February 2008 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Resolution of the Board of Directors related to the proposed Summit
by Danny Younger Feb. 17, 2008

Feb. 17, 2008

Re: "Do I get it well?" Yes, Vittorio, you get it well. While other advisory bodies will be busy working, finalizing serious documents on issues that actually concern the community, performing analyses, making concrete recommendations and such, the at-large will be busy wasting a half million dollars of registrant monies on a giant group hug. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

8 17

Resolution of the Board of Directors related to the proposed Summit
by Nick Ashton-Hart Feb. 17, 2008

Feb. 17, 2008

Dear All: I wanted to ensure you saw this as soon as it became available. This is the text of the resolution related to the proposed Summit adopted unanimously at the public ICANN Board Meeting today in New Delhi ---- At-Large Structures Summit Whereas, the At-Large Advisory Committee is now supported by five Regional At-Large Organizations comprised of more than one hundred At- Large Structures. Whereas, members of the ALAC, RALOs, and At-Large Structures believe that a face-to-face meeting of at least one person from each of these structures in conjunction with an ICANN meeting would facilitate their coordination and work on ICANN policy matters relating to the interests of individual Internet users. Whereas, the ALAC and constituents have been planning for such a Summit since ICANN's San Juan meeting. Whereas, this would be a special event associated with the completion of the establishment of the At-Large Advisory Committee. Whereas, many of the ALAC At-Large structures are unable to cover the costs of sending a representative to an ICANN meeting for this purpose. Resolved (2008.02.15.12), the Board directs Staff to work with the ALAC to finalise a proposal that will fund one person from each At- Large Structure to attend the proposed Summit, for consideration as part of the 2008-2009 operating plan and budget process. --- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

5 8

Latest draft proposal online - Summit
by Thompson, Darlene Feb. 16, 2008

Feb. 16, 2008

Hi all, I am forwarding this e-mail to assist in the discussion between Vittorio and Wolfgang. If you click on the link in Nick's e-mail below, you will see a current copy of the DRAFT proposal. Might I emphasize DRAFT!!! LOL! This was done when we were still shooting for Paris, so now the budget is completely wrong. All in all, though, this document is the one that the WG has been working on and has been agreed to by the vast majority. I would like to draw your attention to the last paragraph in Section 2 (Rationale). It is there that the whole "repeat" issue is addressed. Maybe we need better wording? Not sure. Also, Danny - here are the budget figures as I promised them to you. If you can see any major failing in them, I would encourage you to let me know, offlist. Also, Vittorio - are you part of the WG? If not, maybe you should be as you seem to have a lot of good opinions that could be added to the mix. I say the last two things as this discussion should be held on the Summit WG list or privately so that we don't flood other people's e-mails who may not have such a keen interest in this matter as we do. Or am I wrong? Anyhoo - here it is for discussion purposes. Darlene ________________________________ From: summit-wg-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Thu 2/14/2008 5:49 AM To: Evan Leibovitch; Wendy Seltzer; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Vanda Scartezini Cc: summit-wg(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [Summit-wg] Latest draft proposal online Dear All: The version current as of today of the At-Large Summit is now online on the Documents page of the Summit Working Group Wiki. The link to the file is: https://st.icann.org/summit-wg/index.cgi/14%2002%202008%20Summit%20proposal… The URL for the documents page itself is: https://st.icann.org/summit-wg/index.cgi?documents -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Number of Rogue DNS Servers on the Rise. Is IAB/IANA/IETF partly responsible for spreading malware/spyware?
by Jeffrey A. Williams Feb. 16, 2008

Feb. 16, 2008

All, Where is ICANN or the IANA/IETF on all this? Hiding of course, and seeking a new hiding place in Geneva I suspect! And for good reason I suspect. Seems that ICANN organs, the IANA, the IETF and the IAB are at least partly responsible for spreading malware and spyware. See: http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=iana.org&token=05c0ad… http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=IETF.org&token=050033… http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=iab.org&token=054064e… Does this reflect a responsible organization or organizational leadership, i.e. ICANN? Doesn't seem so... It does strongly indicate that ICANN, the IETF, IAB, and the IANA badly need strong adult supervision, ergo the supervision of stakeholders/users and especially independent registrants and ISP's/IAP's. Yet the ICANN Board seemingly is blind to it's own, other very significant shortcomings. See: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/25/1433207&tid=95 http://www.physorg.com/news122304766.html Such denials are horribly inconsistent with documented fact. And as the article below indicates clearly ICANN and it's organs, the IANA, the IETF, and the IAB are setting a very bad example and perhaps a very dangerous one to boot! Further: Rogue DNS servers are an http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ifrgeDBfUGAvXtLH_vgVrKcm0s_wD8UPLR8O1 increasingly popular tool for scam artists, according to a new report. Their numbers are on the rise, in part because they're difficult for antivirus software to deal with. 'There are now approximately 68,000 rogue DNS servers across the Internet, The authenticity of the sites such servers redirect to varies greatly, from near-perfect copies to laughably bad, but the problem they represent is quite serious. Once an end user's computer has been modified to use a poisoned DNS server, the system can be directed to any fake web site the malware author feels like serving up.' Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Resolution of the Board of Directors related totheproposed Summit
by Jeffrey A. Williams Feb. 16, 2008

Feb. 16, 2008

JFC and all, Very good point on the travel expenses in your remarks below. However the rest of your remarks are simply nonsense. Bashing Danny on a personal level isn't reasonable. His previous remarks were valid all be them rather harshly expressed... However sometimes harsh wording is necessary in order to emphasize valid points... Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827 JFC Morfin wrote: > At 15:59 15/02/2008, Danny Younger wrote: > >Sorry, but this is a waste of money that will produce > >no beneficial results. Those that care make an effort > >to pay attention and manage to participate (as evinced > >by years of member participation in the GA that saw a > >subscriber list in excess of 1000 participants). None > >of them had to be spoon fed on the registrant's dime. > > Or blocked by Danny's lobbying against them at NCUC :-) Danny, we all > know you paid some of your travels as I did for all: shame on ICANN > for that. But you cannot oppose when ICANN improves. ALAC has not the > common duty you define as your lonely own. There are certainly other > ways to make ALAC work, but these are those ICANN lead to. You cannot > object for the ALAC demanding now, what you complained we had not for > so long. You cannot ALAC wishing to do more than it does and taking > the availble steps. No one demanded $ 7000 where the expence can be half of it. > Take care. > jfc > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

1 0

FYI, Are more IPC/RIAA ofacing increasing legal challanges: UK ISPs Want Copyright Holders to Pay if Users Sue
by Jeffrey A. Williams Feb. 15, 2008

Feb. 15, 2008

All, Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "After the recent draft legislation in the UK, which would create a 'three strikes' policy to cut off anyone accused of online piracy, the http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/12/anti_filesharing_paper_leak/ ISPs are asking for liability protection when users are wrongly identified. They're worried that when users are wrongly blamed for piracy, as has happened in several widely-reported investigations already, they will turn around and sue their ISP. The ISPs, of course, think that the record companies or whoever else wrongly identified the file sharers should be the ones to pay out any such judgments. The British Phonographic Industry, however, disagrees and wants the ISPs to simply use their Terms of Service to disconnect people. Apparently, that means they think that the ToS should be able to remove any legal recourse people might otherwise have against being misidentified. My notes: I believe the RIAA is facing a significant challenge here yet again. ToS's will not be held legally ethical and are not practical in addressing this sort of situation in many countries and doubtful even in the UK. It seems clear that certain elements within ICANN's IPC are creating disruption and uncertantity which has huge long term negitive effects on world wide IT sector economics. My guess is that the RIAA is changing it's focus to the UK and other EU nations as it has already lost significant creditability in the US due to significant and high profile legal defeats which are still mounting.. Hence whey we have called for the revocation of the RIAA's membership in the IPC. Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
by Roberto Gaetano Feb. 15, 2008

Feb. 15, 2008

Beau, So, I assume that you would be happy to have a constituency in the GNSO, like the Business Constituency, and only two people in the NomCom. Of course, no Liaison to the Board, at that point. That would match exactly the power of the BC. Is that the consensus? Thanks, Roberto _____ From: Brendler, Beau [mailto:Brenbe@consumer.org] Sent: Friday, 15 February 2008 09:48 To: Roberto Gaetano; Jacqueline Morris; alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs(a)yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2 In my opinion, if we don't get what we are asking for, there is not much point in having an ALAC. In answer to your question, I would rate the "power" of the individual users compared to the "power" of the business constituency, registrars, etc., as about a 1 compared to a 10. Beau Brendler _____ From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Roberto Gaetano Sent: Thu 2/14/2008 12:48 PM To: 'Jacqueline Morris'; alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs(a)yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2 I have a question. How would you rate the "power" of the individual users (via the ALAC) in the ICANN process compared, for instance, to the "power" of business users (via the Business Constituency)? Considering that the ICANN model is a multistakeholder model, where different stakeholder groups participate on equal footing, comparable stakeholder groups are supposed to have similar rights. I believe that, also considering the different reviews (GNSO, NomCom and ALAC) ongoing, you might better be careful in what you ask for, because you might get it. Cheers, Roberto > -----Original Message----- > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of > Jacqueline Morris > Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 21:35 > To: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs(a)yahoogroups.com > Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2 > > Fyi > Please comment. > Jacqueline > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg(a)web.de> > Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:20:14 +0430 > Subject: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2 > To: ALAC internal list <alac-internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> > > Dear folks, > > Here, the draft by the present drafting group members: > Annette, Beau, Wolf > > we stayed in the taj palace and come over to dinner now! ;-) > > see you soon > > best greetings > > annette > > > > Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA: > > As the JPA (between the US Government and ICANN) is under > Review, ALAC wishes to underline the unique opportunity the > occasion offers to realize the original goals that led to the > formation of ICANN. These include, inter alia, > acknowledgement of the international nature of ICANN, support > of the multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management > of ICANN, and the provision of viable and stable channels for > the involvement of individual Internet users in the ICANN > policy formation process. Measures must be implemented to > ensure non-discriminatory availability of ICANN/IANA services > as well as the opportunity for the involvement of global > individual users in the ICANN process. > > In its role as the voice of the individual Internet users, > ALAC firmly believes that the current multi-stakeholder > framework at ICANN should be further strengthened to allow > more effective involvement of end-users. The process to full > participation of individual users through the ALAC and its > Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs) is being undertaken > at this moment. There is, however, a lack of incentives for > the participants, especially a lack of direct involvement at > the decision-making levels of ICANN. Therefore, > > we believe ICANN should consider mechanisms for stronger user > participation, such as At-Large voting rights on the GNSO > council and the ICANN board. > > Alternative for the last sentence: > > [we think that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate > representation of individual users at the decision-making > levels of ICANN so that a real multi-stakeholder framework is > achieved.] > > In addition, we believe no government should have a > pre-eminent role in DNS management and exercise power over > database changes and root-server data. We suggest that an > institutional form should be found as soon as possible so > that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single > national legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency > and openness in the process of making any structural change > in the ICANN framework for the coming transition. > > > We are concerned that the successor oversight framework is > still not clear and ICANN needs to clarify the transitional > arrangements with regard to accountability and transparency > as well as to allow further definition and evolution of the > multi-stakeholder model of governance under which it operates. > > We need to know what replaces the JPA, which refers to "the > global participation of all stakeholders" and "mechanisms for > involvement of those affected by the ICANN policies." As the > Internet-using public is a key set of stakeholders affected > by ICANN's policies, it is critical, including for Internet > security and stability, that the organization be accountable > to the public and account effectively for its input. > > > Respectfully submitted, > > > > Chair > > At-Large Advisory Committee > > Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers >

2 1

Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
by Jacqueline Morris Feb. 15, 2008

Feb. 15, 2008

Fyi Please comment. Jacqueline ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg(a)web.de> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:20:14 +0430 Subject: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2 To: ALAC internal list <alac-internal(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Dear folks, Here, the draft by the present drafting group members: Annette, Beau, Wolf we stayed in the taj palace and come over to dinner now! ;-) see you soon best greetings annette Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA: As the JPA (between the US Government and ICANN) is under Review, ALAC wishes to underline the unique opportunity the occasion offers to realize the original goals that led to the formation of ICANN. These include, inter alia, acknowledgement of the international nature of ICANN, support of the multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management of ICANN, and the provision of viable and stable channels for the involvement of individual Internet users in the ICANN policy formation process. Measures must be implemented to ensure non-discriminatory availability of ICANN/IANA services as well as the opportunity for the involvement of global individual users in the ICANN process. In its role as the voice of the individual Internet users, ALAC firmly believes that the current multi-stakeholder framework at ICANN should be further strengthened to allow more effective involvement of end-users. The process to full participation of individual users through the ALAC and its Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs) is being undertaken at this moment. There is, however, a lack of incentives for the participants, especially a lack of direct involvement at the decision-making levels of ICANN. Therefore, we believe ICANN should consider mechanisms for stronger user participation, such as At-Large voting rights on the GNSO council and the ICANN board. Alternative for the last sentence: [we think that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate representation of individual users at the decision-making levels of ICANN so that a real multi-stakeholder framework is achieved.] In addition, we believe no government should have a pre-eminent role in DNS management and exercise power over database changes and root-server data. We suggest that an institutional form should be found as soon as possible so that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single national legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency and openness in the process of making any structural change in the ICANN framework for the coming transition. We are concerned that the successor oversight framework is still not clear and ICANN needs to clarify the transitional arrangements with regard to accountability and transparency as well as to allow further definition and evolution of the multi-stakeholder model of governance under which it operates. We need to know what replaces the JPA, which refers to "the global participation of all stakeholders" and "mechanisms for involvement of those affected by the ICANN policies." As the Internet-using public is a key set of stakeholders affected by ICANN's policies, it is critical, including for Internet security and stability, that the organization be accountable to the public and account effectively for its input. Respectfully submitted, Chair At-Large Advisory Committee Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

4 3

ICANN.org Announcement: Asia-Pacific Internet Users Big Part of ICANNs New Delhi Meeting
by Nick Ashton-Hart Feb. 15, 2008

Feb. 15, 2008

Asia-Pacific Internet Users Big Part of ICANN's New Delhi Meeting http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-14feb08.htm Ceremony recognizes Regional At-Large Organization, first Asia-Pacific At-Large General Assembly 14 February 2008 NEW DELHI, INDIA: Individual Internet users from Asia, Australia, and the Pacific Islands have direct input into the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, a fact recognized today with the ceremonial signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between ICANN and the Internet user groups who participate in the Asia-Pacific Regional At-Large Organization (APRALO). The APRALO conducted its first General Assembly as a part of ICANN's 31st International Public Meeting in New Delhi. They discussed issues that will affect Internet users throughout the region and the world. The Internet user groups who are a part of APRALO are incredibly diverse, and include users from India, Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and the United Arab Emirates. "Today's ceremony recognizes the ICANN community's success in creating a formal, global structure to help ensure ideas and feedback from individual Internet users around the world is heard in our policy processes," said Dr Paul Twomey, ICANN's President and CEO. "ICANN's work to introduce a process for applying for new top level domains – the part after the dot – especially those using the more than 100,000 characters from the languages of the world which do not use the Latin character set – will benefit from formal inputs through the Regional At-large Organizations worldwide. The Asia-Pacific RALO is a key contributor to this process." There are now more than 100 user groups taking part in ICANN's five Regional At-large Organizations, or RALOs, from the Asia-Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America, Europe, and Africa. APRALO was created on 30 March 2007 and has been informing the region's individual Internet users about ICANN activities and providing advice to ICANN on their behalf for nearly a year. The RALOs have direct input to ICANN, especially through the international At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC), which represents Internet users in ICANN and whose members are chosen largely by the RALOs. "ICANN's ongoing coordination of the domain name system, and its policy work, has a large impact on the Internet and the more than one billion people around the world who use it – and the billions more who should be able to use it," said Cheryl Langdon-Orr, ALAC Chair. "By bringing together Internet users from across the globe, the RALOs are at the heart of ensuring that users have a say on what's happening at ICANN." More information on the participation of individual Internet users in ICANN is available at http://alac.icann.org/ -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

[Fwd: Re: [ALAC-Internal] Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA]
by Jacqueline A.Morris Feb. 15, 2008

Feb. 15, 2008

Dear All, Please see the draft below of a proposed At Large statement on the JPA. Time is short - the deadline is tomorrow, but as much participation as possible is the At Large way, so please do what you can re comments. Jacqueline >> Annette Muehlberg wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> i think by replacing the last paragraph we could, wihtout dismissing other >> positions, reach a consensus. please have a look at the last alternative >> paragraph. >> >> warm greetings >> >> annette >> >> >> >> >> >> Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA: >> >> As the JPA (between the US Government and ICANN) is under Review, ALAC >> wishes to underline the unique opportunity the occasion offers to realize >> the original goals that led to the formation of ICANN. These include, inter >> alia, acknowledgement of the international nature of ICANN, support of the >> multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management of ICANN, and the >> provision of viable and stable channels for the involvement of individual >> Internet users in the ICANN policy formation process. Measures must be >> implemented to ensure non-discriminatory availability of ICANN/IANA services >> as well as the opportunity for the involvement of global individual users in >> the ICANN process. >> >> In its role as the voice of the individual Internet users, ALAC firmly >> believes that the current multi-stakeholder framework at ICANN should be >> further strengthened to allow more proactive involvement of end-users. The >> process to full participation of individual users through the ALAC/RALO >> (Regional At-Large Organization) mechanism is being undertaken at this >> moment. There is, however, a lack of incentives for the participants, >> especially a lack of direct involvement at the decision-making levels of >> ICANN. Therefore, we think that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate >> representation of individual users at the decision-making levels of ICANN so >> that a real multi-stakeholder framework is achieved. >> >> In addition, we believe that no government should have a pre-eminent role in >> DNS management and exercise power over database changes and root-server >> data. We suggest that an institutional form should be found as soon as >> possible so that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single >> national legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency and openness in >> the process of making any structural change in the ICANN framework for the >> coming transition. >> >> However, at this mid-term review phase, we do not believe the organization >> is ready to function without a similar accountability mechanism to the JPA >> in place. >> >> >> Alternative replacing the last paragraph: >> >> We are concerned that the successor oversight framework is still not clear >> and ICANN needs to clarify the transitional arrangements with regard to >> accountability and transparency as well as to allow further definition and >> evolution of the multi-stakeholder model of governance under which it >> operates. >> >> >> > > >

5 5