November 2005 - KICTANet

Consumer Information Network contact
by James Nguo 17 Dec '05

17 Dec '05

Does anyone have the e-mail address, telephone number for Consumer Information Network, Mr. Ochieng?? James Nguo Regional Director Arid Lands Information Network-Eastern Africa (ALIN-EA), P.O. Box 10098, 00100 G.P.O. Nairobi, Kenya, AAYMCA Building, Along State House Crescent, Off State House Avenue. Tel +254 20 2731557 Telefax +254 20 2737813 Cell Phone +254 -722-561006 Email: james(a)alin.or.ke Website: www.alin.or.ke ------------------------------------------------------------- Enriched livelihoods of the people in arid areas of Eastern Africa through targeted information support and facilitation of information exchange -----Original Message----- From: alice(a)apc.org [mailto:alice@apc.org] Sent: 24 November 2005 10:21 To: KIPlist; Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet Subject: [Kictanet] Fw: [governance] Assessment of WSIS Outcomes for Internet Governance This analysis is currently available at www.IP3.gatech.edu . It should soon be available at www.InternetGovernance.org November 23, 2005 An Assessment of the WSIS-2/Tunis '05 Outcomes The outcomes of the Tunis World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) are significant -- and rather surprising. ICANN emerges from the summit both unchanged and significantly different. After WSIS it has a stronger claim to legitimacy. ICANN emerged unchanged, in that its institutional structures - most notably its mechanisms for political oversight - were not amended. ICANN continues to operate under the formal authority of a single government, the US. Such a unilateral globalization model is a novel arrangement, quite unlike what is used in other global sectors (e.g. telephony or communication satellites.) The US continues to exercise a kind of unipolar authority it does not have in physical space. But ICANN also emerges from WSIS radically different: it is now endowed with a greater degree of legitimacy. Over a period of four years the UN family of nations intensely scrutinized ICANN, Internet governance, and unilateral US oversight, and they came to a decision: they declined to change ICANN's structures. Whereas US control was previously the product of a unilateral assertion, it is now the outcome of a lengthy process of scrutiny by all nations. Thus ICANN's greatest weakeness - its lack of legitimacy and its related lack of support from governments around the world - is less after WSIS. From now on, governments that criticize ICANN are criticizing an arrangement that they themselves reviewed and left unchanged. The WSIS decision cannot really be called an endorsement of ICANN. The text nowhere mentions ICANN by name, and there is no real declaration of support. Still, the UN has decided not to act against the organization, and this collective inaction is the final word after years of debate. The Internet Governance Forum Another important WSIS outcome is the launch of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Two features characterize the IGF. First, it is a multi-stakeholder forum. Although a creation of the UN, the forum membership will include more than just UN member states; participating equally will be entities from the private sector and from civil society. Second, the forum has no concrete power. It is an advisory body. Its member will discuss and formulate collective recommendations, but those recommendations will not carry the weight of policy. Still, the forum could become powerful. A forum is a prerequisite for collective action at the global level, making possible communication, interest aggregation, bargaining, and decision. WSIS was itself a forum, and it made possible certain collective decisions of great political import. (For more on the functionality of forums see the article "Understanding WSIS" in the journal Information Technology and International Development.) If the new forum makes continued collective decision-making possible, it could be a powerful entity. Its recommendations could be formalized by national governments. Still one might ask, what is new about this forum? ICANN already has advisory committees for governments and for civil society members, and the private sector controls its board outright. Why create another mechanism for formulating advice? The answer is that this new forum will primarily have a policy focus. Whereas ICANN's bodies ostensibly focus on technical coordination, the IGF will focus on all issues of Internet governance. This dual arrangement formalizes the questionable division of Internet governance into two domains: ICANN's domain of technical coordination and the IGF's domain of public policy. It risks validating the inaccurate claim that ICANN is a purely technical body without policy-making content. Implications: ICANN and IGF In an earlier analysis entitled "ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law" I argued that ICANN needed a legislative mandate. It now has some of that. The Tunis documents are a major step in that direction. The locus of policy making will now shift. Fundamental disputes about ICANN's structures of policy-making have been settled (at least for now.) The next step is to work within those structures. WSIS defined two forums for policy making: ICANN, for matters of technical coordination, and the IGF, for everything else. In the short term, most Internet governance activity will switch to ICANN, where debates will occur within the ICANN structures. They will focus more on substantive issues relating to technical coordination. Of particular note is ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). The GAC is the forum where governments have the opportunity to look in on ICANN decision-making and offer their advice. It will likely become a much more important body - perhaps the most important body - in ICANN. At WSIS governments made it clear that they want a greater voice in ICANN decisions, and the GAC will be the vehicle for that. Thanks to WSIS governments now know a lot more about ICANN issues, so their participation should be more informed and effective. Civil society does not have a strong base within ICANN. The Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) operates at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the multiple commercial constituencies. Even weaker is ICANN's At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), which is a pale shadow of the earlier user representation on the board. Ever since business and technical interests eliminated elections, civil society participation has been constrained. Outside of ICANN, the Internet Society (ISOC) is not a reliable home for civil society. Since 2002 business interests control ISOC by virtue of having rewritten its bylaws in a manner similar to ICANN. ISOC, however, still claims to be a civil society organization. What user organizations are in ALAC are mostly sub-units of ISOC. In summary, the situation for civil society in the post-WSIS ICANN is a major source of concern. A top priority for civil society should be reforming ALAC. With ICANN confirmed as the one operational institution for global Internet governance, civil society should develop a more effective voice there. Investing in ALAC and NCUC is one way to achieve that. The second forum emerging from WSIS is the Internet Governance Forum. The IGF can be thought of as a continuation of the WSIS, since it provides a place for multistakeholder discussion of a very large number of issues. The key question here is whether governments embrace it. With GAC already established and offering a rich agenda, some governments may question the utility of a second advisory forum. Industry interests are likely to be cool to the IGF, since they have so much more influence in ICANN. Civil society, with its weak base in ICANN, may have the most at stake in the IGF, but they may not be able to make it succeed without the commitment of those other stakeholders. Conclusion Before WSIS ICANN was a sort of Frankenstein organization created in the basement of the US Department of Commerce. No formal delegation of authority from the US Congress authorized its exercise of public powers. Nor did its global elections give it legitimacy, since they were canceled before full implementation. Now ICANN can claim some degree of public authority. Many people may regret the UN's implicit endorsement of ICANN, but no one can easily dismiss the validity of the process. ICANN is the same but different. The next step in the policy process will be to work within its structures. There is one additional possibility, not mentioned above, that looms over Internet governance: technology re-design. With WSIS leaving ICANN in place, those dissatisfied with ICANN are likely to move away from a political strategy. Instead, they may see more promise in trying to eliminate the single root. One example in this trend is the Open Root Server Network (orsn.org) which is creating a parallel network of servers that are autonomous of ICANN. With such innovations in place, the power in controlling the authoritative root server is reduced. In the near future, it will be interesting to see how many groups propose technical innovations that effectively decentralize the root. References WSIS Decision: "Tunis Agenda for the Information Society," 15 November 2005, WSIS-05/TUNIS/DOC/6(Rev.1)-E "Understanding WSIS: An Institutional Analysis of the World Summit on the Information Society," Information Technology and International Development, published by MIT Press, 2005. "ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law," web published analysis. Articles can be found at www.InternetGovernance.org and www.IP3.gatech.edu. Author is Hans Klein, Associate Professor of Public Policy at Georgia Institute of Technology and Partner in the Internet Governance Project. The paper benefited from comments by Milton Mueller. ### ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > governance(a)lists.cpsr.org > https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance > _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)kictanet.or.ke http://kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet

2 1

May 17 to Become World Information Society Day
by Wainaina Mungai 14 Dec '05

14 Dec '05

May 17 to Become World Information Society Day SOURCE: http://africa.rights.apc.org/index.shtml?apc=ne_1&x=2467777 11/16/2005 (HANA) -- Sub-Committee B of PrepCom-3 of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) concluded it deliberations yesterday with government officials agreeing to set May 17 as World Information Society Day. The initiative is derived from the need to build awareness about the internet and make it a global resource available to the public. The committee reaffirmed the commitment of governments to empower young people as key participants in building an inclusive information society. It also resolved to actively engage youths in innovative information and communication technology (ICT) development programmes. Delegates agreed to strengthen the protection of children from abuse on the internet and defend their rights in the context of ICTs. The Sub-Committees final document, the Tunis Commitment drafted as part of its deliberations, included a section emphasizing that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration. Officials also reaffirmed their commitment to build a people-centred inclusive and development-oriented information society. Discussing mechanisms to finance the development of ICTs, the Sub-Committee highlighted the need for adequate and sustainable investments in ICTs to bridge the digital divide. Delegates urged the international community to promote assistance to poor countries, by meeting the funding needs of the developing world, especially those facing stiff challenges in the development of ICT. The committee agreed that the transfer of technology and capacity building would work effectively over many years. They unanimously agreed on the efficacy of the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF), established in Geneva, Switzerland, two years ago, as a voluntary mechanism for transforming the digital divide into a digital opportunity for the poor nations. Government ministers and senior officials have for the past three days been attending sessions at the Palexpo Kram in Tunis where the three-day World Summit on the Information Society begins today. Date: 11/16/2005 Location: Tunisia Theme: WSIS Source: HANA

2 1

Fw: [alac] President's IDN Committee
by alice＠apc.org 30 Nov '05

30 Nov '05

FYI on ICANN's website: > > ICANN President's Advisory Committee for IDNs > > 23 November 2005 > > ICANN is pleased to announce the formation of the President’s Advisory > Committee for IDNs. The committee is formed pursuant to ICANN Board > Resolution 04.71 in order to “provide the Board and ICANN community with > advice on issues that relate to IDN policies, in particular issues that > impact the implementation of IDN especially at the top level.” > > Committee Members > > It should be noted that some of the member seats are intended for specific > constituencies and as such the individual on the seat may be changing over > time. Further, other individuals than the listed below have been invited > and as ICANN is receiving acknowledgements the list below will be updated. > > Chairs > (In alphabetical order) > > Mouhamet Diop > CEO, Next SA > > Prof Hualin Qian > Professor, Computer Information Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences > > Paul Twomey > President and CEO > ICANN > > Members > (In alphabetical order) > > Pankaj Agrawala > Joint Secretary, Communication and Information Technology Ministry, India > > Mohammed El Bashir > Chairman , Sudan Internet Society > > Erin Chen > Internet Engineer, TWNIC > > Alex Corenthin > Departement Genie Informatique, Ecole Superieure Polytechnique > > Mark Davis > President, Unicode Consortium and Chief SW Globalization Architect, IBM > > Michael Everson > CEO, Evertype > > Patrik Fältström > Member, Internet Architecture Board and Corporate Consulting Engineer, > Cisco Systems > > Mansour Farah > Senior Information Technology Officer, United Nations Economic and Social > Commission for Western Asia > > Khaled Fattal > Chairman and CEO, Multilingual Internet Names Consortium (MINC) > > Hirofumi Hotta > Director, Japan Registry Service Co., Ltd. (JPRS) > > Pat Kane > Senior Product Manager, Verisign > > Cary Karp > President and CEO, MuseDoma > > Cedarampattu (Ram) Mohan > Vice President, Business Operations, Afilias > > Kraisom Pronsuthe > Former permanent secretary, Information and Communication Technology > Ministry, Thailand > > Imad Sabouni > General Manager, Syrian Telecom > > Michel Suignard > Microsoft > > James Woods > Product Manager – Domains, Tucows > > Hong Xue > Asia/Australia/Pacific Region, ALAC > > Objectives of the Committee > > 1. Ensure that the discussions on IDN within the ICANN community > contribute to the continued development of the name space. > 2. Ensure that such discussions promote the use of languages on the > Internet in a manner that guarantees the Internet’s continued stability > and interoperability. > 3. Strengthen inclusion, coordination, and collaboration of all > organizations involved in IDN discussions and the developing > implementation of multilingual domain name solutions. > 4. Ensure that frequent and timely discussions occur between different > organizations and stakeholders (technical, political, government, private > sector) on challenges in the successful implementation of IDNs in the DNS. > 5. Ensure appropriate evolution of the IDN guidelines, their > development into a Best Current Practices (BCP) document, and follow up > for its implementation into the DNS hierarchy and within TLDs. > > Committee Tasks > > Committee tasks are anticipated to change as IDN implementation matures. > The Committee’s broad representation will promote coordination of IDN > related work that takes place within and outside ICANN’s supporting > organizations, committees, and stakeholders. > > The diversity of member expertise will ensure that the Committee plays a > key role in the successful internationalization of the Internet and thus > ensures Internet access for all languages. > > Initially the Committee is tasked with identifying and proposing solutions > to the following main areas: > > 1. IDN TLD Challenges: The committee is tasked with analyzing the > challenges relating to the implementation of internationalized top level > domains and suggestions towards their resolution. > 2. IDN Technical Development Challenges: The committee is tasked with > providing the ICANN President (and staff) with a list of technical > barriers and opportunities to the continued development of IDNs and which > the community is expecting ICANN to handle or take part in handling. > 3. IDN Policy Challenges: The Committee is tasked with developing and > providing the ICANN President (and staff) with recommendations on how IDN > policy issues should be handled, the use of existing policy development > processes, and the definition of specific IDN policy processes. >

