Sylvia, All - Let's debate all the comments made on Thursday. Sometimes emails are not the best way to debate and to argue opinions and comments. Like Marika said, we have no intention to come to a consensus now, we're only trying to define a corridor of options and scenarios based on your inputs. Looking forward to our call on Thursday, Erika Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 22, 2017, at 5:22 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Sylvia, I’m sure the co-chairs will respond to your message as well but I can assure you that we are not at the stage of a consensus call. As the work plan outlines, a formal consensus call is only expected to happen at the end of the CCWG’s deliberations, prior to the publication of the Initial Report. The objective of our phase two deliberations is to achieve preliminary agreement on the charter questions that were identified as needing at least preliminary resolution prior to moving to the next phase, but as there are many interdependencies, a formal consensus call could only be held once recommendations have been formulated for all charter questions.
The mind map is an attempt to further distill the feedback of the survey into a proposed approach with regards to determining the overall objective of fund allocation. The survey showed a clear preference for 4 objectives identified, but at the same time, some pointed out that not all might necessarily be objectives but more priorities. This is what the thinking was behind the mind map. The change from Internet to the Internet’s unique identifier systems was to align it with the language that is used in ICANN’s mission. As also noted below, everyone is encouraged to share proposed changes /edits with the mailing list so that these can be reviewed and discussed during the upcoming meeting.
Best regards,
Marika
On 8/21/17, 20:32, "ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Sylvia Cadena" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of sylvia@apnic.net> wrote:
I don’t think Carolina was asking to change it… the phrase use on the survey was referring to “the Internet” not “the DNS” and we provided answers and priorities based on that. Changing the text after the responses were provided will indeed change how many of us prioritize those answers and then the results of the survey are no longer reflecting what we thought about those objectives.
Once again, unless I missed something, I have not seen a call for consensus from the chairs, to decide that this is indeed the objective defined. If I missed on that one, I do not agree. At all, not only because it is too limiting, but because it was not what the group expressed as a preference on the survey.
On my email from yesterday, I asked for clarification about the purpose and use of those surveys. I do not thing that the mind maps are accurately reflecting people’s answers to the survey. It was very clear that the respondents were more in favor of support funding to go towards multiple objectives, not a single one. But it seems a decision about actually focusing on a single objective was made (?). It will be greatly appreciated if the use of the surveys is clarified as per my last request, and clearer input about how and when a decision needs to be made.
Regards,
Sylvia
————
** ISIF Asia call for grants proposals and award nominations is open until 30 August (midnight UTC) www.isif.asia <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.isif.asia_&d=DwIGaQ&... > - Get started and submit your application! **
Sylvia Cadena | sylvia@apnic.net | APNIC Foundation - Head of Programs | +10 GMT Brisbane, Australia | https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.apnic.foundation&d=D... <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.apnic.foundation_&d=... >
On 17/8/17, 11:50 pm, "ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of Marika Konings" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks, Carolina for your input. In order to address your first point, what about changing the reference of DNS to the Internet’s unique identifier systems which is also the term that is used in the ICANN Bylaws with regards to ICANN’s mission? Do note that with regards to the other topics such as capacity building, these are identified as possible priorities within the overall objective as currently structured. Please see an updated version attached for your review.
I do note that some CCWG members/participants expressed concern on the mailing list that the proposed overall objective was too limiting. Everyone is encouraged to share proposed changes /edits with the mailing list so that these can be reviewed and discussed during the next meeting.
I will also start a separate thread on the ‘open internet’ definition / reference to facilitate your input ahead of next week’s meeting.
Best regards,
Marika
On 8/10/17, 07:32, "ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of carolina" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org on behalf of carolina@lacnic.net> wrote:
Thank you Marika for putting this document together.
I second Alan that the over all objective is far too limiting and
contradictory with some of the sub-objectives that are listed under it.
My first concern is with limiting funds to DNS only. When the first
survey was circulated, I stated that "funding should go to projects with
a strong technical component aligned with ICANN's mission to improve the
stability, security, and global interoperability of the Internet.
Overall, in the fundraising scene, it is very hard to secure funding for
projects with a technical focus so the auction proceeds are an
opportunity to channel funding towards those type of initiatives dealing
with internet infrastructure challenges."
My answer was grouped under DNS development, but I actually meant
technical/infrastructure issues more broadly: that is, domains but also
numbers and standards. These are topics that are core to ICANN's mission
and are the ones, that in my view should get a higher percentage of
funding.
Second, and as it is becoming evident from the discussion about the
definition of Open Internet, I think this sub-objective cannot be
grouped under DNS Development... a solution may be for this to be a
second, independent objective as a whole.
I am also unsure about listing "for the benefit of capacity building and
underserved populations" as an objective. To me, we can state that we
will prioritize projects that work with underserved populations, we can
require that all projects include a component to build capacities, but
these are not objectives in it of themselves... they are more like
characteristics, activities or qualities of a project.
I look forward to today's conversation to delve into these matters a
little deeper.
Best regards,
Carolina
El 2017-08-10 08:53, elliot noss escribió:
this is the heart of the discussion. our CCWG, in my view, can and
should go outside of the mandate that is acceptable for the ICANN
organization and community itself.
to answer alan’s question (while not forking the thread), I was
using the word “effectively” in the sense of “for all intents
and purposes” i.e. by framing the mind map in this way we were
simply concluding on the narrow construction point. I hope that makes
sense and happy to explain more on the call.
EN
On Aug 10, 2017, at 4:20 AM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net>
wrote:
These topics are so far outside of ICANNs mandate that I really urge
caution here.
FROM: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org
[mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] ON BEHALF OF Arsène
Tungali
SENT: 10 August 2017 08:00
TO: judith@jhellerstein.com
CC: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
SUBJECT: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review -
Objective/priorities & examples mind map
Thanks Judith for raising a point i personally care so much about:
Internet shutdown! We are facing it currently in DRC and this is
very limiting for people to enjoy the Internet because they cannot
easily connect.
Open Internet for me means making sure no one is preventing, for any
reason be it, others to access and use the Internet.
Internet shutdown is just part of the whole concept of Internet
freedom violation which also includes censorship, surveillance,
content take downs, etc.
All of these practices are also refraining the deployement and
development of the DNS because if people cannot connect, then the
DNS has no reason to be spoken about. And that's ICANN!
In terms of activities (i tried hard to include them in my answers
to the survey but might have forgotten when i had to send it for the
2nd time):
- capacity building to help citizens know how to circumvent Internet
shutdown, how to behave in cases of surveillance (use of encryption
tools for example),
- capacity building in ICT policy to support stakeholders to
understand the policy dvpmt process and be in a position to
challenge policies that are not internet freedom friendly,
- digital security trainings,
- etc
The concept of open Internet is very broad, we might not be able to
limit it scope but we can agree on a broader definition(which
includes net neutrality as well as the aspect of internet freedom)
and then judge projects based on the fact that they fit into this
broad definition or not. Which will not be an easy task!
For me, Net neutrality (being able to access the whole of the
Internet, at all time and by anyone) is somehow related to internet
freedom (because when it is violated, only those who know how to
circumvent will be be able to connect).
Hope these help. Happy to expand if need be.
I would like to send my apologies once again if i am not able to
join today's call. As you know, we have issues with Internet outta
here!!
Regards,
Arsene
-----------------
Arsène Tungali,
about.me/ArseneTungali [3]
+243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos)
On Aug 10, 2017, at 5:01 AM, Judith Hellerstein
<judith@jhellerstein.com> wrote:
HI All,
I do like the mind map as it captures the capacity building
activities that were discussed. As for the definition of Open
Internet, I recall we discussed the following definitions or
qualifications of the phrase. During the call I had defined Open
Internet as standards based, adhering to the W3C guidelines and
standards. It means that the network must be inter-operable and
accessible.
I also see an Open Internet as being more inclusive it is a network
that is stable, scalable, agile, secure, profitable, sustainable and
ultimately equitable. An open Internet provides the ability for
civil society groups, indigenous communities and others to take an
active part in the network.
However, I also see the term Open Internet as encompassing a bit
more such as making sure that the Internet is accessible to everyone
and this also speaks of capacity building to avoid Internet
shutdowns. Internet Shut downs close down the Internet and we want
to make the Internet as Open as possible
Looking forward to the call tomorrow
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________
Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com [1]
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ [2]
Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 8/7/2017 4:32 AM, Marika Konings wrote:
Dear All,
Per the discussion during the last CCWG meeting, staff has worked
with the co-chairs to develop the attached mind map which aims to
regroup the objectives based on the survey results as well as the
subsequent discussions. Note that:
* As a result of this regrouping some objectives have been excluded
as specific priorities but one could envision how projects that may
focus on some of those areas could also fit within the current
identified objective and priorities.
* The mind map flags that further work will be needed to define or
explain the term ‘Open Internet’.
* As a number of you indicated in response to the survey, the topic
of auction proceeds cannot be considered as an objective of fund
allocation and as such will need to be considered separately. It
will be up to the CCWG to determine whether that is a discussion
that needs to be held now or whether it can be parked for a later
date.
* The mind map also aims to cluster a number of examples along the
lines of the objective & priorities identified that have been
suggested in response to the survey that seem to provide sufficient
detail to allow for an evaluation of whether or not the proposed
example is consistent with ICANN’s mission. Note that this
evaluation will still need to take place.
You are encouraged to provide your feedback on the proposed
regrouping of objectives/priorities as well as the clustering of
examples ahead of the next meeting of the CCWG which has been
scheduled for Thursday 10 August at 14.00 UTC.
Best regards,
Marika
_MARIKA KONINGS_
_Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) _
_Email: marika.konings@icann.org _
_ _
_Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO_
_Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses [4]
and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages [5]. _
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
Links:
------
[1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jhellerstein.com_&d=...
[2] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jhel...
[3] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__about.me_ArseneTungali&d...
[4] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__learn.icann.org_courses_...
[5]
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_gns...
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds