ITU and ICANN – a loveless forced marriage: ITU & ICANN in Cairo
(Apologies for cross posting) Hi all At the just ended ICANN meeting in Cairo, the ITU Secretary General spoke very provocatively about ICANN, ITU and the global IGF and the relationship/s or lack thereof. See his statement attached and below a press article on the same. best alice -------- Original Message -------- --------------------------------- http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/print/111914 7 November 2008, 12:30 ITU and ICANN – a loveless forced marriage ITU Secretary General Hamadoun Touré has called for better collaboration between the *International Telecommunication Union[1]* (ITU) and the *Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers[2]* (ICANN). "Our members have unnecessarily attacked and criticised each other and I think we should put an end to that," said Touré on Thursday at the 33rd ICANN meeting in Cairo. According to Touré, the two organisations need to get to know each other better and learn to love each other, as telecommunications and the internet are ultimately condemned to a "forced marriage". Despite the outstretched hand, the ITU Secretary General did not spare the criticism in his first appearance at an ICANN meeting. Touré made it clear to the assembled experts that he saw his organisation as playing the dominant role in the forced marriage and made his opinion of the other party clear – provocatively describing ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee as purely cosmetic. The depth of the chasm between the two – the UN organisation, which has its roots in the telecommunications world, and the quasi-internet-regulator ICANN – was stressed by a series of further statements in the half-hour talk given by the head of the ITU. Touré repeatedly spoke of the "war" between the two organisations. According to Touré, who was elected in 2006, "The best way to win a war, is to prevent it." In the course of his 'marriage proposal', he referred extensively to the ITU's outstanding role. Key topics for his organisation, he noted, include the internationalisation of domains, something with which ICANN is currently engaged, the *transition to IPv6[3]*, standardisation for the all-IP *Next Generation Network[4]* (NGN), cyber-security, the fight against online terrorism and child protection online. Touré rejected concerns that the ITU was appointing itself as global regulator of internet resources and processes, "The ITU has clear boundaries. We do not perform the operative business." However, he underlined the organisation's demand, set out in its *Cybersecurity Agenda[5]*, to be responsible for a global framework in the fight against online terrorism and criminality. He also defended the controversial *IP traceback[6]* standard proposal. "There is not one country which isn't doing it, it's just that each country is doing it differently," said Touré. Touré also rejected criticism that the ITU operates behind closed doors. He stated that the organisation has around 700 sector members from the telecommunications industry and also admits NGOs as members. Touré also praised the ITU's openness – a nod to the *World Summit on the Information Society[7]* (WSIS). The summit, organised under ITU auspices, is, according to Touré, the first UN summit at which civil society has also been invited to sit at the table, rather than demonstrating outside. In the same breath, Touré expressed strong criticism of the *Internet Governance Forum[8]* (IGF), which was called into being by the WSIS, "I am personally of the opinion that the IGF is continuously going round in circles and avoiding issues – it is becoming more and more a waste of time." Therefore, the ITU is planning a global forum for internet policy next year as a rival event. Touré also fired a further undiplomatic broadside at the work performed by governments within ICANN. "The Governmental Advisory Committee is ICANN's weak point," said Touré. His criticism was directed at the advisory function of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) in developing rules for the domain name system. "If someone gives me advice, I am free to take it or leave it." The ICANN's GAC is therefore nothing more than "cosmetic", noted Touré forthrightly. In a short statement following Touré's speech, the Brazilian government representative on the GAC demanded, in the name of his and the Argentinian government, the "strengthening of the GAC". Latvian diplomat Janis Karklins, re-elected as GAC chairman, by contrast noted that the ITU and ICANN operated according to very different political models, "From the viewpoint of an international organisation, the ICANN model may appear weak, because governments are merely advisory, whilst in an international organisation they run the show." ICANN is, he opined, based on the novel idea of collaboration between interested parties. He noted that both models have their advantages and disadvantages, and that governments need to learn to operate within both models. (/Monika Ermert/) (*lghp[9]*) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *URL of this Article:* http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111914 *Links in this Article:* [1] http://www.itu.int/ [2] http://www.icann.org [3] http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/OECD-member-states-throw-their-weight-beh... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Networking [5] http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/cybersecurity/gca/ [6] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10040152-38.html [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSIS [8] http://www.intgovforum.org/ [9] mailto:lghp@heise-online.co.uk ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance@lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
<excerpts> [ITU]-It has 191 member states and 700 private companies, non-governmental organizations, and civil society that are members of the union. Not many people know that. .... I personally believe that the IGF is just going around and around, avoiding the topics, and becomes sometimes a waste of time. We need to address issues frankly and try to solve them. .... During the WSIS process, there were long debates on Internet governance. I was telling to many people from developing countries who were fighting for Internet governance: "Before you get the governance, get the Internet first. It has been alleged in some corners of the ITU that ITU wishes to govern the Internet. And I have specifically said that I categorically deny that. And I say today again to you, it is not the case. My intention as Secretary-General of ITU is not to govern the Internet. <excerpt> Who are the Civil Society organisations in ITU? Supposing ITU and ICANN agreed the way forward, What would be the fate of IGF expert Civil Society, bearing in mind said within the ITU? Would they again strike outside meetings to become relevant? Agreed, our fundamental problem remains access (affordable and equitable). It is what we ought to focus on addressing the most. Reassuring to note the intention is not to "take over" the Internet and its affiliate and working institutions;) The vast energies and development resources directed at Internet governance politics should be directed into building more infrastructure, especially rural community -based access initiatives. East African regulators should facilitate this to happen!! rgds, Alex On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:41 PM, alice <alice@apc.org> wrote:
(Apologies for cross posting)
Hi all At the just ended ICANN meeting in Cairo, the ITU Secretary General spoke very provocatively about ICANN, ITU and the global IGF and the relationship/s or lack thereof. See his statement attached and below a press article on the same.
best alice
-------- Original Message --------
--------------------------------- http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/print/111914
7 November 2008, 12:30
ITU and ICANN – a loveless forced marriage
ITU Secretary General Hamadoun Touré has called for better collaboration between the *International Telecommunication Union[1]* (ITU) and the *Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers[2]* (ICANN). "Our members have unnecessarily attacked and criticised each other and I think we should put an end to that," said Touré on Thursday at the 33rd ICANN meeting in Cairo. According to Touré, the two organisations need to get to know each other better and learn to love each other, as telecommunications and the internet are ultimately condemned to a "forced marriage".
Despite the outstretched hand, the ITU Secretary General did not spare the criticism in his first appearance at an ICANN meeting. Touré made it clear to the assembled experts that he saw his organisation as playing the dominant role in the forced marriage and made his opinion of the other party clear – provocatively describing ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee as purely cosmetic.
The depth of the chasm between the two – the UN organisation, which has its roots in the telecommunications world, and the quasi-internet-regulator ICANN – was stressed by a series of further statements in the half-hour talk given by the head of the ITU. Touré repeatedly spoke of the "war" between the two organisations. According to Touré, who was elected in 2006, "The best way to win a war, is to prevent it."
In the course of his 'marriage proposal', he referred extensively to the ITU's outstanding role. Key topics for his organisation, he noted, include the internationalisation of domains, something with which ICANN is currently engaged, the *transition to IPv6[3]*, standardisation for the all-IP *Next Generation Network[4]* (NGN), cyber-security, the fight against online terrorism and child protection online.
Touré rejected concerns that the ITU was appointing itself as global regulator of internet resources and processes, "The ITU has clear boundaries. We do not perform the operative business." However, he underlined the organisation's demand, set out in its *Cybersecurity Agenda[5]*, to be responsible for a global framework in the fight against online terrorism and criminality. He also defended the controversial *IP traceback[6]* standard proposal. "There is not one country which isn't doing it, it's just that each country is doing it differently," said Touré.
Touré also rejected criticism that the ITU operates behind closed doors. He stated that the organisation has around 700 sector members from the telecommunications industry and also admits NGOs as members. Touré also praised the ITU's openness – a nod to the *World Summit on the Information Society[7]* (WSIS). The summit, organised under ITU auspices, is, according to Touré, the first UN summit at which civil society has also been invited to sit at the table, rather than demonstrating outside.
In the same breath, Touré expressed strong criticism of the *Internet Governance Forum[8]* (IGF), which was called into being by the WSIS, "I am personally of the opinion that the IGF is continuously going round in circles and avoiding issues – it is becoming more and more a waste of time." Therefore, the ITU is planning a global forum for internet policy next year as a rival event.
Touré also fired a further undiplomatic broadside at the work performed by governments within ICANN. "The Governmental Advisory Committee is ICANN's weak point," said Touré. His criticism was directed at the advisory function of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) in developing rules for the domain name system. "If someone gives me advice, I am free to take it or leave it." The ICANN's GAC is therefore nothing more than "cosmetic", noted Touré forthrightly.
In a short statement following Touré's speech, the Brazilian government representative on the GAC demanded, in the name of his and the Argentinian government, the "strengthening of the GAC". Latvian diplomat Janis Karklins, re-elected as GAC chairman, by contrast noted that the ITU and ICANN operated according to very different political models, "From the viewpoint of an international organisation, the ICANN model may appear weak, because governments are merely advisory, whilst in an international organisation they run the show." ICANN is, he opined, based on the novel idea of collaboration between interested parties. He noted that both models have their advantages and disadvantages, and that governments need to learn to operate within both models.
(/Monika Ermert/)
(*lghp[9]*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*URL of this Article:* http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111914
*Links in this Article:* [1] http://www.itu.int/ [2] http://www.icann.org [3] http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/OECD-member-states-throw-their-weight-beh... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Networking [5] http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/cybersecurity/gca/ [6] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10040152-38.html [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSIS [8] http://www.intgovforum.org/ [9] mailto:lghp@heise-online.co.uk
____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance@lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org
For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
This message was sent to: alexgakuru.lists@gmail.com Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alexgakuru.lists%40gmai...
But I do not agree on proposed "government-heaviness": - cite: Last, but not least, I should just tell you that another important issue that the ITU is working on today is the trace-back issue, which is also controversial. And we hope to discuss it with anyone who has a problem with trace-back issues. We will never counter terrorism if we don't have a harmonized way of tracing back the IP address. This does not take away individual privacy or private information, but you have to track criminals and terrorists down. And I don't know one country in the world where they have Internet where they are not doing that, to be frank here. But we have to do it in a harmonized and coordinated way. Unfortunately, the criminals are very well organized. And they are working now, as we are talking. We need to tackle them. -end cite My comments: One of the most common responses of those unconcerned about government surveillance or privacy invasions is 'I've got nothing to hide.' According to the 'nothing to hide' argument, there is no threat to privacy unless the government uncovers unlawful activity, in which case a person has no legitimate justification to claim that it remain private. The 'nothing to hide' argument is quite prevalent. Responding to this argument in a way that registers with people in the general public is 'I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy. Professor Daniel Solove takes on the 'nothing to hide' <http://ssrn.com/abstract=998565> argument and exposes its faulty underpinnings." At the base of the fallacy, as Bruce Schneier has notes, is the "faulty premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. The nothing to hide argument is one of the primary arguments made when balancing privacy against security. In its most compelling form, it is an argument that the privacy interest is generally minimal to trivial, thus making the balance against security concerns a foreordained victory for security. Sometimes the nothing to hide argument is posed as a question: "If you have nothing to hide, then what do you have to fear?" Others ask: "If you aren't doing anything wrong, then what do you have to hide?" Thomas Jefferson once said, "The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive" and "You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong no matter who does it or who says it," added Malcolm X. ends On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Gakuru Alex <alexgakuru.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
<excerpts> [ITU]-It has 191 member states and 700 private companies, non-governmental organizations, and civil society that are members of the union. Not many people know that. .... I personally believe that the IGF is just going around and around, avoiding the topics, and becomes sometimes a waste of time. We need to address issues frankly and try to solve them. .... During the WSIS process, there were long debates on Internet governance. I was telling to many people from developing countries who were fighting for Internet governance: "Before you get the governance, get the Internet first.
It has been alleged in some corners of the ITU that ITU wishes to govern the Internet. And I have specifically said that I categorically deny that. And I say today again to you, it is not the case. My intention as Secretary-General of ITU is not to govern the Internet.
<excerpt>
Who are the Civil Society organisations in ITU? Supposing ITU and ICANN agreed the way forward, What would be the fate of IGF expert Civil Society, bearing in mind said within the ITU? Would they again strike outside meetings to become relevant?
Agreed, our fundamental problem remains access (affordable and equitable). It is what we ought to focus on addressing the most.
Reassuring to note the intention is not to "take over" the Internet and its affiliate and working institutions;) The vast energies and development resources directed at Internet governance politics should be directed into building more infrastructure, especially rural community -based access initiatives. East African regulators should facilitate this to happen!!
rgds,
Alex
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:41 PM, alice <alice@apc.org> wrote:
(Apologies for cross posting)
Hi all At the just ended ICANN meeting in Cairo, the ITU Secretary General spoke very provocatively about ICANN, ITU and the global IGF and the relationship/s or lack thereof. See his statement attached and below a press article on the same.
best alice
-------- Original Message --------
--------------------------------- http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/print/111914
7 November 2008, 12:30
ITU and ICANN – a loveless forced marriage
ITU Secretary General Hamadoun Touré has called for better collaboration between the *International Telecommunication Union[1]* (ITU) and the *Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers[2]* (ICANN). "Our members have unnecessarily attacked and criticised each other and I think we should put an end to that," said Touré on Thursday at the 33rd ICANN meeting in Cairo. According to Touré, the two organisations need to get to know each other better and learn to love each other, as telecommunications and the internet are ultimately condemned to a "forced marriage".
Despite the outstretched hand, the ITU Secretary General did not spare the criticism in his first appearance at an ICANN meeting. Touré made it clear to the assembled experts that he saw his organisation as playing the dominant role in the forced marriage and made his opinion of the other party clear – provocatively describing ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee as purely cosmetic.
The depth of the chasm between the two – the UN organisation, which has its roots in the telecommunications world, and the quasi-internet-regulator ICANN – was stressed by a series of further statements in the half-hour talk given by the head of the ITU. Touré repeatedly spoke of the "war" between the two organisations. According to Touré, who was elected in 2006, "The best way to win a war, is to prevent it."
In the course of his 'marriage proposal', he referred extensively to the ITU's outstanding role. Key topics for his organisation, he noted, include the internationalisation of domains, something with which ICANN is currently engaged, the *transition to IPv6[3]*, standardisation for the all-IP *Next Generation Network[4]* (NGN), cyber-security, the fight against online terrorism and child protection online.
Touré rejected concerns that the ITU was appointing itself as global regulator of internet resources and processes, "The ITU has clear boundaries. We do not perform the operative business." However, he underlined the organisation's demand, set out in its *Cybersecurity Agenda[5]*, to be responsible for a global framework in the fight against online terrorism and criminality. He also defended the controversial *IP traceback[6]* standard proposal. "There is not one country which isn't doing it, it's just that each country is doing it differently," said Touré.
Touré also rejected criticism that the ITU operates behind closed doors. He stated that the organisation has around 700 sector members from the telecommunications industry and also admits NGOs as members. Touré also praised the ITU's openness – a nod to the *World Summit on the Information Society[7]* (WSIS). The summit, organised under ITU auspices, is, according to Touré, the first UN summit at which civil society has also been invited to sit at the table, rather than demonstrating outside.
In the same breath, Touré expressed strong criticism of the *Internet Governance Forum[8]* (IGF), which was called into being by the WSIS, "I am personally of the opinion that the IGF is continuously going round in circles and avoiding issues – it is becoming more and more a waste of time." Therefore, the ITU is planning a global forum for internet policy next year as a rival event.
Touré also fired a further undiplomatic broadside at the work performed by governments within ICANN. "The Governmental Advisory Committee is ICANN's weak point," said Touré. His criticism was directed at the advisory function of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) in developing rules for the domain name system. "If someone gives me advice, I am free to take it or leave it." The ICANN's GAC is therefore nothing more than "cosmetic", noted Touré forthrightly.
In a short statement following Touré's speech, the Brazilian government representative on the GAC demanded, in the name of his and the Argentinian government, the "strengthening of the GAC". Latvian diplomat Janis Karklins, re-elected as GAC chairman, by contrast noted that the ITU and ICANN operated according to very different political models, "From the viewpoint of an international organisation, the ICANN model may appear weak, because governments are merely advisory, whilst in an international organisation they run the show." ICANN is, he opined, based on the novel idea of collaboration between interested parties. He noted that both models have their advantages and disadvantages, and that governments need to learn to operate within both models.
(/Monika Ermert/)
(*lghp[9]*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*URL of this Article:* http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111914
*Links in this Article:* [1] http://www.itu.int/ [2] http://www.icann.org [3] http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/OECD-member-states-throw-their-weight-beh... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Networking [5] http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/cybersecurity/gca/ [6] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10040152-38.html [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSIS [8] http://www.intgovforum.org/ [9] mailto:lghp@heise-online.co.uk
____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance@lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org
For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
This message was sent to: alexgakuru.lists@gmail.com Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/alexgakuru.lists%40gmai...
Interesting, but not necessarily new comments from the SG. I think attention needs to be paid as this could be a pointer to the status of the IG debate in two years time when then the IGF mandate from Tunis comes to an end. He is right in his comments about the efficacy of the IGF. It was meant to be a toothless bulldog all along. The more substative proposals from Château de Bossey did not pass through the Tunis mincer. So the IGF, being a toothless talkshop, was left with the hope that its deliberations and outcomes would act as uptakes by the "implementing agencies" depending to the subject from the broad IG definition. Personally I have not seen any specific uptakes since Athens, at least not by ICANN. I am not even aware of a "linking mechanism" between the IGF and the impelementing mechanisms. Is there any "decision" or recommendation that was reached in Athens or Rio that has impacted on global IG? Maybe Marcus Kummer will elucidate while he is in Nairobi. As for GAC again the SG is right. The idea of GAC seems right when viewed as an element of multi-stakeholder governance. But GAC is not the way most governments operate. I think most governments would prefer some direct contribution in the decision-making of the ICANN Board, rather than just offering advice. Waudo On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 20:41:20 +0300, "alice" <alice@apc.org> said:
(Apologies for cross posting)
Hi all At the just ended ICANN meeting in Cairo, the ITU Secretary General spoke very provocatively about ICANN, ITU and the global IGF and the relationship/s or lack thereof. See his statement attached and below a press article on the same.
best alice
-------- Original Message --------
--------------------------------- http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/print/111914
7 November 2008, 12:30
ITU and ICANN – a loveless forced marriage
ITU Secretary General Hamadoun Touré has called for better collaboration between the *International Telecommunication Union[1]* (ITU) and the *Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers[2]* (ICANN). "Our members have unnecessarily attacked and criticised each other and I think we should put an end to that," said Touré on Thursday at the 33rd ICANN meeting in Cairo. According to Touré, the two organisations need to get to know each other better and learn to love each other, as telecommunications and the internet are ultimately condemned to a "forced marriage".
Despite the outstretched hand, the ITU Secretary General did not spare the criticism in his first appearance at an ICANN meeting. Touré made it clear to the assembled experts that he saw his organisation as playing the dominant role in the forced marriage and made his opinion of the other party clear – provocatively describing ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee as purely cosmetic.
The depth of the chasm between the two – the UN organisation, which has its roots in the telecommunications world, and the quasi-internet-regulator ICANN – was stressed by a series of further statements in the half-hour talk given by the head of the ITU. Touré repeatedly spoke of the "war" between the two organisations. According to Touré, who was elected in 2006, "The best way to win a war, is to prevent it."
In the course of his 'marriage proposal', he referred extensively to the ITU's outstanding role. Key topics for his organisation, he noted, include the internationalisation of domains, something with which ICANN is currently engaged, the *transition to IPv6[3]*, standardisation for the all-IP *Next Generation Network[4]* (NGN), cyber-security, the fight against online terrorism and child protection online.
Touré rejected concerns that the ITU was appointing itself as global regulator of internet resources and processes, "The ITU has clear boundaries. We do not perform the operative business." However, he underlined the organisation's demand, set out in its *Cybersecurity Agenda[5]*, to be responsible for a global framework in the fight against online terrorism and criminality. He also defended the controversial *IP traceback[6]* standard proposal. "There is not one country which isn't doing it, it's just that each country is doing it differently," said Touré.
Touré also rejected criticism that the ITU operates behind closed doors. He stated that the organisation has around 700 sector members from the telecommunications industry and also admits NGOs as members. Touré also praised the ITU's openness – a nod to the *World Summit on the Information Society[7]* (WSIS). The summit, organised under ITU auspices, is, according to Touré, the first UN summit at which civil society has also been invited to sit at the table, rather than demonstrating outside.
In the same breath, Touré expressed strong criticism of the *Internet Governance Forum[8]* (IGF), which was called into being by the WSIS, "I am personally of the opinion that the IGF is continuously going round in circles and avoiding issues – it is becoming more and more a waste of time." Therefore, the ITU is planning a global forum for internet policy next year as a rival event.
Touré also fired a further undiplomatic broadside at the work performed by governments within ICANN. "The Governmental Advisory Committee is ICANN's weak point," said Touré. His criticism was directed at the advisory function of the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) in developing rules for the domain name system. "If someone gives me advice, I am free to take it or leave it." The ICANN's GAC is therefore nothing more than "cosmetic", noted Touré forthrightly.
In a short statement following Touré's speech, the Brazilian government representative on the GAC demanded, in the name of his and the Argentinian government, the "strengthening of the GAC". Latvian diplomat Janis Karklins, re-elected as GAC chairman, by contrast noted that the ITU and ICANN operated according to very different political models, "From the viewpoint of an international organisation, the ICANN model may appear weak, because governments are merely advisory, whilst in an international organisation they run the show." ICANN is, he opined, based on the novel idea of collaboration between interested parties. He noted that both models have their advantages and disadvantages, and that governments need to learn to operate within both models.
(/Monika Ermert/)
(*lghp[9]*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*URL of this Article:* http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/111914
*Links in this Article:* [1] http://www.itu.int/ [2] http://www.icann.org [3] http://www.heise-online.co.uk/news/OECD-member-states-throw-their-weight-beh... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Networking [5] http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/cybersecurity/gca/ [6] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10040152-38.html [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSIS [8] http://www.intgovforum.org/ [9] mailto:lghp@heise-online.co.uk
Men trip not not mountains, the stumble on stones - Chinese Proverb
participants (3)
-
alice -
Gakuru Alex -
waudo siganga