1 0

Fw: [DigAfrica] What lies ahead of WSIS - Panos wrap up piece.
by alice＠apc.org 30 Nov '05

30 Nov '05

From: "Murali Shanmugavelan" <Murali.Shanmugavelan(a)panos.org.uk> To: <DigAfrica(a)yahoogroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 6:31 PM Subject: [DigAfrica] What lies ahead of WSIS - Panos wrap up piece. > WSIS is over, but the debate has just begun > > This WSIS wrap up piece looks at what lies ahead of WSIS. The author > argues that building an inclusive information society will need civil > society to hold governments to account - and that the media has a > crucial role to play in ensuring this happens. > > > www.panos.org.uk/iwitness/summit/shanmugavelan.asp > > Thanks. > > > > > Dig Africa site welcomes you to join us at > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/Digafrica > > Also if you are interested to join a Swahili/English discussion group > click > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/kiswahili > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > a.. Visit your group "DigAfrica" on the web. > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > DigAfrica-unsubscribe(a)yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >

1 0

PRESENTATION OF RESULTS OF RESEARCH ON TELCOMS AND INTERNET ACTI VITY IN KENYA
by James Nguo 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

Dear KICTANet members, As mentioned during the Consumer Protection Consultative Meeting on 24th Oct 2005 at Jacaranda Hotel, I will be presenting the results of telcoms and internet activity here in Kenya. I take the pleasure to invite you all to this meeting. Please confirm your participation through <james(a)alin.or.ke> I have attached an invitation for your review Best wishes James Nguo Regional Director Arid Lands Information Network-Eastern Africa (ALIN-EA), P.O. Box 10098, 00100 G.P.O. Nairobi, Kenya, AAYMCA Building, Along State House Crescent, Off State House Avenue. Tel +254 20 2731557 Telefax +254 20 2737813 Cell Phone +254 -722-561006 Email: james(a)alin.or.ke Website: www.alin.or.ke ------------------------------------------------------------- Enriched livelihoods of the people in arid areas of Eastern Africa through targeted information support and facilitation of information exchange

2 1

meetings and ISP forum
by alice＠apc.org 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

Dear all I shall be away from Nairobi from Monday 28th November to December 10, 2005. I will be attending the ICANN meeting. kind regards Alice Wanjira National Coordinator, Catalysing Access to ICTs in Africa (CATIA) Association for Progressive Communications (APC) alice(a)apc.org http://www.apc.org http://www.catia.ws

1 0

WSIS Youth Caucus in Tunis
by constance georgina 26 Nov '05

26 Nov '05

Dear Friends, I hope you are well and in the best of spirits, for more information on the WSIS Youth Caucus RYNICS campaigns and presentations, and substantial positive contribution that we as young leaders made at WSIS Tunis last week, visit: www.wsisyouth.org, www.wsistunis2005.tn, (kenya) www.madeinkenya.org, http://projects.takingitglobal.org/wsisyouthkenya For youth caucus blogs (except those syndicated!) you can check out the events page too: http://events.takingitglobal.org/wsistunis/blog, Photos will also be uploaded soon here:http://events.takingitglobal.org/wsistunis/photos/ Get Informed! Get Involved! Bridge the Digital Divide! Kindest Regards Connie Constance Georgina Khaendi Walyaro Citron Wood President Oxfam International Youth Parliament (OIYP) Action Partner UNOY Peacebuilders Affiliate Global Youth Coalition on HIV/AIDS East Africa Focal Point XVI International AIDS Conference Scientific Programme Committee Member: Track A National WSIS Subcommittee Youth Representative WSIS Youth Caucus RYNICs (Kenya) National Campaign Coordinator 'youth building a peaceful, equitable and sustainable world' OIYP. --------------------------------- To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

1 0

WSIS Youth Caucus in Tunis
by constance georgina 26 Nov '05

26 Nov '05

Dear Friends, I hope you are well and in the best of spirits, for more information on the WSIS Youth Caucus RYNICS campaigns and presentations, and substantial positive contribution that we as young leaders made at WSIS Tunis last week, visit: www.wsisyouth.org, www.wsistunis2005.tn, (kenya) www.madeinkenya.org, http://projects.takingitglobal.org/wsisyouthkenya For youth caucus blogs (except those syndicated!) you can check out the events page too: http://events.takingitglobal.org/wsistunis/blog, Photos will also be uploaded soon here:http://events.takingitglobal.org/wsistunis/photos/ Get Informed! Get Involved! Bridge the Digital Divide! Kindest Regards Connie Constance Georgina Khaendi Walyaro Citron Wood President Oxfam International Youth Parliament (OIYP) Action Partner UNOY Peacebuilders Affiliate Global Youth Coalition on HIV/AIDS East Africa Focal Point XVI International AIDS Conference Scientific Programme Committee Member: Track A National WSIS Subcommittee Youth Representative WSIS Youth Caucus RYNICs (Kenya) National Campaign Coordinator 'youth building a peaceful, equitable and sustainable world' OIYP. --------------------------------- How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos

1 0

Fwd: [Kictanet] Internet (ISPs) Consumer Forum....
by John Walubengo 25 Nov '05

25 Nov '05

We have in the recent two weeks, witnessed this 'roller-coaster' phenomena that continues to unfold within our political and social circles... Can we however say that like the Italians, politics never affected us and we stayed focused and are therefore ready to host the above forum next week Thrs 1st Dec 2005 as planned? AITEC (Andrew), I wonder what is the state of the logistics (Invites, Adverts, Venue, etc) on this one? walu.

1 0

Fw: [governance] Assessment of WSIS Outcomes for Internet Governance
by alice＠apc.org 24 Nov '05

24 Nov '05

This analysis is currently available at www.IP3.gatech.edu . It should soon be available at www.InternetGovernance.org November 23, 2005 An Assessment of the WSIS-2/Tunis '05 Outcomes The outcomes of the Tunis World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) are significant -- and rather surprising. ICANN emerges from the summit both unchanged and significantly different. After WSIS it has a stronger claim to legitimacy. ICANN emerged unchanged, in that its institutional structures - most notably its mechanisms for political oversight - were not amended. ICANN continues to operate under the formal authority of a single government, the US. Such a unilateral globalization model is a novel arrangement, quite unlike what is used in other global sectors (e.g. telephony or communication satellites.) The US continues to exercise a kind of unipolar authority it does not have in physical space. But ICANN also emerges from WSIS radically different: it is now endowed with a greater degree of legitimacy. Over a period of four years the UN family of nations intensely scrutinized ICANN, Internet governance, and unilateral US oversight, and they came to a decision: they declined to change ICANN's structures. Whereas US control was previously the product of a unilateral assertion, it is now the outcome of a lengthy process of scrutiny by all nations. Thus ICANN's greatest weakeness - its lack of legitimacy and its related lack of support from governments around the world - is less after WSIS. From now on, governments that criticize ICANN are criticizing an arrangement that they themselves reviewed and left unchanged. The WSIS decision cannot really be called an endorsement of ICANN. The text nowhere mentions ICANN by name, and there is no real declaration of support. Still, the UN has decided not to act against the organization, and this collective inaction is the final word after years of debate. The Internet Governance Forum Another important WSIS outcome is the launch of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Two features characterize the IGF. First, it is a multi-stakeholder forum. Although a creation of the UN, the forum membership will include more than just UN member states; participating equally will be entities from the private sector and from civil society. Second, the forum has no concrete power. It is an advisory body. Its member will discuss and formulate collective recommendations, but those recommendations will not carry the weight of policy. Still, the forum could become powerful. A forum is a prerequisite for collective action at the global level, making possible communication, interest aggregation, bargaining, and decision. WSIS was itself a forum, and it made possible certain collective decisions of great political import. (For more on the functionality of forums see the article "Understanding WSIS" in the journal Information Technology and International Development.) If the new forum makes continued collective decision-making possible, it could be a powerful entity. Its recommendations could be formalized by national governments. Still one might ask, what is new about this forum? ICANN already has advisory committees for governments and for civil society members, and the private sector controls its board outright. Why create another mechanism for formulating advice? The answer is that this new forum will primarily have a policy focus. Whereas ICANN's bodies ostensibly focus on technical coordination, the IGF will focus on all issues of Internet governance. This dual arrangement formalizes the questionable division of Internet governance into two domains: ICANN's domain of technical coordination and the IGF's domain of public policy. It risks validating the inaccurate claim that ICANN is a purely technical body without policy-making content. Implications: ICANN and IGF In an earlier analysis entitled "ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law" I argued that ICANN needed a legislative mandate. It now has some of that. The Tunis documents are a major step in that direction. The locus of policy making will now shift. Fundamental disputes about ICANN's structures of policy-making have been settled (at least for now.) The next step is to work within those structures. WSIS defined two forums for policy making: ICANN, for matters of technical coordination, and the IGF, for everything else. In the short term, most Internet governance activity will switch to ICANN, where debates will occur within the ICANN structures. They will focus more on substantive issues relating to technical coordination. Of particular note is ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). The GAC is the forum where governments have the opportunity to look in on ICANN decision-making and offer their advice. It will likely become a much more important body - perhaps the most important body - in ICANN. At WSIS governments made it clear that they want a greater voice in ICANN decisions, and the GAC will be the vehicle for that. Thanks to WSIS governments now know a lot more about ICANN issues, so their participation should be more informed and effective. Civil society does not have a strong base within ICANN. The Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC) operates at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the multiple commercial constituencies. Even weaker is ICANN's At Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), which is a pale shadow of the earlier user representation on the board. Ever since business and technical interests eliminated elections, civil society participation has been constrained. Outside of ICANN, the Internet Society (ISOC) is not a reliable home for civil society. Since 2002 business interests control ISOC by virtue of having rewritten its bylaws in a manner similar to ICANN. ISOC, however, still claims to be a civil society organization. What user organizations are in ALAC are mostly sub-units of ISOC. In summary, the situation for civil society in the post-WSIS ICANN is a major source of concern. A top priority for civil society should be reforming ALAC. With ICANN confirmed as the one operational institution for global Internet governance, civil society should develop a more effective voice there. Investing in ALAC and NCUC is one way to achieve that. The second forum emerging from WSIS is the Internet Governance Forum. The IGF can be thought of as a continuation of the WSIS, since it provides a place for multistakeholder discussion of a very large number of issues. The key question here is whether governments embrace it. With GAC already established and offering a rich agenda, some governments may question the utility of a second advisory forum. Industry interests are likely to be cool to the IGF, since they have so much more influence in ICANN. Civil society, with its weak base in ICANN, may have the most at stake in the IGF, but they may not be able to make it succeed without the commitment of those other stakeholders. Conclusion Before WSIS ICANN was a sort of Frankenstein organization created in the basement of the US Department of Commerce. No formal delegation of authority from the US Congress authorized its exercise of public powers. Nor did its global elections give it legitimacy, since they were canceled before full implementation. Now ICANN can claim some degree of public authority. Many people may regret the UN's implicit endorsement of ICANN, but no one can easily dismiss the validity of the process. ICANN is the same but different. The next step in the policy process will be to work within its structures. There is one additional possibility, not mentioned above, that looms over Internet governance: technology re-design. With WSIS leaving ICANN in place, those dissatisfied with ICANN are likely to move away from a political strategy. Instead, they may see more promise in trying to eliminate the single root. One example in this trend is the Open Root Server Network (orsn.org) which is creating a parallel network of servers that are autonomous of ICANN. With such innovations in place, the power in controlling the authoritative root server is reduced. In the near future, it will be interesting to see how many groups propose technical innovations that effectively decentralize the root. References WSIS Decision: "Tunis Agenda for the Information Society," 15 November 2005, WSIS-05/TUNIS/DOC/6(Rev.1)-E "Understanding WSIS: An Institutional Analysis of the World Summit on the Information Society," Information Technology and International Development, published by MIT Press, 2005. "ICANN Reform: Establishing the Rule of Law," web published analysis. Articles can be found at www.InternetGovernance.org and www.IP3.gatech.edu. Author is Hans Klein, Associate Professor of Public Policy at Georgia Institute of Technology and Partner in the Internet Governance Project. The paper benefited from comments by Milton Mueller. ### -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > governance(a)lists.cpsr.org > https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance >

1 0