDs in the broader IG eco-system. ccTLDs in principal have a national or regional focus. That is also why the RO’s are so successful. Work area is very national. For ccTLDS. Often a close relation with their national governments, often in a positive, collaborative way. Governance models varies from country to country. All operate in different legal systems, cultures, and policy areas. What makes this effort so unique? Why is it so important to participate in the IGLC? Pierre: various IG fora, such as ITU along with the IGFs. Mandy: not just the national and regional IGF. Also the ITU, what happens coming out of the regional conferences, activities that take place in the ITU regional centres of excellence, that provide technical training and capacity building efforts. 2. Introduction Internet Governance Liaison Committee 2.a. Confirmation IGLC chair Pierre Bonis stepped forward Introduction by Pierre: IG is the day-to-day job of AFNIC. Works on this topic at a daily basis. Easier for him to share info. Important step to take, just after the Paris IGF which he co-chaired, available to share the Paris-message, leading up to IGF in Germany. Not a lot of european participants in the IGLC. He thought it was useful to have a european view, since Europe will host the IGF for the third time. The IGLC is open to non-ccNSO members as well. Happy to bear in mind that this group is lightweight, with a light organisational model Eduardo supports Pierre’s candidacy, others as well via non-verbal contributions in the zoom room. Introduction by IGLC members
2.b. Expectations Goals & Scope of the group: coming from the ToR. How to look at what this group is going to do. Leading up to Marrakech: discussing how to make this goal and scope a bit more specific. Q1. How to increase participation and input of ccTLDs in IG-related discussions and processes? Q2. What are IG topics relevant to ccTLDs? Lianna: had recently the southern europea IGF. invited ccTLDs regarding IDNS. use and awareness of the government. One of the topics that could involve ccTLDs more. The .am ccTLD is interested in the local content increases. How to promote, how to facilitate local content creation. Identify use - wider scope, not only the managerial scope. Young-eum: most topics discussed in ITU or in other UN committees. Those issues are what are the CCWG IG has been focusing on. Those are the topics we should be looking at as well. Potential to affect the topics discussed within ICANN. First and foremost, it is important to participate in the things that are being discussed within the CCWG IG. Bart. Discussions in Barcelona: ccTLDs were interested in IG topics relevant to them. No need to answer this question right now, but group members are invited to give it some thought. Pierre: IDN, local content, those are all topics. Pierre intends to share with the group members some background documents, that are different visions of what is included as Internet Governance as topics, as a whole. General consensus of what is an IG-related topic. Netmundial declaration tries to give a definition. Link to 2005 Tunis declaration that put in place the IGF. This will help to do some cherry-picking. Q3. How does the IGLC intends to provide feedback? Bart. More in-depth discussion at the upcoming meeting. Group members are invited to start thinking about these 3 questions, and focus on them at the next meeting The IGLC needs to be aware of what is being discussed in the CCWG IG| CCWG EG. needs to be established firmly from the start. Mandy supports this. The IGLC needs to decide what work needs to be done by the IGLC, and how to interact within the broader community. Structural questions: IG is an ongoing activity. Some of the chartering constituencies had a question on the role of the WG. and whether the aim us consensus-based contributions. That was difficult to meet by the chartering organisations. They want to get away from the idea that the people in that group are speaking with a consensus voice for their constituencies. Body that intends to identify high interest topics in the IG space. E.g. panel on universal acceptance in the global IGF. is becoming a less formalised mechanism. If the topics are not considered to be relevant to ccNSO, opportunity to inject topics in that. IGLC willing to work as a liaison group? From a perspective of the Board WG, they look for community perspective and feedback. Hopefully this group wants to be aware and contributing to what the CCWG EG is doing, but also ensure to bring the discussions by the IGLC to the attention of the Board WG and the rest of the community. Pierre. What are the expectations from ICANN org? This committee is bound by the decision of the ccNSO Council. If the ccNSO council has decided to withdraw from the CCWG and not charter the group, this means the IGLC cannot be a member representing the ccNSO within the CCWG. no-on is prevented to participate to the discussions in an individual capacity. Some members of the IGLC are already a member of the CCWG IG. We should not reinvent the wheel: take past work into account, and do not do it again. Main idea: share and give the info to this community. Do not spend too much time on the link between the IGLC and other groups. 3. Internal organization and next steps Pierre will chair the next meeting. 4. AOB Bart: newcomers to the ccNSO-type of work. Would it be helpful to do a newcomer introduction? If so, we can facilitate this. 5. Next meeting: 31 May 2019 | 16 UTC Mandy and colleagues are invited as well. Next steps: Focus on the slides with the questions during the next call. Starting with the second questions (topics relevant to ccTLDs) Young-eum: I would like us to think about what the “liaison” means for this group. Who are we trying to liaise? Bart: in Barcelona, the community felt that IG-related topics were important to them. Once the group has a clear idea of its own scope, the liaison part becomes easier to define. First do this type of homework, leading up to a face-to-face meeting on Thu in Marrakech. Start presenting some ideas on the direction of travel with the ccTLDs as well. |
