FYI, ----- Original Message ----- From: <shears@isoc.org> To: <chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 4:05 PM Subject: [Chapter-delegates] Update from WSIS - Monday 14 November

Dear all,

Please find below a report on the highlights from yesterday's Internet Governance sessions in Tunis.

Best,

Matthew

--------------------------------------------------------------

Sub-committee A on Internet Governance

The discussion opened with Canada giving a read-out

consensus that had been agreed the night before. As was expected the discussion quickly turned to oversight and new models after a number of statements related to ccTLDs and the role of government. The discussion turned to ICANN and the role of the GAC in

delegations suggesting that change was not moving fast or far enough. Other countries also suggested that new rules were needed for gTLDs, mentioning the XXX domain name issue. The Chair called the meeting to a close and suggested that he distribute a new Chair's

related to follow-up mechanisms. The paper was introduced in the afternoon after two presentations by ICANN, one from

from the Chair of the GAC addressing the proposed evolution of the GAC and its role in ICANN.

The Chair's paper (see link below) built on the Canadian group areas of consensus and also elaborated considerably on the Forum function, moving directly to a proposal for an Internet Governance Forum. There were a range of comments from delegations from outright support to immediate bracketing (not agreed) of significant portions of text. It was at this juncture that Australia, Canada and the United States indicated their concern with the role of the UN Secretary General in establishing the Forum and proposed that ISOC be considered in that capacity. Shortly thereafter the meeting was adjourned and split into

to address different parts of the Chair's text. Upon read-out of the working groups, and specifically the working group reviewing the Forum text, there appeared to be no consensus for ISOC's role, but this issue is not yet closed. We understand that comments supportive of ISOC's role in the Forum (rather than convener) were made by a number of delegations. Discussions continued but were characterized by significant bracketing of text. The meeting was adjourned and a new text was to be prepared for the following morning. It is not yet clear what the outcome of these discussions will be as much is still in play.

Additional information: there is a continuous effort to downplay the role of the existing players with the intent of marginalizing their role going forward. This position is usually accompanied by

on the points of particular, with a number of paper for the section the President and one three working groups the call for some need

for additional (government) oversight.

http://www.itu.int/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2125|2247|2246|2255

_______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org

http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates

__________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs