ICANN|ARCHIVES

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

ICANN MEETING
PUBLIC FORUM PART 1
SÃO PAULO, BRAZIL
MONDAY, 4 DECEMBER 2006.

>>VINT CERF: GOOD MORNING. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY BUT WE NEED TO GET STARTED. BOARD MEMBERS DO NOT NEED TO SIT AT THE TABLE. YOU CAN SIT DOWN IN THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE AS SOON AS THE PRESIDENT FINISHES HIS REPORT, THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE TO SIT DOWN ANYWAY TO BRING A PANEL UP, SO THERE'S NO POINT.

CAN WE HAVE THE DOORS, PLEASE.

LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO.

I'M GOING TO ASK PAUL TWOMEY TO MAKE HIS PRESIDENT'S REPORT THIS MORNING. AFTER HE FINISHES, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR QUESTIONS. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BRING TWO PANELS UP TO DISCUSS THE STRATEGIC PLANS FOR ICANN. SO THE BOARD WILL REMAIN ON THE AUDIENCE FLOOR FOR THIS MORNING UNTIL WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT PANEL DISCUSSION.

SO PAUL, ARE YOU READY? ALL RIGHT. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU, VINT.

AND GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY.

THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE HERE IN THE FRONT ROW, AND THROUGHOUT THE ROOM, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE PARTICULARLY TO NOTE THAT VENI MARKOVSKI, A MEMBER OF THE BOARD, IS JOINING US BY TELEPHONE, AND I WOULD PARTICULARLY LIKE TO WELCOME THE MOST RECENT ADDITION TO THE ICANN FAMILY, NINA MILENA MARKOVSKI. I UNDERSTAND ALREADY SHE IS A MEMBER OF THE ALAC. SHE'S, I THINK, THREE DAYS OLD, AND I WOULD LIKE TO PARTICULARLY ISSUE OR EXPRESS MY CONGRATULATIONS TO VENI AND ELANA ON THE BIRTH OF NINA.

CHAIRMAN, THIS IS A CHANGE OF FORMAT THAT WE ARE NOW TRYING TO PURSUE IN RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY FEEDBACK IN THE ORGANIZATION OF THESE MEETINGS. AND IN THAT CHANGE OF FORMAT, IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED AND WE'RE FOLLOWING NOW A PUBLIC FORUM ON MONDAY EARLY IN THE MEETING TO LET PEOPLE HEAR A LOT OF THESE PRESENTATIONS AND THEY CAN BE ABSORBED, WHICH MEANS IT'S LESS LIKELY OTHER DAYS LATER ON THAT WE REPEAT OURSELVES.

BUT ALSO, WOULD ALLOW US POSTING OF REPORTS.

SO THE REPORT I HAVE HERE IN POWERPOINT, I AM NOT GOING TO GO THOROUGH FULLY. I WILL ARRANGE FOR THAT TO BE POSTED AND I WOULD POINT OUT TO CONSTITUENCIES AND SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND MEMBERS OF CONSTITUENCIES THAT THEY DO GO TO THE WEB SITE AND HAVE A LOOK AT THEM.

SECONDLY, I'LL MAKE THE POINT, CHAIRMAN, HAVING SAID THAT AND BEEN ALLOCATED 20 MINUTES THIS MORNING I HAVE ALSO BEEN ASKED BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY FOR A LOT OF INPUT ON KEY THINGS. SO I WILL GO TO A LOT OF TOPICS IN PARTICULAR AND RUSH THROUGH IF I CAN.

THE AGENDA, WHICH WILL BE IN THIS PAPER, WHICH PEOPLE CAN FIND, INCLUDES THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE OPERATING PLAN. SOME MORE DETAIL ON THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT, SOME COMMENTS ON THE DOT COM AGREEMENT. SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN THE IANA FUNCTION. SOME COMMENTS ON IDNS, SOME COMMENTS ON POLICY DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES, SOME COMMENTS ON CCTLD ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS, ALAC, SOME OBSERVATIONS ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, AND REGIONAL LIAISONS. CONTINGENCY PLANNING AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVES.

I AM GOING TO TOUCH ON A FEW OF THESE TOPICS, SOME OF THEM IN PARTICULAR, AND I AM NOT GOING TO TALK TO OTHERS AND I WILL LEAVE IT FOR PEOPLE TO READ.

JUST QUICKLY, THEN, MOVING TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN, I WILL REMIND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE STRATEGIC PLAN ISOC AT THE MOMENT. IT TAKES PLACE THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE YEAR, AND WE EXPECT THE DRAFT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD AT THIS MEETING.

THE PAGE SHOWS THE -- WHERE YOU CAN FIND THE LINK FOR THE PLANNING PROCESS. AND THERE'S A LAYOUT THERE OF ALL OF THE CONSULTATION PROCESSES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE LEADING UP TO THIS.

I WOULD JUST REMIND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT CONSULTATIONS ARE TAKING PLACE IN FOUR LANGUAGES HERE IN SAO PAULO, BETWEEN THE 4TH AND THE 6TH, A FINAL REVISED PLAN WILL BE PUBLISHED ON THE 6TH, OUR FIRST CONSULTATIONS. THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC FORUM DISCUSSION ON THIS ON THE 7TH OF DECEMBER, AND IT WILL BE PRESENTED FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION ON THE 8TH OF DECEMBER.

SO I PARTICULARLY ASK MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE CONSULTATION, PUBLIC FORUMS, AND THE DRAFT IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE FOR PEOPLE TO REVIEW.

WE ARE HALFWAY THROUGH THE OPERATING PLAN FOR THIS YEAR. AND THE OPERATING PLAN IS SORT OF A ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN THAT DRAWS FROM THE STRATEGIC PLAN. IT'S COMPRISED OF A SERIES OF PROJECTS, EACH WHICH IS BACKED UP BY A CHARTER, A WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE AND A SCHEDULE.

AND EACH PROJECT IS LINKED TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVE. THERE IS SPECIFIC STAFFING AND DOLLARS AND BUDGETS AND OUTCOMES.

ALSO, BESIDES THE PROJECTS, THERE IS A BUSINESS-AS-USUAL ELEMENT OF WORK, SO IN SOME RESPECTS THE WAY WE THINK OPERATIONALLY ABOUT THE WORK BEING DONE, CERTAINLY BY THE ICANN STAFF BUT ALSO BROADER THAN THAT, IS PROJECT-BASED WORK DRIVEN BY THE OPERATIONAL PLAN, AND THEN IF YOU LIKE, BUSINESS-AN-USUAL WORK THAT'S BEEN UNDERTAKEN.

AND WE HAVE RECENTLY POSTED AN OPERATING PLAN STATUS DESCRIBING THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN THE FIRST FOUR AND ONE-HALF MONTHS INTO THE FISCAL YEAR. AGAIN, THE LINK IS AVAILABLE THERE. I WOULD DIRECT YOU TO IT.

SUMMARIZED, ACROSS ALL THE PROJECTS WE ARE ABOUT 33% COMPLETED AFTER 38% OF THIS YEAR. SO IT'S TRACKING ROUGHLY ACCORDING TO TIME. BUT THE OTHER MESSAGE I WOULD GIVE TO THE COMMUNITY IS WE HAVE SOMETHING LIKE 60, 63 PROJECTS THAT CAME OUT OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS FOR THE OPERATING PLAN. EVERYBODY -- I THINK I COULD APPROPRIATELY SAY EVERYBODY THINKS THEY ARE IMPORTANT BUT THEIR OWN PARTICULAR PROJECT FOR THEIR OWN PARTICULAR INTEREST THAT EVERYBODY ALWAYS THINKS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OTHERS. THE REALITY OF SIMPLY TRYING TO MANAGE THINGS AND MANAGE CAPACITY OF STAFF AND OTHERS IS THAT YOU HAVE TO PRIORITIZE. SO THERE IS SOME PRIORITIZATION OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT YOU WILL SEE IN THE REPORT.

AND I WOULD HAVE TO REPORT THAT I THINK SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, BECAUSE OF THAT AND BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS, SOME PROJECTS WILL CERTAINLY BLEED OVER INTO THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR.

BUT I WILL LEAVE PEOPLE TO LOOK AT THE OPERATING PLAN, AND THERE WILL BE MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS LATER THIS WEEK.

SINCE WE LAST MET IN A BIG MEETING LIKE THIS IN MARRAKECH, WE, ICANN, HAVE CONCLUDED A NEW JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. AND IT'S WORTH TALKING TO THAT IN SOME DETAIL BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT MILESTONE. ITS MOST SIGNIFICANT ASPECT IS THAT IT'S A COMMITMENT FROM ICANN AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TO CONTINUE THE TRANSITION OF THE COORDINATION OF THE TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS RELATING TO THE MANAGEMENT OF INTERNET DOMAIN NAME AND ADDRESSING SYSTEM TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR, TO PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO STRESS HERE IN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT, PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT IS A TERM THAT HAS BEEN INCORPORATED IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT'S POLICY ON THIS SINCE 1997-98. AND SO IT IS A PARTICULAR PHRASE THAT HAS A PARTICULAR HISTORICAL CONTEXT.

THOSE OF YOU WHO KNEW THE OLD MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROCESS KNEW THAT IT WAS SORT OF A DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS, IF YOU LIKE, WHICH HAD LOTS OF TASKS IN IT THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE WANTED TO SEE THIS COMMUNITY ACHIEVE. A LOT OF THEM WERE INSTITUTIONAL TYPE TASKS AND THERE WAS A LONG LIST OF -- YOU HAD TO TICK OFF THE BOX LIST, IF YOU LIKE.

I THINK THE KEY THING NOW IS THAT MOST OF THOSE -- ALL OF THOSE, BASICALLY, HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED. THE INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED AND ACHIEVED.

AND IN SOME RESPECTS, THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT IS A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT AGREEMENT. WE NO LONGER HAVE OUR WORK PRESCRIBED FOR US. THE AGREEMENT, WHEN YOU COME TO THE PART WHICH SAYS ICANN WILL DO THIS AND THE D.O.C. WILL DO THIS, THAT PART OF THE AGREEMENT IS ABOUT THREE-QUARTERS OF A PAGE LONG. ICANN IS NOT REQUIRED TO REPORT EVERY SIX MONTHS AS IT HAS BEEN UNDER THE MOU, AND, INDEED, THE BOARD HAS UNDERTAKEN TO ISSUE ANNUAL REPORTS TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE AS A FORM OF ACCOUNTABILITY IN REPLACEMENT OF THAT. AND WE THINK THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION MODEL IS STILL WORKING VERY WELL.

I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT AS WE LOOK FORWARD IN THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW THE COMMUNITY'S ATTENTION TO SOMETHING ELSE YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE SEEN WHICH WAS EVIDENCE GIVEN -- OR TESTIMONY GIVEN, SORRY, IMPORTANT, TESTIMONY GIVEN BY ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY JOHN KNEUER TO HEARINGS HELD BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEES AND SENATE COMMITTEES. AND IN THAT SENATE HEARING, JOHN MADE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: THE DEPARTMENT CONTINUES TO BELIEVE THAT THE STABILITY AND SECURITY OF THE INTERNET DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM CAN BEST BE ACHIEVED BY TRANSITIONING THE COORDINATION OF THE TECHNICAL FUNCTIONS RELATED TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE DNS TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

SO I THINK VERY IMPORTANTLY, PEOPLE SHOULD SEE THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT IN THE CONTEXT ALSO OF A REPEATED STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT TO TRANSITION FROM THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. I'D ALSO MAKE THE OBSERVATION FOR THIS COMMUNITY THAT, AGAIN, IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT, DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM AND DNS IN THESE AGREEMENTS HAS BEEN DEFINED IN '98. IT MEANS MUCH MORE THAN DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM. THOSE OF US IN THE ROOM THINK DNS IS ONE PART OF WHAT WE DO. IN THE ACTUAL WORDING OF THESE AGREEMENTS, DNS WAS DEFINED EARLY TO INCLUDE THINGS LIKE ALL THE UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS. SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR PEOPLE'S UNDERSTANDING.

VERY RECENTLY, ANOTHER EVENT, THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE APPROVED, AS WAS ITS RIGHT UNDER THE PREVIOUS AGREEMENT, THE NEW DOT COM AGREEMENT BETWEEN VERISIGN AND ICANN, WHICH HAS BEEN A TOPIC, OBVIOUSLY, OF LONG DISCUSSION OF THIS COMMUNITY FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

AND I THINK, AND I'M CERTAINLY PLEASED THAT THAT PROCESS HAS COME TO ITS CONCLUSION.

THERE HAVE BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ASKED ABOUT AN ASPECT OF THAT ARRANGEMENT WHICH WAS IN PARTICULAR AN AMENDMENT MADE TO AN EXISTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. AND IT'S AMENDMENT 30.

NOW, I SHOULD MAKE THE POINT, VERY IMPORTANTLY, THAT DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND VERISIGN HAVE AN ESTABLISHED COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. THIS IS ACTUALLY AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR AGREEMENT, NOT AN AMENDMENT TO ICANN. SO WE HAVE JUST TRIED TO GIVE A SUMMATION OF THE WORDING WITHIN THAT, BUT I WOULD DRAW YOUR ATTENTION SPECIFICALLY TO THE AGREEMENT. IT IS POSTED.

DURING THE COURSE OF ITS REVIEW, THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SOUGHT THE ADVICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S ANTITRUST DIVISION ON COMPETITION ISSUES RAISED BY THE NEW DOT COM REGISTRY AGREEMENT. THE USG HAS PRESERVED THEIR RIGHT TO CONDUCT FURTHER REVIEWS IN THE FUTURE DUE TO THE COMPETITION-RELATED ISSUES INVOLVING A U.S. COMPANY. USG APPROVAL OF ANY RENEWAL OR SUBSTITUTION WILL OCCUR ONLY IF IT CONCLUDES THAT IT WILL SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE CONTINUED SECURITY AND STABILITY OF THE DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM AND THE OPERATION OF THE DOT COM REGISTRY, AND THE PROVISION OF REGISTRY SERVICES IS OFFERED AT REASONABLE PRICE, TERMS AND CONDITIONS. AND USG MAY SEEK SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF THE PRICING TERMS AND COMPETITION SAFEGUARDS IN THE NEW DOT COM REGISTRY AGREEMENT. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE, DRAW YOURSELVES TO THOSE TWO PARTIES AND YOU SHOULD READ THAT PARTICULAR PROVISION IN THE AGREEMENT. I WOULD JUST MAKE AN OBSERVATION FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE THAT THIS IS AN EXPRESSION OF A RIGHT, PARTICULARLY OF THE COMPETITION AUTHORITIES IN THE UNITED STATES THAT WE BELIEVE THEY HAVE ANYWAY. SO WHILE THIS IS BEING EXPRESSED IN AN AMENDMENT TO THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, THIS IS ABOUT A CONTRACT WITH A UNITED STATES COMPANY. IT'S A RIGHT WE SEE IS ALREADY EXPRESSED UNDER U.S. LAW ANYWAY.

SO JUST FOR THOSE WHO THINK THAT THIS HAS GOT SOME SPECIAL NATURE, THAT'S OUR INTERPRETATION IS THAT ONE ASPECT OF THIS IS THAT'S THE STATUS.

SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

JUST QUICKLY ON IANA AND PERFORMANCE OF IANA. THAT CONTINUES TO IMPROVE IN SERVICES AND RESPONSIVENESS. THERE IS STILL A PATHWAY TO GO. THERE IS INCREASED RESOURCES ALLOCATED TO THE IANA FUNCTION. DAVID CONRAD WILL BE PRESENTING FURTHER THIS INFORMATION LATER THIS WEEK.

IMPORTANTLY, VERY IMPORTANTLY, ICANN AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE HAVE RECENTLY AGREED AN IMPORTANT SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT FOR THE WORK THAT ICANN’S IANA DOES IN THE SERVICE OF THE IETF/IAB COMMUNITY IN KEEPING OF REGISTRIES. AND WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD IN NOVEMBER. AND I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER IMPORTANT MILESTONE. IT IS A FURTHER ADDITION TO AN EXISTING MOU BETWEEN THE IETF AND ICANN FOR THE OPERATION OF THOSE SERVICES.

JUST TO GIVE YOU A QUICK YEAR-ON-ON YEAR SENSE, AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SEE THIS GRAPH. NOW, THIS IS -- FOR THE STATISTICIANS IN THE ROOM, THIS IS AVERAGES OF AVERAGES, SO IT'S A -- DAVID WILL GIVE MUCH DETAIL PERFORMANCE GRAPHS TO SPEAK TO LATER IN THE WEEK, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE WE WERE IN DECEMBER '05 TO WHERE WE WERE IN NOVEMBER '06, THE BLUE GRAPH IS NOVEMBER '05, THE RED IS NOVEMBER '06, ACROSS THE RANGE OF SOME OF THE THINGS IANA KEEPS, YOU CAN SEE THE PROCESSING DAYS HAVE COLLAPSED SIGNIFICANTLY. AND ON AVERAGE, ACROSS ALL THE IANA FUNCTIONS, THERE IS AN 82% IMPROVEMENT YEAR ON YEAR. BUT I WILL LET DAVID TALK TO THAT FURTHER AND THERE IS CLEARLY WORK TO BE DONE IN SOME PARTICULAR AREAS. YES, THE TEAM HAS DONE A GOOD JOB.

I WON'T TALK TO INTERNATIONALIZED DOMAIN NAMES BECAUSE WE HAVE A SESSION ON THAT. I WON'T WALK TO POLICY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. I WON'T TALK TO ADDRESS SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION.

I WILL JUST MAKE A QUICK POINT ON COUNTRY CODE TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS.

WE HAVE NOW SIGNED 15 ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS WITH CCTLD MANAGERS SINCE POSTING THE TEMPLATE DOCUMENTS IN FEBRUARY. AND IF YOU MEASURE CCS IN TERMS OF NUMBERS OF REGISTRANTS, IT IS NOW MORE THAN 45% OF ALL REGISTRANTS OF CCTLDS ARE NOW COVERED BY SOME FORM OF ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK SLASH EXISTING CONTRACTS WITH ICANN.

OBVIOUSLY, THOSE AGREEMENTS ARE NOT WITH THE REGISTRANTS, BUT TO GIVE YOU SOME SENSE OF SCALE, BASICALLY WE HAVE SIGNED WITH MOST OF THE BIG CCTLDS. AND DISCUSSIONS ARE CONTINUING, ONGOING, WITH A NUMBER OF OTHER CCTLD MANAGERS.

I DID MENTION IN MY OPENING SPEECH, WE'RE VERY PLEASED THAT LAST NIGHT THERE WAS FINALIZATION FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FIRST LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN RALO WHICH WILL BE LAUNCHED HERE IN SAO PAULO. MY CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT. THAT'S BEEN, I KNOW, QUITE A MARATHON AND EFFORT. I THINK IT'S A MAGNIFICENT EFFORT AND WE ARE VERY PLEASED WITH THAT AND THAT WILL BE OBVIOUSLY DISCUSSED LATER THIS WEEK.

I WON'T SPEAK TO INTERNET GOVERNANCE ISSUES, BUT THERE ARE REPORTS HERE ABOUT INTERNET GOVERNANCE AND REGIONAL LIAISONS.

I WANT TO FINISH IN PARTICULAR, CHAIRMAN, ON TWO TOPICS. ONE IS ON THE ICANN CONTINGENCY PLAN AND THE SECOND ONE IS ON TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. AND BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF RETICULATION OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, IT MIGHT BE WORTH REMINDING PEOPLE OF THE STANDING ICANN CONTINGENCY PLANS.

UNDER THE AMENDMENT 6 TO THE OLD MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, THIS WAS A REQUIREMENT FOR ICANN TO PUT IN PLACE A CONTINGENCY PLAN. GOOD BUSINESS SENSE, ANYWAY. AND THE CONTINGENCY PLAN HAS TWO ASPECTS. ONE IS OPERATIONAL IN CASE OF NATURAL DISASTER OR OTHER PHYSICAL OR OPERATIONAL EVENT, TO ENSURE ONGOING OPERATIONS AND NO GLOBAL LOSS TO THE INTERNET COMMUNITY. AS YOU WOULD APPRECIATE, A LOT OF THAT IS TECHNICAL. AND WE DON'T TEND TO PUBLISH TOO MUCH OF THIS FOR SECURITY REASONS BUT IT'S THE SORTS OF THINGS YOU WOULD EXPECT ANY COMPANY WOULD DO IN TERMS OF CONTINGENCY PLANNING.

THE SECOND ONE WHICH IS IMPORTANT IS BUSINESS FAILURE OR INSOLVENCY. AND TO ENSURE THE ONGOING OPERATIONS OF THE UNIQUE IDENTIFIER COORDINATION SYSTEM AND NO GLOBAL LOSS TO THE GLOBAL INTERNET. IF ICANN AS AN ENTITY WAS TO FACE BUSINESS FAILURE OR INSOLVENCY, AND WE FOCUS ON THAT PARTICULAR PART OF THE CONTINGENCY PLAN.

I TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TECHNICAL ONE ALREADY.

AND THE KEY PART OF THE OBJECTIVE OF THE BUSINESS FAILURE ASPECT OF THE CONTINGENCY PLAN IS TO ENSURE THE CORE AND NECESSARY FUNCTIONS ARE CARRIED OUT AND THAT THE RELEVANT RELATIONSHIPS, AGREEMENTS, AND PUBLIC MESSAGES ARE MANAGED TO ENSURE THE STABILITY AND SECURITY OF THE DNS AND THE INTERNET.

AND I WANT TO TAKE YOU THROUGH THE STEPS THAT ARE PRESCRIBED IN THE CONTINGENCY PLANNING.

ICANN EXECUTIVE STAFF ARE TO COMMUNICATE TO ICANN'S CHAIRMAN. AND THE ICANN'S CHAIRMAN IS UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION BY AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR IF THERE IS ANY SENSE THAT ICANN COULD BE FACING, COULD BE FACING, INSOLVENCY OR BUSINESS FAILURE.

SO THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT OBLIGATION UPON THE CHAIRMAN.

AND THAT'S A FURTHER OBLIGATION, THEN, WOULD EXIST I THINK UNDER THE EXISTING SORT OF CORPORATIONS LAW. IT'S AN ADDITIONAL OBLIGATION WE PLACE ON THE CHAIRMAN.

AND IF THAT INDEPENDENT AUDITOR DOES DETERMINE THERE IS A REAL RISK OF INSOLVENCY OR COMPLETE BUSINESS FAILURE, THEN THE CHAIRMAN IS TO CREATE AN EXECUTIVE STABILITY COMMITTEE WITH THE UGLY ACRONYM OF EXSTABCOM WITH THE APPOINTMENT OF AN EMINENT PERSON ADDING THREE PEOPLE INCLUDING THE CHAIR OF THE SECURITY AND STABILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THE ICANN CFO, AND THE IDENTIFIED INDEPENDENT AUDITOR. AND IF NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE, THIS GROUP IS TO CONSULT AND GET ADVICE FROM A WIDER INTERNET COMMUNITY TO ENSURE ONGOING OPERATION OF CORE FUNCTIONS.

NOW, THIS ALL TAKES PLACE BEFORE ANY ASPECT OF INSOLVENCY, OF BUSINESS FAILURE, SO THIS IS AN EARLY WARNING SYSTEM. IF THERE IS AN EARLY WARNING, THE OBLIGATION OF THE CHAIRMAN IS TO EXECUTE THIS STEP WHICH IS THEN A GROUP WHO ARE SPECIFICALLY THERE TO MOVE QUICKLY ON COORDINATION.

ONE OF THE OTHER ASPECTS THEY ARE TO DO IS TO INCLUDE THE APPOINTMENT OF AN EMERGENCY NAMES AND ADDRESSING COMMITTEE. AND I'LL COME BACK TO THE MEMBERSHIP IN A MINUTE.

THAT COMMITTEE IS TO ASSIST THE EMERGENCY -- THE EXSTABCOM, AGAIN, PLEASE EXCUSE THE TERRIBLE ACRONYM, TO EXECUTE ICANN'S TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS AND TO ASSIST THE EXSTABCOM TO FORM A REPLACEMENT OR REFORMED ENTITY.

SO IF ICANN GOES INTO -- POTENTIALLY GOES INTO BUSINESS FAILURE OR INTO -- LOOKS LIKE THERE'S INSOLVENCY, THERE IS A PROCESS FOR RECONVENING REPRESENTATIVES OF THE FULL COMMUNITY FOR THEM TO ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS OF WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN NEXT. TO A DEGREE, FOR THOSE OF US WHO HAVE HISTORY HERE, IT'S A REPEAT OF '97. '97-98. BUT IN A MORE FOCUSED WAY. A GROUP COMES TOGETHER FROM THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. NOTICE THIS GROUP DOESN'T COME FROM THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. THIS GROUP COMES FROM THE COMMUNITY TO CONSIDER WHAT SHOULD BE THE RECONSTITUTED NATURE OF IT.

AND THEN WE TALK ABOUT THE PRESENT MAKEUP OF THAT COMMITTEE. IT CONSISTS OF ONE GAC REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH OF THE ICANN REGIONS. ONE APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE OF EACH GNSO CONSTITUENCY. ONE APPOINTED ALAC REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH REGION. TWO APPOINTED ASO REPRESENTATIVES. ONE APPOINTED CCNSO REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH REGION. ONE ROOT SERVER OPERATOR. ONE REPRESENTATIVE FROM ICANN'S TECHNICAL LIAISON GROUP. THE SSAC CHAIRMAN AND TWO SSAC MEMBERS. AND ONE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE INTERNET ARCHITECTURE BOARD. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED NOW TO REMIND THE COMMUNITY IS WE ACTUALLY NEED THE NOMINEES FROM THE CONSTITUENCIES FOR 2007. WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE IS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS TO HAVE NOMINEES NAMED SO IF THIS PROCESS HAS TO TAKE PLACE, IT CAN TAKE PLACE QUICKLY. REMEMBER, WE ARE PUTTING IN PLACE -- PEOPLE NEED TO UNDERSTAND CLEARLY THIS IS A CONTINGENCY PLANNING SYSTEM TO ENSURE TRANSITION BEFORE THE ORGANIZATION IS FORMALLY IN INSOLVENCY. AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO KNOW YOUR INSOLVENCY LAWS, YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO MOVE THAT WAY, OR BUSINESS FAILURE. THIS IS TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THERE CAN BE RE- -- A) THAT THE FUNCTIONS WILL CONTINUE TO BE TAKEN -- BE OPERATED, AND, SECONDLY, THERE IS A COMMUNITY-BASED PROCESS FOR THINKING THROUGH WHAT NEXT.

SO WE NEED, AS I SAID, THE FORMAL REQUEST IS NOW TO THE CONSTITUENCIES TO PLEASE -- WE WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE NOMINEES THAT WE COULD PLACE IN THE FILE FOR 2007 AND WE WANT TO DO THIS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.

I WANT TO FINISH NOW ON SOME OBSERVATIONS ON TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. AND AS MANY IN THE COMMUNITY KNOWS, THERE IS A PROCESS UNDERWAY OF CONSULTATION ON MANAGEMENT OPERATING PRINCIPLES THAT WAS INITIATED BY THE BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 29TH AS A COMPLEMENTARY ASPECT OF THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT. I WANT TO GIVE YOU SOME FEEDBACK OF WHAT WE HAVE RECEIVED SO FAR IN THAT COMMUNITY CONSULTATION. COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE SAID, AND THIS IS A SUMMATION OF FEEDBACK WE HAVE RECEIVED, THE ADDRESSING ISSUES AROUND ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ARE VERY IMPORTANT AND SHOULD NOT BE RUSHED. THERE'S BEEN SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT WE RECEIVE -- THAT ICANN LOOK FOR EXPERT ASSISTANCE TO BE SOUGHT.

ALL RESPONDENTS, NOT SURPRISINGLY SAID, THEY IDENTIFY THE NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT.

MANY COMMENTS FOCUSED ON THE NEED FOR A MORE TRANSPARENT BOARD DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.

SOME SUGGEST THAT STAFF HAVE TOO MUCH INFLUENCE ON POLICY, BUT SOME PUT AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW THAT STAFF IN ANY ORGANIZATION HAVE INFLUENCE BY NATURE OF THEIR ROLE.

SOME SUGGESTED THAT MEETINGS SHOULD BE OPEN AND/OR RECORDED. THE COMMUNICATION STYLE ON WEB SITE ALSO WERE IDENTIFIED AS TRANSPARENCY ISSUES. EFFECTIVE APPEAL AND REVIEW PROCESSES IDENTIFIED AS KEY TO ACCOUNTABILITY. AND SUGGESTIONS TO PUT IN PLACE A SET OF STANDARDS, GENERAL AND/OR PROCESS SPECIFIC, THAT PERFORMANCE COULD BE MEASURED AGAINST.

NOW, THIS IS JUST SOME SUMMATION OF THE FEEDBACK WE HAVE RECEIVED ALREADY. AND THIS CONSULTATION PROCESS WILL NOT CONCLUDE BEFORE THE 31ST OF DECEMBER.

BY ICANN WISHES TO ENGAGE EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE IN IMPROVING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY, INCLUDING SEVERAL THINGS. CONDUCTING BENCHMARKING, WORKING WITH ICANN TO IDENTIFY AREAS OF WEAKNESS. ASSISTING WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANS FOR IMPROVEMENT. AND POTENTIALLY ADVISING ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THESE MANAGEMENT OPERATING PRINCIPLES.

NOW, THERE HAS BEEN QUITE A DEGREE OF WORK DONE, SORT OF REVIEWING POTENTIAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT COULD HELP US REFLECTING THE NATURE OF OUR ORGANIZATION, AN INTERNATIONAL MULTISTAKEHOLDER ORGANIZATION WITH ITS -- YOU KNOW, UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW. THERE'S NOT TOO MANY OF THEM. SO WE HAVE TO TRY TO THINK ABOUT THAT CONTEXT. AND WE HAVE IDENTIFIED AN ORGANIZATION BASED IN LONDON CALLED THE ONE WORLD TRUST, WHICH WAS SELECTED AFTER REVIEWING A NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS WITH EXPERTISE IN ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY.

THE ONE WORLD TRUST PROMOTES EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND RESEARCH INTO THE CHANGES REQUIRED WITHIN GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONS IN ORDER TO MAKE THEM ANSWERABLE TO THE PEOPLE THEY AFFECT.

AND THEY HAVE A CORE FRAMEWORK THAT THEY OPERATE UNDER. ONE, TRANSPARENCY, THE PROVISION OF ACCESSIBLE AND TIMELY INFORMATION TO STAKEHOLDERS AND THE OPENING UP OF ORGANIZATIONAL PROCEDURES, STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES TO THEIR ASSESSMENT.

TWO, PARTICIPATION. THE PROCESS THROUGH WHICH AN ORGANIZATION ENABLES KEY STAKEHOLDERS TO PLAY AN ACTIVE ROLE IN THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES AND ACTIVITIES WHICH AFFECT THEM.

THREE, EVALUATION. THE PROCESS THROUGH WHICH AN ORGANIZATION REVIEWS ITS PROGRESS AND RESULTS AGAINST GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

AND FOUR, COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE MECHANISMS. MECHANISMS THROUGH WHICH AN ORGANIZATION ENABLES STAKEHOLDERS TO ADDRESS COMPLAINTS AGAINST ITS DECISIONS AND ACTIONS, AND ENSURES COMPLAINTS ARE PROPERLY REVIEWED AND ACTED UPON.

AND I WOULD URGE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY TO GO TO ONEWORLDTRUST.ORG TO LOOK AT THE WORK OF THAT ORGANIZATION.

THEY PRESENTLY ACTUALLY DO THIS WORK FOR A NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS, AND THEY ACTUALLY PUT TOGETHER A THING CALLED THE GLOBAL ACCOUNTABILITY INDEX. AND TO GIVE YOU EXAMPLES OF ENTITIES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THEIR INDEX, THEY INCLUDE TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND THE SORT OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT PRIVATE -- INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS LIKE ICANN AS WELL AS SOME INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, BUT TO GIVE YOU EXAMPLES, ANGLO AMERICAN, DOW CHEMICAL, EXXON, MICROSOFT, TOYOTA, WAL-MART, BUT ALSO THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE CONFEDERATION OF FREE TRADE UNIONS, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT SOCIETIES, OXFAM. AND YOU CAN LOOK ON THE WEB SITE. BUT THEY HAVE A RANGE OF ORGANIZATIONS THEY DO THIS INDEX FOR.

I CAN REPORT TO YOU THAT THEY HAVE AGREED TO WORK WITH US AND THEY HAVE AGREED TO START THE PROCESS OF BENCHMARKING AND LOOKING AT IDENTIFICATION OF WEAKNESSES AS PART OF A PROCESS.

TO TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT WE SEE GOING FORWARD TO, YOU KNOW, FURTHER THIS -- ADDRESS THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, THERE IS THE INITIAL CONSULTATION PROCESS THAT WILL INCLUDE ON THE 31ST OF DECEMBER.

AND WE'LL HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS CLEARLY HERE IN SAO PAULO, PARTICULARLY ON THURSDAY IN THE PUBLIC SESSION.

THERE ARE DEVELOPMENTS OF TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR ONE WORLD TRUST BY THE 31ST OF DECEMBER.

AND WE EXPECT TO SUMMARIZE THE INITIAL COMMENTS RECEIVED IN THE CONSULTATION PROCESS BY -- BE POSTED IN JANUARY.

IN FORM OF BENCHMARKING BY ONE WORLD TRUST, INCLUDING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT, WILL BE ACHIEVED AND RELEASED FOR THE LISBON MEETING.

AND WE WILL WORK WITH ONE WORLD TRUST ON THE DRAFT OF MANAGEMENT OPERATING PRINCIPLES FOR RELEASE BEFORE THE LISBON MEETING.

AND THERE WILL BE CONSULTATION ON THE DRAFT PRINCIPLES AT THE LISBON MEETING.

AND IF WE ARE LOOKING TOWARDS SOME CONSENSUS IF THE COMMUNITY IS COMFORTABLE IN THAT PROCESS, I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO MOVE TO THE ADOPTION OF THOSE PRINCIPLES BY THE BOARD IN APRIL.

THAT WILL DEPEND A LOT ON HOW THE CONSULTATION IN LISBON TAKES PLACE.

I WONDER IF I CAN MAKE A FINAL OBSERVATION AS PRESIDENT AND CEO ON THIS TOPIC.

IT STRIKES ME, AS I'VE BEEN READING THROUGH THE BYLAWS IN THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS AND READING A NUMBER OF THINGS -- AND THIS CHART, I'M AFRAID, IS VERY MESSY.

THIS IS ME ON A WHITE BOARD.

BUT IT DOES STRIKE ME, IF YOU GO THROUGH OUR BYLAWS, IF YOU GO THROUGH OUR PDP DOCUMENTS AND WHAT HAVE YOU, THAT THERE ARE -- WE ALREADY HAVE AS A COMMUNITY LAID OUT A VERY CAREFUL PROCESS STEPS FOR A LOT OF THE CORE PROCESSES WHERE WE DO NEED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

SO POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES FOR THE COUNTRY CODE NAME SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION, FOR THE GENERIC NAME SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION.

THERE IS A SERIES OF STEPS FOR THE POLICY FORMATION UNDER THE ASO.

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF ALREADY EXPRESSED AND INTENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE BYLAWS ON CONSULTATION PROCESSES RELATING TO CONTRACT CHANGES AND RENEWALS.

WE'VE PUT IN PLACE A PROCESS FOR -- WE'VE -- THE NICKNAME BEING THE "FUNNEL," FOR NEW REGISTRY SERVICES.

THE GNSO WORKING GROUP AND THEN THE COUNCIL IS WORKING, I THINK, VERY WELL WITH STAFF AND OTHER SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS TRYING TO THINK THROUGH WHAT WILL BE THE ACTUAL PRAGMATIC PROCESS IF THERE ARE TO BE NEW GTLD INITIATIVES.

FINANCIALLY, WE HAVE A BUDGET THAT GOES THROUGH COMMUNITY APPROVAL AND HAS A BOARD FINANCE COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT.

WE HAVE BUDGET CONTROLS THAT ARE DEALT WITH THROUGH EXTERNAL AUDIT AND ALSO BOARD AUDIT.

IT COMES UP THROUGH AN ANNUAL REPORT.

IN OPERATIONS, WE HAVE IANA AND WE HAVE MORE ON IANA REPORTING.

IN WHAT I CALL BUSINESS AS USUAL, WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO MORE WORK ON ESTABLISHING A SORT OF WHAT NICKNAME IN MANAGEMENT TERMS, A DASHBOARD, BUT GRAPH-BASED REPORTING ON THAT, WHICH HAS BEEN SLOWER THAN I WANT, BUT, NEVERTHELESS, WORK HAS BEEN UNDERTAKEN, AND I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO SHARE MORE BY LISBON.

ON COMPLIANCE PROJECTS, WE HAVE OUR PROJECT REPORTING PROCESS.

WHEN WE LOOK AT COMPLAINT MANAGEMENT, WE HAVE A COMPLAINT -- A COMPLIANCE FUNCTION, WHICH ALSO WILL COME BACK AND REPORT THROUGH THE ANNUAL REPORT PROCESS.

THE OMBUDSMAN ISSUE'S AN ANNUAL REPORT.

AND THEN WE HAVE THE RECONSIDERATION AND INDEPENDENT REVIEW PROCESSES.

PART OF WHAT I THINK I'M SAYING IS WE ACTUALLY HAVE A LOT OF THIS.

BUT WHAT WE HAVE NOT DONE A GREAT JOB OF, TO BE TRUTHFUL, I THINK, IS LAY IT OUT VERY CLEARLY.

AND IT'S -- A LITTLE BIT, IT'S BEEN THE PRODUCT OF OUR DEVELOPMENT THAT IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE LAWYERS IN THE COMMUNITY AND YOU CAN REMEMBER ALL OUR BYLAWS AND WHAT APPEARS IN OUR WEB SITE, THEN YOU KNOW THIS, BUT IF YOU'RE NOT, YOU DON'T.

AND SO I THINK WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US IS TO ACTUALLY LAY THIS ALL OUT AND PRESENT IT TO THE COMMUNITY MUCH MORE CLEARLY SO THAT WHEN THERE'S A PARTICULAR ISSUE INVOLVED, YOU CAN ACTUALLY TRACK IT ACROSS ALL THIS.

SO THAT'S ONE OBSERVATION.

THE SECOND OBSERVATION AS PRESIDENT AND CEO IS THAT I THINK WE DO HAVE TWO AREAS THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT WHICH STRIKE ME.

THE SECOND -- I'LL DEFAULT TO THE SECOND ONE FIRST, WHICH IS ABOUT BOARD DELIBERATIONS AND DECISIONS.

HOW DO WE COMMUNICATE THE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE OUTCOMES? THAT IS AN ACTIVE DIALOGUE.

I THINK YOU'VE HEARD ALL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, CHAIRMAN AND -- FROM CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO SAY "DOWN," BUT EVERYBODY IN THE BOARD SAYING THIS IS A REAL ISSUE THE BOARD IS TAKING SERIOUSLY.

WE ARE REALLY CONSIDERING IT.

AND AS YOU APPRECIATE, WE HAVE GOT THIS BALANCE -- WE FEEL THIS ISSUE OF BALANCE BETWEEN FULL TRANSMISSION AND RISK MANAGEMENT.

BUT I THINK YOU CAN SEE THE BOARD'S REALLY VERY ACTIVE ON THIS AND YOU CAN EXPECT FURTHER ACTION ON THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO TALK FULLY ON THE BOARD'S BEHALF, BUT THAT'S BEING TAKEN VERY SERIOUSLY.

BUT HERE'S AN AREA THAT I'M VERY WORRIED ABOUT AS PRESIDENT AND CEO. AND IT'S THE FOLLOWING.

HOW DO WE START AN ISSUE IN THIS COMMUNITY? LET ME TELL YOU ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I AM A LITTLE SICK AND TIRED OF, WHICH IS -- AND WE'VE JUST GOT HERE.

IT PARTICULARLY COMES FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE A COMMERCIAL INTEREST IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT NOT JUST, WHO WANT PARTICULAR CHANGES AND WHO WILL TEND -- WE'VE TENDED TO GET IN A PATTERN OF THEM COMING TO THE STAFF TO START A DISCUSSION.

WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THIS? WE'D LIKE TO CHANGE THAT.

HOW DO WE DO THIS? WHICH IS NATURAL AND THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE STAFF IS THERE FOR.

BUT WHAT HAS TENDED TO HAPPEN IS THAT'S JUST TENDED TO GO ON AND GO ON AND GO ON.

AND OFTEN THE FIRST TIME THE COMMUNITY FINDS OUT ABOUT IT IS WHEN THE STAFF POSTS SOMETHING.

AND FOR MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, IT LOOKS LIKE THE STAFF ARE THE ADVOCATES OF THE PARTICULAR PERSPECTIVE.

SO YOU CAN'T WIN AS STAFF, BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A PROCESS WHEREBY EACH PERSON WHO WANTS SOMETHING IS BEING REPRESENTED BY A STAFF PROCESS.

NOW, I'M NOT SAYING, YOU KNOW, ABSORB EVERYTHING FROM STAFF AT ALL.

BUT WHAT I DO THINK WE SHOULD THINK A LOT ABOUT IS THAT WHEN -- WHEN ARE WE GOING -- IF ANYBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY WANTS TO START ANY DISCUSSION THAT MIGHT END UP IN ANY ONE OF THESE PROCESS FLOWS, HOW DO THEY START THAT DISCUSSION?

BY ALL MEANS, PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE THE FREEDOM, IT STRIKES ME, TO COME TO TALK TO STAFF AND BOARD MEMBERS AND OTHERS TO TALK THROUGH IDEAS.

BUT IT DOES STRIKE ME WHEN WE THINK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT IS DISCUSSION FORUMS OR OTHER THINGS WHICH LET MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THEMSELVES, IF I CAN BE BLUNT ABOUT IT, MAKE THEIR OWN CASE, PUT THEIR OWN ARGUMENTS, HAVE OTHER PEOPLE RESPOND TO THAT AND THINK ABOUT IT BEFORE SOMETHING'S INITIATED.

NOW, THIS IS JUST THINKING IN PROGRESS.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO SHARE, FROM A PRESIDENT'S PERSPECTIVE, THAT I THINK THAT'S A BIG AREA THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHEN WE THINK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY.

IT'S NOT JUST A QUESTION OF TRANSPARENCY OF STAFF AND BOARD.

I THINK IT'S A QUESTION OF TRANSPARENCY OF COMMUNITY.

AND I THINK -- I'VE FORGOTTEN WHICH MEMBER AT THE MOMENT, THOMAS REMINDED ME, FROM THE BOARD, THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE IETF -- OR MAYBE IT WAS VINT.

THE IETF, I THINK, HAS GONE THROUGH A SIMILAR SORT OF ISSUE AND HAS DEVELOPED A PROCESS CALLED BIRDS OF A FEATHER.

AND BEFORE THINGS CAN ACTUALLY INITIATE OFTEN IN THE IETF, THERE IS THIS CONCEPT OF BIRDS OF A FEATHER, THERE'S A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME TOGETHER AROUND AN IDEA AND THINK THE IDEA IS WORTH PROGRESSING.

SOME OF OUR SISTER ORGANIZATIONS HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS LEARNING, IT STRIKES ME.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER.

SO, CHAIRMAN, THAT'S -- I FINISH ON A PERSONAL NOTE.

THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT.

>>VINT CERF: VERY WELL, PAUL.

(NO AUDIO.)

HOW'S THAT? IT'S NOT MUCH BETTER, IS IT?

I CAN'T HAVE THESE ON AT THE SAME TIME.

FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, PAUL.

SECOND, BEFORE WE DO ANY Q AND A ABOUT THIS REPORT, I'D LIKE TO INVITE THERESA SWINEHART UP TO BRING THE PANEL TO DISCUSS THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

SO IF THERESA AND HER PANELISTS ARE HERE, LET ME INVITE YOU UP TO EXECUTE THE PANEL, SO TO SPEAK.

THE BOARD WILL CONTINUE TO STAY IN THE AUDIENCE.

>>THERESA SWINEHART: IF I CAN ASK THE MEMBERS OF THE PRESIDENT'S STRATEGY COMMITTEE WHO ARE HERE TO COME UP TO THE PODIUM.

THANK YOU.

I THINK IT'S MARILYN AND PIERRE.

JANIS, AND THEN PAUL.

I THINK THOSE ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE THAT ARE HERE.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: CHAIRMAN, AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE THIS GROUP TO MAKE ITS PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS ON BOTH PRESENTATIONS AFTERWARDS?

>>VINT CERF: I'D LIKE THIS GROUP TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATIONS, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE Q AND A FOR ALL THE MATERIAL.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THANK YOU.

THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WHO ARE PRESENT HAVE ASKED THAT -- IF I COULD JUST AT LEAST TAKE US THROUGH THE PROCESS, TALK A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT WAS IN THE DRAFT REPORT, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE.

AND THEN WE CAN TAKE QUESTIONS.

JUST WANT TO GIVE BACKGROUND TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY ON THE PRESIDENT'S STRATEGIC COMMITTEE.

YOU MIGHT RECALL THAT IN VANCOUVER IN DECEMBER 2005, ICANN BOARD APPROVED THE APPOINTMENT OF THE COMMITTEE.

AND WHAT WAS -- WAS THE RATIONALE BEHIND THAT WAS LOOKING FOR ADVICE OF A GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM THE BROAD RANGE OF THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE AN INTEREST ABOUT ICANN, WHICH INCLUDES PEOPLE WHO DO NOT OFTEN ATTEND OUR MEETINGS, BUT WHO -- SOME OF THE MEMBERS ARE PEOPLE WHO SORT OF ARE OUTSIDE THIS IMMEDIATE CIRCLE BUT WHO STILL HAVE AN INTEREST IN ICANN AND THE WAY IT OPERATES AND IS SEEN IN THE WORLD, AS WELL AS PEOPLE WHO ARE INSIDE THAT COMMUNITY.

AND TO MAKE OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING STRATEGIC ISSUES FACING ICANN.

NEED TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR, THIS DOES NOT REPLACE THE BOTTOM-UP PROCESS NOR THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS, NOR THE BOARD'S PREROGATIVES.

THIS IS JUST A GROUP OF -- WHO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LIKE, THE FRIENDS OF ICANN WHO ARE TO MAKE OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT THEY ARE NOT -- THEY DON'T HAVE ANY SORT OF ROLE FOR EXECUTION AND THEY DON'T SUPPLANT THE BOTTOM-UP STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS.

RATHER, IT'S AN INPUT TO THAT.

TO GIVE YOU SOME UPDATE, THE COMMITTEE ENGAGED WITH THE COMMUNITY AT ICANN'S MEETING IN MOROCCO AND IN EARLY JULY, POSTED CONSULTATION MATERIALS FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT POSED QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE FURTHER EXPLORED.

THESE WERE TRANSLATED INTO ARABIC, FRENCH, ITALIAN, AND SPANISH.

AND WE RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM WOLFGANG KLEINWAECHTER, GEORGE RICHARDS, NSI, INTA, SEBASTIAN RICCIARDI, DANNY YOUNGER, LAURA ABBA, VITTORIO BERTOLA, STEFANO TRUMPY, MEMBERS OF AN ITALIAN GOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, THE ISPCP, BECKY BURR, GO DADDY, REMMY NWEKE, CHAIRMAN OF THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE NIGERIA INTERNET GROUP, EDWARD HASBROUCK AND PATRICK VANDE WALLE FROM ISOC. THESE WERE THE SORT OF WRITTEN COMMENTS WE RECEIVED.

THE COMMITTEE ALSO HELD A TOWN HALL CONSULTATION ON THE 21ST OF JULY.

THE TRANSCRIPTS AND AUDIO ARE AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE.

THAT WAS ABOUT FOUR TO SIX HOURS, FROM MEMORY, AND IT WAS INTERNATIONALLY AVAILABLE THROUGH THE WEB.

AND SOME OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THAT CONSULTATION INCLUDED ERIKA MANN, WHO'S A MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY AND CHAIRPERSON OF THE EUROPEAN INTERNET FOUNDATION.

HANS CORREL, WHO'S THE FORMER UNDERSECRETARY GENERAL COUNSEL FOR LEGAL AFFAIRS AND FORMER LEGAL COUNSEL OF THE UNITED NATIONS; ROELOF MEIJER, CEO OF SIDN, WHO IS IN THE ROOM HERE, WHICH IS THE REGISTRY FOR THE .NL CCTLD.

STEFANO TRUMPY, FROM .IT REGISTRY; BECKY BURR, PARTNER IN WILMER HALE.

JON NEVETT FROM NETWORK SOLUTIONS, BHAVIN TURAKHIA FROM DIRECTI AND LOGICBOXES.

TIM RUIZ FROM GO DADDY.

OTHER PARTICIPANTS IN THE CONSULTATIONS WAS BERNIE TURCOTTE FROM CIRA, MARGARITA VALDES FROM NIC CL, MARK MCFADDEN, CHRIS DISSPAIN FROM AUDA, NAOMASA MARUYAMA FROM JPNIC, DANNY YOUNGER, AND DAVID MAHER FROM PIR.

THAT GIVES YOU SOME RANGE OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE RESPONDED AND WERE PART OF THIS CONSULTATION, AS WELL AS OTHERS.

THE COMMITTEE MET TO REVIEW THE COMMENTS AND INPUT RECEIVED.

IT DISCUSSED ONLINE, WE HAD A MEETING, WE WERE -- WE HAD A MEETING IN -- OF EVERYBODY IN PARIS IN EARLY SEPTEMBER.

IT WAS IN PARIS BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO MEET SOMEWHERE ELSE UNTIL THERE WAS A SCARE IN BRITISH AIRPORTS, AND SUDDENLY WE FOUND PARIS WAS THE BEST PLACE FOR EVERYBODY TO COME TOGETHER, PARTICULARLY PEOPLE COMING OUT OF AFRICA.

THAT WAS A ONE-LEVEL FIRST DRAFTING.

THE COMMITTEE HAS THEN HAD FURTHER INPUT, FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, AND HAS POSTED A DRAFT REPORT.

THE COMMITTEE WILL TAKE INPUT AND FEEDBACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND WILL HOLD AN ONLINE TOWN MEETING IN FEBRUARY 2007, DATE TO BE PROVIDED, FOR FURTHER COMMUNITY DISCUSSION, WITH THE AIM TO PROVIDE A FINALIZED REPORT AT ITS MARCH 2007 MEETING.

SO I THINK THAT'S ALL FOR THAT.

WHOOPS, DOESN'T GO AWAY.

SO, BASICALLY, THE MESSAGE IS, LOTS OF CONSULTATION, AND THE CONSULTATION IS STILL CONTINUING.

THE DRAFT REPORT, I DON'T REALLY WANT TO READ THROUGH IT WORD FOR WORD.

AND -- SO I'M SOMEWHAT HOPEFUL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN IT.

BUT MAYBE IT'S WORTH OUR TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE GENERAL HEADINGS ARE.

JUST A COUPLE OF POINTS ON MEMBERSHIP BEFORE WE DO THAT.

THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE HAS BEEN -- TRIED TO DRAW FROM A RANGE OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE AN INTEREST IN ICANN.

IT'S NOT A COMPLETE SET.

THERE WILL BE CONTINUED CHANGE IN THAT.

WE NEED SOME OTHER PEOPLE AS MEMBERS.

WE'VE HAD SOME MEMBERS WHO PARTICIPATED MORE THAN OTHERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO PARTICULARLY NOTE CARL BILDT, WHO WAS AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE UNTIL THE LAST SWEDISH ELECTIONS.

AFTER THAT POINT, CARL WAS MADE SWEDISH FOREIGN MINISTER, AND CARL HAS NOT PARTICIPATED IN THIS FURTHER.

AND I THINK I SHOULD FORMALLY STATE THAT IN NO WAY DO WE CONSIDER THE DRAFT REPORT TO BE ANY SORT OF STATEMENT OF THE SWEDISH GOVERNMENT OR FORMAL STATEMENT OF CARL BILDT AS AN INDIVIDUAL.

SO WE'VE HAD CHANGE.

AND SO YOU ARE SEEING IN OUR REPORTING, TO BE ACCURATE, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT SOME MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE HAVE MET, SOME MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE HAVE FINALIZED, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO ACCURATELY REFLECT THE DIFFERENT NATURE OF INVOLVEMENT AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

THE REPORT HAS A SERIES OF FOUR OR SOME MAJOR HEADINGS.

ONE OF THE MAIN AREAS OF DISCUSSION WAS ICANN STATUS AND CONTINUED IMPROVED RESPONSIVENESS TO AN EVOLVING GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT.

THE COMMITTEE BELIEVES THERE ARE SEVERAL AREAS IN WHICH ICANN CAN CONTINUE TO WORK TO IMPROVE ITSELF AS A GLOBAL ORGANIZATION.

ONE OF THOSE AREAS COMING OUT OF MUCH OF THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED IN THE CONSULTATION WAS ON LEGAL STATUS AND IDENTITY.

AND I SHOULD SAY THAT QUITE A LOT OF THE THINKING OF THE COMMITTEE WAS SHARED IN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT ICANN HAD WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE IN THE WHOLE PROCESS OF THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT AND SOME OF THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE BOARD IN THAT CONTEXT.

SO IT WAS VALUABLE FOR THOSE PEOPLE THAT PARTICIPATED AS INPUT TO THOSE DISCUSSIONS, BUT PARTLY BECAUSE OF THE DEADLINES OF A SERIES OF HEARINGS, ET CETERA, AT THAT TIME, WE ACTUALLY HELD OFF THE FINALIZATION OF THE REPORT UNTIL NOVEMBER.

SO THAT'S MY EXPLANATION TO THOSE WHO WERE -- WE HAD SAID EARLIER WE'D HOPED TO HAVE IT FINISHED PRIOR TO THOSE -- THE SEPTEMBER 30TH DEADLINE.

THE TIMINGS OF THINGS LIKE HEARINGS IN THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE AND OTHERS JUST MEANT WE, BASICALLY, HAD TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE, UNFORTUNATELY.

BUT THAT DOES LET THE REPORT THAT WE -- DRAFT REPORT THAT WE'VE PUT ON THE TABLE BE SEEN AS PARTLY IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT HAPPENED AFTER SEPTEMBER 29TH.

AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POTENTIALLY READ ONE SECTION FROM THE REPORT.

THE COMMITTEE NOTES THAT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT, THE ICANN BOARD AFFIRMED A STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND, IN PARTICULAR, COMMITTED TO CONDUCT THE REVIEW OF ICANN'S CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE, AND, IN PARTICULAR, ITEM NUMBER 10, ICANN SHALL CONDUCT A REVIEW OF AND SHALL MAKE NECESSARY CHANGES IN CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE TO ENSURE STABILITY, INCLUDING DEVOTING ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO CONTRACT ENFORCEMENT, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ORGANIZATIONAL AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE BEST PRACTICES.

AS ONE CONTRIBUTION TO THAT REVIEW, AND IN ORDER TO FURTHER ADVANCE ICANN'S INTERNATIONALIZATION, THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES THE ICANN BOARD TO EXPLORE WITH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, OTHER GOVERNMENTS IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY, WHETHER THERE ARE ADVANTAGES AND APPROPRIATE MECHANISMS FOR MOVING ICANN'S LEGAL IDENTITY TO THAT OF A PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION BASED IN THE U.S. THE COMMITTEE EMPHASIZES THAT SUCH EXPLORATION SHOULD NOT CHANGE THE FUNDAMENTAL MULTISTAKEHOLDER MODEL OF ICANN OR THE EVOLUTIONARY PROCESSES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENT OUTLINED IN ICANN'S BYLAWS, OR THE NEED FOR CLEAR ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS FOR ICANN'S PROCESSES AND DECISION-MAKING.

THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERS SUCH A DEVELOPMENT MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE FURTHER IMPROVEMENT OF STABILITY.

AND I WANT TO REEMPHASIZE, THE COMMITTEE SAID THAT THIS COULD BE ONE THING THAT THE BOARD COULD LOOK AT AS PART OF THIS CONSULTATION, PART OF THIS ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW.

THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES THE ICANN BOARD TO EXPLORE THE PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION MODEL AS PART OF ITS REVIEW.

AND TO OPERATIONALIZE WHATEVER OUTCOME, WHETHER THAT WAS ACCEPTED OR NOT, WHATEVER OUTCOME FROM THE REVIEW BY THE END OF 2007.

SO THE COMMITTEE WAS ASKING THE BOARD TO DO THIS BY 2007.

IN FOLLOW-UP TO THE COMMITTEE'S CONSULTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS PROVIDED BY AMBASSADOR HANS CORREL, FURTHER EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT TO MEMBERS.

THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO BE CLEAR THAT IN REFERRING TO A PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION, IT IS NOT SUGGESTING A TREATY ORGANIZATION OR AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION.

SO IT'S JUST -- AND THIS WAS SOME FEEDBACK TO THE COMMITTEE.

SO IT'S ONE SUGGESTION TO -- SOMETHING THAT WOULD -- THE BOARD HAS UNDERTAKEN FOR REVIEW.

IT'S NOT THE ONLY SUGGESTION.

THE COMMITTEE DOESN'T THINK THIS IS THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED, BUT IT IS ONE SUGGESTION THAT THE COMMITTEE THOUGHT WOULD BE VALUABLE FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER.

THE COMMITTEE ALSO STATED ON REGIONAL PRESENCE THAT THE COMMITTEE BELIEVES THAT WHILE ICANN'S HEADQUARTERS MAY REMAIN IN THE U.S., IT NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO ESTABLISH AND STRENGTHEN REGIONAL PRESENCES, STAFFING, AND CONTINUE REGIONAL OUTREACH.

THE COMMITTEE RECOGNIZES THAT ICANN HAS ALREADY UNDERTAKEN STEPS TO IMPROVE ITS OPERATIONS, AND IT WENT THROUGH A NUMBER OF STEPS, A NUMBER OF POINTS THERE.

I'M TRYING TO DO THIS IN SOME SORT OF TIME SENSE.

I SHOULD -- IT'S BEEN REMISS OF ME.

I SHOULD ACTUALLY MAKE THE POINT OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE SO THAT PEOPLE ARE REMINDED AGAIN OF THE MEMBERS.

SO THE MEMBERS INCLUDE PETER DENGATE THRUSH, WHO WILL BE JOINING US VERY SHORTLY AS THE CO-CHAIR, CARL BILDT, WHO IS A CO-CHAIR, JANIS KARKLINS, AND ADAMA SAMASSEKOU FROM MALI, EACH OF WHOM WERE THE CHAIRS OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEES.

MARILYN CADE, PIERRE DANDJINOU, ART COVIELLO, THE CEO OF RSA.

I'M MISSING SOMEBODY.

HERE'S THERESA.

THOMAS NILES, FORMER BOARD MEMBER, AMBASSADOR THOMAS NILES.

THAT'S NOT A COMPLETE BOARD COMMITTEE AT ALL.

JUST TO REMIND YOU OF WHO THOSE MEMBERS WERE.

BUT THE COMMITTEE ALSO MADE SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT ROOT ZONE MANAGEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY.

THE PROCESS SURROUNDING ROOT ZONE UPDATES HAVE BEEN CLARIFIED THROUGH THE IANA FUNCTION WITH EXPLANATION OF STEPS TAKEN FOR ROOT ZONE CHANGES.

IN ADDITION TO THIS, THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES ICANN TO DISCUSS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE METHODS FOR CLARIFYING AND SIMPLIFYING THE ROOT ZONE PROCESS.

AND THE COMMITTEE CONSIDERS THAT SUCH DISCUSSIONS COULD CONSIDER A NUMBER OF OPTIONS.

NOW, THESE ARE JUST OPTIONS THAT WERE PUT BY THE COMMITTEE.

THEY'RE NOT OF ANY BINDING NATURE.

THEY'RE NOT -- THEY'RE NOT THE FULL SET.

THEY'RE JUST A COUPLE OF OPTIONS THAT THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS CONSIDERED COULD BE HELD IN DISCUSSION.

ONE COULD BE TO SUBSTITUTE THE U.S. ROLE OF AUDITING AUTHORIZING AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONE FILE WITH A TWO-PHASED OUTSOURCE PROCESS, SUCH AS, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE, AN ORDER CONTRACTED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE TO UNDERTAKE THIS FUNCTION WITH REPORTING BY THE AUDIT TO THE U.S. AND ICANN.

AND TWO, THAT CONTRACTING OF A THIRD-PARTY AUDIT TO BE TAKEN OVER BY ICANN, IF PROVEN SUSTAINABLE.

ANOTHER OPTION, WHICH PERHAPS WOULD BE A COMPLEMENTARY APPROACH, WOULD BE TO DISCONTINUE AUDITING AUTHORIZATION FOR SIMPLE CHANGES TO THE ZONE FILE THROUGH AUTOMATION OF PROCESSES, SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS EIANA, WITH ICANN ENSURING MORE ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PUBLIC OF REPORTING SUCH CHANGES.

COMMITTEE WAS NOT TRYING TO BE PRESCRIPTIVE, IT'S JUST SAYING IT'S WORTH HAVING THIS DIALOGUE, HERE'S TWO POTENTIAL OPTIONS THAT MIGHT BE WORTH HAVING IN THAT DIALOGUE THAT THE COMMITTEE THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT.

THE COMMITTEE ALSO MADE AN OBSERVATION ABOUT CONTINGENCY PLANNING.

IT SAYS, AS PART OF ICANN'S CONTINGENCY PLANNING, THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES THE BOARD TO CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY'S VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS, IN PARTICULAR WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, HOW SOME OF ITS POLICY OBJECTIVES RELATED TO THE ZONE FILE AND DNS COULD BE BETTER ACHIEVED THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION AND/OR EVOLUTION OF CONTINGENCY TRIGGERS AND APPROPRIATE BACK STOP MECHANISMS AS EXPRESSED IN ICANN'S EXISTING CONTINGENCY PLAN.

THIS COULD BE ACHIEVED AS PART OF THE REVIEW OF CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE.

I THINK THE COMMITTEE WAS TRYING TO REFLECT THERE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS MADE QUITE CLEAR A NUMBER OF TIMES, AND I THINK THERE'S A KEY STRATEGIC POINT, OF THEIR CONCERN TO ENSURE SECURITY AND STABILITY OF THE DNS.

AND THE COMMITTEE DID NOT DOUBT THAT AT ALL AND JUST RAISED POTENTIAL ISSUES THAT MIGHT BE IN DISCUSSION TO ENSURE ALIGNMENT OF POLICY INTERESTS WITH POTENTIALLY THIS DISCUSSION.

AGAIN, JUST AN IDEA PUT ON THE TABLE.

THE COMMITTEE ALSO MADE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT.

THE COMMITTEE NOTES THAT ICANN IS ALREADY UNDERTAKING MUCH WORK IN PARTNERSHIP WITH RESPECTIVE ORGANIZATIONS TO FACILITATE OUTREACH AND PROVIDE EXPERTISE IN RESPECTIVE AREAS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING AS APPROPRIATE WITH ICANN'S MANDATE.

AND THEY WERE VERY, VERY CONSCIOUS OF THAT AND DID NOT SEE ICANN AS A DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION.

AND RECOGNIZED SOME OF ITS -- ALREADY WORKING WITH DIFFERENT RELATIONSHIPS.

THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES THE ICANN BOARD AND MANAGEMENT TO CONTINUE TO ENGAGE WITH PARTNERS, INCLUDING REGIONAL INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, TO IDENTIFY HOW THE ICANN COMMUNITY, WITHIN ITS TECHNICAL COORDINATION ROLE, CAN BEST BUILD ON AND CONTINUE TO CONTRIBUTE TO CAPACITY-BUILDING OBJECTIVES IN THE REGIONS, PARTICULARLY AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST, CENTRAL ASIA AND CAUCUSES, SOUTHEAST ASIA, LATIN AMERICA, AND THE CARIBBEAN, AND HELP DEVELOP REGION-SPECIFIC PROGRAMS RELEVANT WITHIN THE PRINCIPLES OF NONDUPLICATION OF EFFORT AND PROMOTING ADVANCED APPROACHES TO SECURITY AND STABILITY.

I THINK I OUGHT TO AUGMENT THAT BY SAYING THE COMMITTEE WAS VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE NARROW MANDATE FOR ICANN AND DOES NOT LOOK AT ICANN TRYING TO DUPLICATE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING, BUT MORE, I SUPPOSE, THE EMPHASIS IS ON COORDINATION, WHERE APPROPRIATE, WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.

CLEARLY, ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS WE WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH IS ISOC AND THE KEY ROLE IT PLAYS IN REGIONAL EDUCATION AND OTHER INITIATIVES.

SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WERE -- HAVE BEEN HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THE FORMATION OF SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS.

AND I THINK VERY INTERESTINGLY, IMPORTANTLY INVOLVED IN THE AT LARGE PROCESS.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY MIGHT REMEMBER THAT CARL BILDT ACTUALLY CHAIRED THE ORIGINAL AT LARGE COMMITTEE REPORT.

PIERRE AND OTHERS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE AT LARGE PROCESS FOR SOME TIME.

AND SO IT'S I THINK PROBABLY I'D LIKE TO ALSO, PERHAPS, FINISH WITH THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE COMMITTEE ON PARTICIPATION AND THE ROLE OF STAKEHOLDERS.

THE COMMITTEE NOTES THAT THE PROVISIONS IN ICANN'S BYLAWS WITH REGARD TO REVIEWING THE RESPECTIVE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF ENSURING A MULTISTAKEHOLDER ORGANIZATION THAT REMAINS RESPONSIVE TO THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH IT OPERATES TO MOST EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY CARRY OUT ITS RESPONSIBILITIES.

THE GREATEST EMPEDIMENT TO ANY ORGANIZATION IS BECOMING STAGNANT IN THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH IT OPERATES OR THE COMMUNITY TO WHICH IT IS RESPONSIBLE.

THE COMMITTEE NOTES THE RECENTLY PROVIDED LSE REVIEW OF THE GNSO AS AN IMPORTANT STEP IN REVIEWING THE GNSO STRUCTURES AND PROCESSES, INCLUDING REPRESENTATION OF STAKEHOLDERS AND BROAD PARTICIPATION.

THE LSE'S REPORT INCLUDES THE OBSERVATION THAT STAKEHOLDER REPRESENTATION IN THE GNSO REQUIRES REVIEW TO ENSURE IT IS REFLECTIVE OF THE EMERGING ENVIRONMENT.

ALSO, THE COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGES THE WORK OF THE CURRENT ALAC AND NOTES IT HAS CONDUCTED A SELF-REVIEW WHICH HAS IDENTIFIED SEVERAL KEY AREAS IN WHICH ALAC NEEDS TO GROW STRONGER.

WITH THIS IN MIND, THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES THE BOARD TO INITIATE AND CONCLUDE THE REVIEWS OF ITS SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS, ADVISORY COMMITTEES, NOMINATING COMMITTEE, AND AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, PARTICULARLY CLARIFYING AND STRENGTHEN RESPECTIVE ROLES, CONTRIBUTIONS, EXPECTATIONS, AND RESPONSIBILITIES.

BUILDING ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND MECHANISMS, THE COMMITTEE ENCOURAGES THE BOARD TO CHALLENGE THE COMMUNITY TO WORK TOGETHER TO ESTABLISH A CLEAR TOPOLOGY, INCLUDING EXAMINING ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF VARIOUS PARTICIPANTS IN THE ICANN PROCESS.

AND THE COMMITTEE HAD A VERY LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT CIVIL SOCIETY.

AND YOU CAN IMAGINE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WITH BACKGROUNDS LIKE CARL BILDT AND ADAMA SAMASSEKOU, AND JANIS HAVING BEEN INVOLVED, AND PIERRE IN CIVIL SOCIETY NOT JUST INSIDE ICANN, BUT ALSO IN OTHER CONTEXTS.

IN RELATION TO THE BROAD CLASSIFICATION OF CIVIL SOCIETY, THE RESPECTIVE ROLES OF SUPPLIERS, USERS, NONCOMMERCIAL ENTITIES, INDIVIDUALS, AND/OR AT LARGE WOULD BENEFIT FROM CLARIFICATION.

AND I THINK THAT WAS A KEY OBSERVATION ABOUT CLARIFICATION OF, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE AND YOU WHAT DO YOU STAND FOR WOULD BE USEFUL.

SO, CHAIRMAN, THAT'S A QUICK SUMMATION OF THE PAPER.

I WOULD EXHORT MEMBERS OF COMMUNITY TO GO TO THE PAPER AND TO READ IT AND GO TO THE CONSULTATION PROCESSES.

I'M NOW FEELING QUITE EXPOSED, BECAUSE I'VE TALKED TO THIS FOR SO LONG, A; AND, B, BECAUSE ALTHOUGH IT'S A PRESIDENT'S STRATEGIC COMMITTEE, A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE DISCUSSION HAS NOT BEEN FROM THE PRESIDENT.

SO WHILE I'VE SUMMARIZED IT, IT'S ACTUALLY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO HAVE DRIVEN THIS DIALOGUE.

I WOULD LIKE TO TURN TO ME COLLEAGUES AND SEE IF THERE ARE FURTHER OBSERVATIONS THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.

>>MARILYN CADE: THANK YOU, PAUL.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I HOPE YOU'LL MARK YOUR CALENDAR ABOUT, AND THAT IS TO PLAN TO NOT ONLY REVIEW WHAT WE HAVE SAID SO FAR AND PROVIDE COMMENTS, BUT TO THINK AHEAD TO PROVIDING FURTHER COMMENTS TO US AND PARTICIPATING IN THE ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL THAT WE PLAN TO DO IN THE MIDDLE OF FEBRUARY.

THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE GIVEN THOUGHT TO THE STRATEGIC CHALLENGES AND THE ISSUES THAT ARE FACING ICANN IN THAT SETTING, I THINK THE COMMITTEE FOUND -- I CAN SPEAK FOR MYSELF -- WE FOUND THAT VERY HELPFUL AND VERY INFORMATIVE.

SO WHILE WE'VE GIVEN A LOT OF THOUGHT SO FAR, THERE'S ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THINK EVEN FURTHER.

AND THAT WILL BE COMING UP IN THE MIDDLE OF FEBRUARY.

WHEN WE THINK ABOUT STRATEGIC ISSUES THAT ARE FACING ICANN, WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND, OF COURSE, THAT THE ORGANIZATION HAS TO KEEP RUNNING AND FULFILLING ITS CORE MISSION, EVEN AS IT PREPARES TO DEAL WITH STRATEGIC ISSUES.

AND EVERY ONE OF YOU CAN PROBABLY HELP THE COMMITTEE TO THINK A BIT ABOUT WHAT THOSE STRATEGIC ISSUES ARE AND WHAT SOME OF THE OPTIONS ARE.

>>PIERRE DANDJINOU: JUST TO ADD QUICK COMMENTS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT FIRST WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED SO FAR. AND PERSONALLY I WOULD LIKE TO INSIST ON THE ROLE OF PARTICIPATION FOR STAKEHOLDERS. AND AS MENTIONED, I THINK THERE IS A NEED TO ACTUALLY COME UP WITH A CLEAR DEFINITION OF CLARIFICATION OF ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES, ESPECIALLY IF ONE WANTS TO REFLECT THE EMERGING ENVIRONMENT. ESPECIALLY POST WSIS, WHERE YOU DO HAVE MANY STAKEHOLDERS THERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE PLAYING A ROLE. I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY IMPORTANT.

AND AS THE ICANN BYLAWS ALREADY ACTUALLY SUGGEST, THE REVIEW IS IMPORTANT. IT'S NECESSARY TO ACTUALLY COME UP WITH DEFINITIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS, SO THAT AT LEAST PEOPLE REALLY PARTICIPATE.

AND ONCE AGAIN, I THINK WE STILL HAVE SOME TIME, TILL FEBRUARY, TO ADD COMMENTS AND TO HAVE A PROPER REPORT.

THANKS.

>>JANIS KARKLINS: SO FOR MY PART, I SHOULD MOST PROBABLY START BY SAYING THAT AS PAUL INDICATED THAT THIS REPORT DOES NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF GOVERNMENT OF SWEDEN. I MUST ADMIT THAT THIS REPORT DOES NOT REPRESENT VIEWS OF GOVERNMENT OF LATVIA, EITHER, BECAUSE I TRIED TO BRING WSIS PERSPECTIVE IN THIS DISCUSSION, AND I TRIED TO MAKE SOME SUGGESTIONS WHICH, IN MY PERSONAL VIEW, WOULD HELP IN IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION AS WELL AS SPIRIT OF DISCUSSIONS IN WSIS, PARTICULARLY SECOND PART OF THE WSIS.

AND YOU SHOULD REVIEW AND ANALYZE PROPOSALS ON ISSUES LIKE REGIONAL PRESENCE AND LEGAL ENTITY OF ICANN, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DECISION OF WSIS WHICH SPEAKS ABOUT INTERNATIONALIZATION, FURTHER INTERNATIONALIZATION OF ICANN; THE ISSUE OF ROOT ZONE MANAGEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY IN CONJUNCTION WITH DISCUSSIONS OF THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT -- ONE GOVERNMENT VERSUS INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY GOVERNMENTS IN MANAGEMENT OF CERTAIN ASPECTS OF DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM.

SO THAT IS, I MUST SAY, MY PERSONAL BEST JUDGMENT AND OPINION WHAT COULD BE DONE REASONABLY TO MEET CONCERNS EXPRESSED DURING WSIS BY MANY GOVERNMENTS OF THE WORLD.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: AM I AUDIBLE? BARELY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO WALK THROUGH THE REPORT IN THAT DEGREE OF DETAIL.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL STATUS REPORT TO DO BEFORE WE GO ON TO Q&A AND THAT'S TO GO SOME VIEWS ON THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM, AND MARKUS KUMMER HAS AGREED TO OFFER THAT OBSERVATION.

SO IF MARKUS IS WITH US, I'D LIKE TO ASK HIM TO JOIN US ON THE DAIS.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: I THINK AS WELL AS MARKUS, WE HAVE ALSO GOT AYESHA HASSAN FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND THE REDOUBTABLE LYNN ST. AMOUR FROM ISOC WHO ALL PARTICIPATED STRONG HI IN THIS AREA SO I THINK WE ARE ASKING ALL THREE TO GIVE US AN UPDATE.

>>MARKUS KUMMER: THANK YOU, VINT. GOOD MORNING TO YOU ALL.

MANY OF YOU WERE IN ATHENS SO I WON'T GO TOO MUCH INTO DETAILS.

THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM IS A MULTISTAKEHOLDER FORUM AND IT INCLUDES ALL STAKEHOLDERS. I'M VERY PLEASED TO HAVE TWO REPRESENTATIVES OF TWO IMPORTANT STAKEHOLDER GROUPS HERE, THE INTERNET COMMUNITY, WITH LYNN, AND PRIVATE SECTOR REPRESENTED HERE BY AYESHA HASSAN FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. BUT WE SHOULD NOT FORGET THERE ARE ALSO TWO VERY IMPORTANT GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS, GOVERNMENTS AND CIVIL SOCIETY.

ATHENS -- THE MEETING IN ATHENS WAS A LEARNING EXPERIENCE, I THINK, FOR ALL THESE STAKEHOLDER GROUPS. MAYBE THE TOUGHEST EXPERIENCE WAS FOR THE GOVERNMENTS, BECAUSE THEY HAD TO BLEND IN WITH THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, NOT AS IN WSIS WHERE THEY HAD A PRIVILEGED SPACE AS IT IS NORMAL IN INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS, BUT THERE WERE ONE GROUP AMONG OTHERS, AND HAD NO PARTICULAR PRIVILEGES COMPARED TO THE OTHER GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS.

ALL IN ALL, I THINK THE IGF CAN BE DESCRIBED AS AN EXPERIMENT IN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.

THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS IN HIS MESSAGE TO THE MEETING CALLED IT A MOVE INTO UNCHARTED TERRITORY.

ATHENS, THE MEETING, I THINK WE CAN SAFELY SAY, EXCEEDED EXPECTATIONS. MOST PARTICIPANTS WERE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH THE MEETING, AND IT IS A VERY SOLID BASIS TO BUILD ON WHEN PREPARING THE NEXT MEETING, WHICH WILL TAKE PLACE IN RIO IN NOVEMBER 2007.

AND I'M PARTICULARLY PLEASED TO WORK WITH THE HOST COUNTRY TEAM, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE THE SAME TEAM AS THE TEAM THAT IS HOSTING THIS ICANN MEETING HERE IN SAO PAULO, SO WE HAVE, I THINK, VERY SOLID GUARANTEES FOR A SUCCESSFUL MEETING IN RIO NEXT YEAR.

LET ME SAY A FEW WORDS WHAT THE IGF IS, FOR THOSE WHO WERE NOT IN ATHENS. AND MAYBE IT IS EASIER TO SAY WHAT THE IGF IS NOT RATHER THAN WHAT IT IS. IT IS NOT A NEW ORGANIZATION. IT IS NOT A DECISION-MAKING BODY, AND IT IS NOT A DIPLOMATIC TYPE CONFERENCE, SUCH AS WE HAD WITH THE WORLD SUMMIT ON THE INFORMATION SOCIETY.

CRITICS SAY IT'S JUST A TALKING SHOP WITHOUT TEETH. I WOULD TURN THIS ARGUMENT AROUND AND SAY WHAT MAY BE SEEN AS AN APPARENT WEAKNESS IS ACTUALLY THE STRENGTH OF THE IGF. NOBODY NEEDS TO BE AFRAID OF THE IGF. NOBODY NEEDS TO BE AFRAID OF ANY WRONG DECISION THAT COULD BE TAKEN. AND THIS GIVES, ACTUALLY, PARTICIPANTS THE FREEDOM TO SPEAK OPENLY. IT ALLOWS FOR AN OPEN DIALOGUE, FOR AN OPEN EXCHANGE OF VIEWS AND INFORMATION, AND FOR THE SHARING OF BEST PRACTICES.

THE IGF HAS NOT THE POWER OF REDISTRIBUTION. IT CANNOT TAKE AWAY ANYTHING FROM ANYBODY, BUT IT DOES HAVE THE POWER OF RECOGNITION. IT CAN PUT AN ISSUE ON THE AGENDA OF INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION, AND AS SUCH, IT HAS -- IF IT HAS ANY POWER -- A KIND OF MORAL POWER.

I WOULD SAY IN MANY WAYS, THE IGF IS LIKE THE INTERNET ITSELF. IT IS BASED ON A BOTTOM-UP COLLABORATIVE EFFORT, AND IT'S VALUE ADDED IS ACTUALLY MORE AT THE EDGES THAN AT THE CENTER.

THE MEETING, THE PANELS WE HAD, THIS WAS ALL GOOD, BUT I THINK THE REAL VALUE ADDED FOR PARTICIPANTS WERE AT THE EDGES WHERE THEY COULD MEET OTHER PEOPLE, REACH OUT TO PEOPLE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE MET OTHERWISE.

THERE WERE A NUMBER OF WORKSHOPS, I THINK MORE THAN 30 WE HAD, AND THERE PEOPLE COULD FOCUS ON ISSUES THEY CARED ABOUT, MORE SPECIFIC ISSUES.

AND OUT OF THESE WORKSHOPS, WE HAD A NUMBER OF WHAT WAS TERMED DYNAMIC COALITIONS, COMMON INITIATIVES THAT EMERGED AGAIN IN A BOTTOM-UP MANNER. IT WAS NOT A NEGOTIATED OUTCOME, BUT IT WAS INITIATIVES FROM PEOPLE WHO GOT TOGETHER AND DECIDED TO PURSUE A COMMON OBJECTIVE.

WE HAVE NOW DYNAMIC COALITIONS ON SPAM, WHICH GROUPS ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE OECD AND APEC BUT ALSO NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS AND THEY HAVE CREATED A COMMON WEB SITE AND THIS WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT THE IGF AS A CATALYST THAT TRIGGERED OFF THIS COMMON ACTIVITY.

WE HAVE A COALITION ON OPEN STANDARDS, ON PRIVACY, ONE ON INTERNET BILL OF RIGHTS, AND WE ALSO HAVE A COALITION OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD MAKE EFFORTS TO FIND FUNDING FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRY PARTICIPANTS.

THE IGF, I THINK, FILLED A GAP. THERE WAS A DEMAND HERE FOR THIS KIND OF MEETING TO DISCUSS IN A MULTISTAKEHOLDER SETING A BROAD RANGE OF INTERNET-RELATED ISSUES. AND BASED ON THE BROAD DEFINITION OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE AS IT WAS ADOPTED BY WSIS IN TUNIS, WHICH GOES WELL BEYOND THE ICANN'S REMIT.

WE PUT THE DISCUSSION ON THE FOUR BROAD THEMES OF OPENNESS, SECURITY, DIVERSITY, AND ACCESS, AND ON THESE THEMES WE HAD INTERESTING DISCUSSIONS WHICH WILL BE PURSUED IN RIO.

ATHENS WAS PREPARED BY A MULTISTAKEHOLDER ADVISORY GROUP. NOW TIME HAS COME TO TAKE STOCK, TO LOOK AT WHAT WORKED AND WHAT WORKED MAYBE LESS WELL, AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED. WE HAVE OPENED FOR CONTRIBUTIONS ON OUR WEB SITE, WWW.INTGOVFORUM.ORG. AND WE ARE HOPING TO HOLD AN OPEN CONSULTATION MEETING IN FEBRUARY NEXT YEAR ON THE 13TH OF FEBRUARY, BUT THE DATES CANNOT YET BE CONFIRMED. THAT WILL DEPEND ON THE U.N. CALENDAR OF MEETINGS, WHICH WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE UNITED NATIONS BY THE END OF THIS YEAR. BUT 99.9% CERTAINTY, IT WILL BE ON THE 13TH OF FEBRUARY.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO END MY BRIEF INTRODUCTION BY THANKING ALL STAKEHOLDERS WHO ENGAGED IN THE PROCESS. AND I THINK LYNN AND AYESHA REPRESENT TWO STAKEHOLDER GROUPS WHICH WERE RATHER SKEPTICAL TO BEGIN WITH, AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT, IN PARTICULAR, THE INTERNET COMMUNITY AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR ACTUALLY HAVE BOUGHT INTO THE PROCESS.

THANK YOU.

>>AYESHA HASSAN: THANK YOU, PAUL. THANK YOU, MARKUS.

MY NAME IS AYESHA HASSAN, AND I AM FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WHICH IS BASED IN PARIS.

AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, ICC WAS VERY INVOLVED IN COORDINATING BUSINESS INPUT TO THE WSIS PROCESS, AND HAS CONTINUED TO BUILD ON THOSE EFFORTS POST WSIS.

I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE USEFUL TODAY FOR THIS COMMUNITY TO JUST GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF HOW BUSINESS PARTICIPATED IN THE IGF, WHAT WERE SOME OF THE EXPECTATIONS, AND SOME OF OUR REFLECTIONS POST THE IGF IN ATHENS AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO COMING BACK TO BRAZIL NEXT NOVEMBER FOR THE RIO IGF --

BRIEFLY, BUSINESS DID HAVE A SENSE OF SKEPTICISM, AS MARKUS HAS NOTED. WE DID ENGAGE IN THE PREPARATIONS FOR THE IGF THROUGH THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER ADVISORY GROUP, AND RECOGNIZED THAT IN PREPARING THIS IGF IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL MEETING THAT DID ALLOW ALL THE STAKEHOLDER GROUPS TO COMMUNICATE AND EXCHANGE EXPERIENCES IN AN ENVIRONMENT THAT WAS SHAPED FOR JUST THAT KIND OF EXCHANGE.

-- ONE OF THE KEY WAYS IN WHICH THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL HAS BEEN CONTRIBUTING TO THE IGF HAS BEEN THROUGH ICCS NEW INITIATIVE, THE BUSINESS ACTION TO SUPPORT THE INFORMATION SOCIETY INITIATIVE, BASIS FOR SHORT. AND WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS BUILD ON THE NETWORK THAT HAD BEEN STARTED THROUGH THE SUMMIT PROCESS, BRINGING TOGETHER ASSOCIATIONS AND COMPANIES FROM AROUND THE WORLD, FROM ALL SECTORS, OF ALL SIZES, TO HELP CREATE A COORDINATED SUBSTANTIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE IGF PROCESS. AND THE BASIS MEMBERSHIP INCLUDES ICC AND NON-ICC MEMBERS.

BASICALLY, THE PLATFORM IS NOT ONLY TO COORDINATE AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM BUT ALSO TO A VARIETY OF OTHER ICT FOR DEVELOPMENT FORA AND THE POST WSIS ACTION LINES.

SO IN A NUTSHELL, WHEN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY CAME TO THE IGF, ONE OF OUR HOPES WAS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD LEAVE SAYING THAT THEY HAD LEARNED SOMETHING NEW; THAT THEY NEW KNEW MORE ABOUT WHO WAS DOING WHAT, AND THEY HAD MET PEOPLE THAT THEY COULD CALL ON AFTERWARDS TO ADDRESS ISSUES TOGETHER AT THE NATIONAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL.

AND WE HAVE TO SAY THAT THE IMPORTANT EXPERIMENT THAT WAS THE IGF WAS A SUCCESS IN THIS REGARD, AND PARTLY THIS IS DUE TO THE IMPORTANT FORMAT THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER. THE FACT THAT ALL STAKEHOLDERS WERE PARTICIPATING ON AN EQUAL FOOTING REALLY ALLOWED US, AS MARKUS POINTED OUT, FOR SOME SUBSTANTIVE EXCHANGES WHICH THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY FELT WERE VERY MUCH LINKED TO THE FORMAT AND THE WAY IN WHICH THE PROGRAM WAS SHAPED.

THIS WAS ALSO ONE OF THE EXPECTATIONS WE HAD WAS THAT THE INFORMAL PART OF THE IGF WOULD BE A COMPLEMENT TO THE FORMAL EVENTS. THIS CAN BE UNDERSCORED AS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD CONTINUE.

THE INFORMAL EVENTS WERE NOT ONLY THE ENCOUNTER PLAZA, AN AREA WHERE PEOPLE HAD EXCHANGES AND WERE ABLE TO TALK WITH EACH OTHER AND PROVIDE INFORMATION TO EACH OTHER ABOUT THE BROAD RANGE OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE ISSUES THAT THEY MIGHT BE WORKING ON, BUT IT WAS ALSO THE SOCIAL EVENTS AND THE ONE-ON-ONE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAPPENED IN THIS VERY SPECIAL SPACE. AND BUSINESS WOULD HOPE TO SEE THAT IMPROVE AND CONTINUE WHEN WE COME BACK TO RIO.

IN ADDITION, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WAS INVOLVED IN THE MAIN MEETING SESSIONS THROUGH THE VARIOUS SPEAKERS AS WELL AS THROUGH MANY WORKSHOPS. AND FOR INSTANCE, ICC AND BASIS WORKED WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA AS WELL AS A CO-SPONSOR OF A WORKSHOP ON CAPACITY BUILDING TO BUILD MEANINGFUL PARTICIPATION IN INTERNET GOVERNANCE ISSUES. AND WE ALSO WORKED CLOSELY WITH ISOC AND APC TO ENSURE THAT THE PANEL WAS A MULTISTAKEHOLDER DISCUSSION AND A REAL SHARING OF CONCRETE EXPERIENCES. AND WE FELT THAT THAT WAS A GREAT SUCCESS.

MANY OTHER BUSINESS ENTITIES WHO ARE MEMBERS OF BASIS WERE ALSO INVOLVED IN CAPACITY BUILDING WORKSHOPS AND OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE WORKSHOPS. MANY OF THEM ARE IN THE ROOM AND I'M SURE ALL OF YOU CAN CONSULT THE WEB SITE TO SEE THE DETAILS. BUT BUSINESS WAS INVOLVED IN THAT ELEMENT AS WELL.

WE WERE ALSO A PART OF THE OPENING AND CLOSING AT THE IGF, AND ALL OF THOSE THOUGHTS ARE ON THE WEB SITES FOR YOU TO CONSULT.

OUR HOPE WAS THAT THE IGF WOULD BE A REAL OPPORTUNITY FOR MULTISTAKEHOLDER DISCUSSIONS, AND ALSO THIS KIND OF COOPERATION, WHICH WE FELT WAS AN IMPORTANT PART OF BRINGING ABOUT DIALOGUE AND EMPOWERING PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY PROMOTE THE BENEFITS OF THE INTERNET FOR MORE STAKEHOLDERS AT ALL LEVELS.

ONE OF THE OTHER HOPES IS THAT THE INFORMAL AND FORMAL EXCHANGES AT THE IGF WILL BE TAKEN HOME, AND THAT THOSE EXPERIENCES AND PERHAPS GREATER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS AND VIEWPOINTS OF THE BROAD RANGE OF ISSUES THAT WERE ADDRESSED WILL TRANSLATE INTO NATIONAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL DISCUSSIONS ON THESE ISSUES TO TAKE THEM FURTHER AND HELP PUT INTO PLACE THE APPROPRIATE FRAMEWORKS AND ENVIRONMENTS TO CONTINUE TO BUILD.

A FEW FEEDBACK AND REFLECTIONS ON THE IGF. AS MARKUS HAS SAID THERE IS A FORMAL CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS THAT PEOPLE CAN CONTRIBUTE ON THE WEB SITE, AND THE ICC/BASIS GROUP IS PUTTING TOGETHER A MORE FORMAL CONTRIBUTION, BUT I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO POINT OUT SOME OF THE KEY ELEMENTS THAT HAVE SURFACED AS GOOD FEEDBACK AS WE THINK FORWARD AND OUR BRAZILIAN HOSTS WILL BE PLANNING AHEAD. AND ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WAS THAT THE IGF'S FORMAT DID ALLOW THESE DISCUSSIONS AND WE WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO THAT CONTINUING.

IT WAS A REAL SUCCESS, AND THAT'S PARTLY THE LEADERSHIP OF MARKUS AND MR. DESAI WHO PROVIDED THE ADVISORY GROUP AND THE PROGRAM WITH GREAT LEADERSHIP AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD CONTINUE AS WE GO FORWARD TO RIO.

SOME OF THE THINGS THAT COULD BE IMPROVED AND THE IGF IN RIO HAS THE BENEFIT OF EXTRA TIME, WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE NEXT IGF'S PLANNING IS GIVEN MORE TIME THAN THE IGF IN ATHENS WHICH HAD TO WORK QUICKLY AND RAPIDLY AT A RAPID PACE, GETTING READY, AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THE FINALIZATION OF CERTAIN LOGISTICS AND FACILITIES AND THE PLANNING OF THE SESSIONS AND FINALIZATION OF PANELISTS THAT WOULD JUST ALLOW FOR A DEEPER LEVEL OF PREPARATION.

THE INTERACTIVE NATURE OF THE SESSIONS, THE MAIN MEETING SESSIONS, AS SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW, THEY WERE MODERATED BY PROFESSIONALS WHO HELPED TO STIR DISCUSSION AND ELICIT THE DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS ON THE VARIOUS BUCKETS OF ISSUES THAT MARKUS TALKED ABOUT, AND MANY IN BUSINESS FEEL THAT A SMALL NUMBER ON THE PANEL, BUT THE SAME USE OF INTERACTIVE FORMATS FOR THOSE PANELS, WOULD BE VERY USEFUL.

THAT'S JUST A FEW BRIEF HIGHLIGHTS.

A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WILL BE WORKING ON AND ICC AND BASIS ARE VERY COMMITTED TO TRYING TO RAISE THE NUMBER OF BUSINESS PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE IGF NEXT YEAR, BUT ALSO DIVERSIFY. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THERE BE A DIVERSITY IN BOTH GEOGRAPHY AND SECTORS IN ALL STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT WHAT THE IGF OPPORTUNITY IS FOR BUSINESS AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS. AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON THAT I'M VERY THANKFUL TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK HERE TODAY, AS ALL OF YOU GO BACK AND THERE ARE CONNECTIONS AND CONTACTS WITH BUSINESS PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE INVOLVED FOR NEXT YEAR. I WOULD CERTAINLY BE PLEASED TO HEAR FROM YOU AND DO WHAT I CAN TO HELP FACILITATE THAT.

ANOTHER LAST POINT IS I THINK THE IGF IN ATHENS, FROM THE BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE, REALLY UNDERSCORED THE FACT THAT THE BROAD RANGE OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE ISSUES CANNOT BE MANAGED BY ANY ONE STAKEHOLDER GROUP ALONE. AND THAT HAVING THIS KIND OF SPACE TO SHARE EXPERIENCE AND COOPERATE TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES IS VERY IMPORTANT GOING FORWARD.

AND SINCE THE RANGE OF ISSUES IS MUCH BROADER THAN WHAT IS ADDRESSED IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY, I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO LET YOU KNOW WHAT BUSINESS WAS DOING THERE. AS YOU KNOW, BUSINESS IS INVOLVED IN THE ICANN COMMUNITY AS WELL, BUT WHERE IT'S HELPFUL AND WHERE IT'S POSSIBLE, HELPING TO BRING THE RIGHT EXPERTISE TO THE IGF FROM ALL THE DIFFERENT AREAS, THE BROAD RANGE OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE ISSUES AS WELL AS SOME OF THE TECHNICAL ISSUES THAT WE HAVE MORE EXPERTISE IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE WOULD WELCOME THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR EXPERTS TO PARTICIPATE.

I WILL FINISH WITH THAT REMARK AND JUST WELCOME ALL OF YOU TO BE IN TOUCH WITH ME WHILE I AM HERE. I AM HAPPY TO SHARE ANY MORE INFORMATION AND OBVIOUSLY THE ICC WEB SITE IS A SOURCE FOR THAT AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

>>LYNN ST. AMOUR: THANK YOU.

I WILL ACTUALLY ECHO A LOT OF WHAT AYESHA JUST SAID, WHICH IS PROBABLY AN INDICATION OF HOW COLLABORATIVE AN ENVIRONMENT THE IGF WAS AND, IN PARTICULAR, THE PREPARATIONS LEADING UP TO IGF AS WELL.

IN THE ISOC'S EXPERIENCE, BOTH AS A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY GROUP AS WELL AS SUPPORTIVE AND LEADER IN MANY OF THE PANELS, WAS JUST AS RICH AND JUST AS VARIED AS ANY OF THE OTHER COMMUNITIES. AND IN PARTICULAR, IS CIVIL SOCIETY AND GOVERNMENTS AS WELL, WHOM WE WERE ABLE TO WORK WITH VERY CLOSELY.

I THINK THE THING ISOC WAS MOST PROUD ABOUT IS WE ACTUALLY MADE A SPECIFIC EFFORT TO INCREASE THE DEVELOPING COUNTRY PARTICIPATION IN THE WORKSHOPS.

THROUGH THE WSIS AND WGIG ACTIVITIES HAD VARIOUS SPONSORSHIP PROGRAMS FOR PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE ACTIVITIES, LARGELY AS WE ALL DID, LARGELY AS OBSERVERS. PARTICULARLY FOR THE IGF, WE TRIED TO PUT AS MANY PEOPLE FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ON THE PANELS AND IN THE SESSIONS AS POSSIBLE. SO WE DIDN'T PUT ISOC STAFF, BY AND LARGE. WE ACTUALLY FOUND PEOPLE FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO HAD EXPERIENCE AND WERE EXPERTS AND PARTICIPATED IN THE SESSIONS. AND THAT'S CERTAINLY ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE THE IGF TO DO IN THE FUTURE IS TO FIND A WAY TO FUND AN EVEN GREATER AMOUNT OF PARTICIPATION. THAT WAS ONE OF THE CRIES FROM MOST OF THE PARTICIPANTS THERE, THAT A FACILITY TO SUPPORT GREATER PARTICIPATION FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES WASN'T THERE IN A PHYSICAL SENSE. AND I THINK WE CAN ALSO DO A LOT TO INCREASE THE VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CAPABILITIES AS WELL.

JUST A COUPLE OF OTHER COMMENTS. WE WERE VERY, VERY HAPPY THAT IGF FOCUSED AS MUCH AS IT DID ON CAPACITY BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT. I THINK IT'S NO SECRET THAT WE WERE PRETTY DISAPPOINTED THROUGH ALL THE WSIS ACTIVITIES THAT A RELATIVELY SMALL SHARE OF ACTIVITIES THERE FOCUSED ON ACTIVITIES THAT WERE GOING TO BRING THE INTERNET TO THE 5 BILLION PEOPLE THAT AREN'T YET CONNECTED. SO WE PUSHED VERY HARD THROUGH THE IGF. WE WERE EXTREMELY HAPPY THAT THE IGF DID MAKE THAT SUCH A SIGNIFICANT FOCUS. AND ACTUALLY, LARGELY REMAINED COMMITTED TO IT THROUGH THE FULL AGENDA.

I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THAT COMMITMENT REMAINS THROUGH RIO AND SUBSEQUENT IGF MEETINGS. ONE MEETING DOESN'T FIX IT.

I WOULD HATE TO SEE US SLIP BACK AND FOCUS PRIMARILY -- AND THERE'S PROBABLY EVEN A DANGER OF US FOCUSING LARGELY SOLELY ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE MATTERS OR MATTERS HAVING TO DO WITH INTERNET RESOURCES. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT LOSS, NOT ONLY FOR THE MOMENTUM WE HAVE BUILT UP FOR THIS LAST IGF. IT'S CLEARLY A GREAT LOSS FOR THE CONTINUED DEPLOYMENT OF THE INTERNET.

I THINK THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER APPROACH, VERY, VERY CLEARLY ENABLED MORE DIALOGUE AND MORE OPEN DIALOGUE BETWEEN ALL PARTIES. AND I CERTAINLY HOPE THE DISCUSSION IN MANY FORUMS, NOT JUST IGF FORUMS, MOVES BEYOND WHERE -- BEYOND WHETHER CIVIL SOCIETY SHOULD PARTICIPATE, BUT IN FACT, HOW CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATES.

I THINK WE HAVE SPENT AN AWFUL LOT OF TIME IN VARIOUS COMMUNITIES, THE INTERNET COMMUNITIES, CIVIL SOCIETY, BUSINESS, ARGUING ON THE PRINCIPLE OF PARTICIPATION. I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S NOW TIME TO START MOVING TO A PRINCIPLE OF PARTICIPATION FOLLOWED UP WITH, AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO PARTICIPATE, TO WHAT PURPOSE, AND TO WHAT EXTENT. I THINK WE HAVE DONE THE PLEAS AND THE PASSIONATE CRIES VERY EFFECTIVELY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. I THINK WE NOW NEED TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP TOWARD ACTUALLY FACILITATING VERY SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS.

I THINK THERE CLEARLY WAS A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH ON ALL MATTERS AFFECTING THE GROWTH AND DEPLOYMENT OF THE INTERNET, WHETHER IT WAS THROUGH THE WORKSHOPS OR THROUGH SOME OF THE PANEL SESSIONS AS WELL.

DIALOGUE WAS OPEN AND FRANK, CERTAINLY IN SMALLER SESSIONS AND IN SMALLER WORKSHOPS, BUT IF ANY OF YOU SAW SOME OF THE SESSIONS SUCH AS THE SETTING THE SCENE OR THE OTHER PANELS, IT WAS EQUALLY FRANK THERE. AND I THINK TO EVERYBODY'S CREDIT, INCLUDING MANY GOVERNMENTS, THEY STAYED IN, THEY STAYED IN THE PROCESS. AND TO DATE, THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY SIGNIFICANT RETRACTION OR WITHDRAWAL FROM FUTURE PROCESSES. SO I THINK THAT'S EXCELLENT.

I THINK I'LL JUST CLOSE WITH THE FACT THAT THE INTERNET BROKE MANY BARRIERS, AND I REALLY HOPE THAT AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO FUTURE PROCESSES THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE JUST AS CREATIVE AND JUST AS INNOVATIVE ABOUT THOSE PROCESSES AND THEIR FUTURE EVOLUTION AS THE CREATORS OF THE INTERNET WERE.

I THINK THERE'S, AT TIMES, STILL PRESSURE TO MOVE TO A STRUCTURE WHICH PEOPLE RECOGNIZE. IT CAN BE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE, A U.N. STRUCTURE. IT CAN EVEN BE AN INTERNET COMMUNITY STRUCTURE THAT ALL OF US WOULD ACTUALLY PUSH, I GUESS, FOR GREATER ADOPTION. BUT I REALLY WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY TO BE AS OPEN AS THEY CAN WITH RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW MODELS, TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WILL HELP THE GREATER DEPLOYMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET.

BUT I THINK IN SUMMARY, WE WERE SLIGHTLY SKEPTICAL, WHICH MAYBE IS IN OUR NATURE. WE'RE ALSO PRETTY PRAGMATIC. WE'RE DRIVEN TO PROBLEM SOLVE.

THOSE CHARACTERISTICS WOULD MAKE US A LITTLE BIT SKEPTICAL ABOUT WHAT WAS INITIALLY CHARACTERIZED AS A TALK SHOP

HAVING SAID THAT, COMING OUT OF THE IGF, I WAS VERY, VERY IMPRESSED.

I THINK IT WAS EXTREMELY VALUABLE, ABSOLUTELY DO SUPPORT IT GOING FORWARD, WOULD ENCOURAGE MORE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE.

I THINK IT BROKE DOWN BARRIERS BETWEEN COMMUNITIES AND ALLOWED PEOPLE TO LISTEN FREELY AND OPENLY WITHOUT HAVING TO DETERMINE WHAT THEIR NEGOTIATION POSITION WAS, WITHOUT HAVING TO READ FROM A PAPER THAT HAD BEEN PREAPPROVED A MONTH BEFORE THEY WALKED IN THE FORUM.

I THINK THAT ENABLED LISTENING BEYOND WHAT I HAD ACTUALLY IMAGINED IT MIGHT ENABLE.

SO I THINK IT WAS A VERY REWARDING EXPERIENCE FOR ME AND FOR ALL THE OTHER INTERNET COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT I'VE SPOKEN TO THAT PARTICIPATED.

AND I SIMPLY HOPE THAT WE KEEP THAT SPIRIT AND THE FOCUS TO THE ORIGINAL CHARTER AND PURPOSE ALIVE FOR RIO.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL THE PANELISTS.

I'D LIKE TO INVITE QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR, IF THERE ARE ANY, ON ALL THE TOPICS THAT HAVE BEEN COVERED THIS MORNING.

I REALIZE THAT WE'RE KIND OF IMPINGING ON THE 2:00 START OF THE GNSO ACTIVITY.

SO WE'LL TRY TO DO THIS IN A -- AN EFFICIENT WAY.

I'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE IGF.

I SPENT THE TIME THERE BEING VERY IMPRESSED BY THE DIVERSITY OF PARTICIPATION.

AND IN THE END, I KEPT THINKING WE SHOULD BE CALLING IT THE INTERNET FACILITATION FORUM, BECAUSE AN AWFUL LOT OF WHAT WAS GOING ON WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET MORE INTERNET OUT THERE AND IN EVERYBODY'S HANDS.

LET ME INVITE THE FIRST QUESTION.

>>VITTORIO BERTOLA: OKAY.

THANK YOU.

WELL, I ACTUALLY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO SUPPLEMENT THE PANEL WITH THE PERSPECTIVE THAT WAS MISSING FROM IT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A SORT OF VIEW FROM CIVIL SOCIETY.

I HAPPEN TO HAVE BEEN ELECTED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AS ONE OF THE COORDINATORS OF THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE CAUCUS, WHICH IS MORE OR LESS THE PLACE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY SIMILAR TO WHAT AYESHA, FOR EXAMPLE, IS DOING FOR BUSINESS.

SO I THINK IT'S -- IT WAS A GOOD EXPERIENCE.

I THINK EVERYONE WAS SATISFIED, AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE I TALKED TO WERE MORE SATISFIED THAN THEY THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE.

SO I THINK THE SAME APPLIES TO CIVIL SOCIETY.

WE WERE A BIT CONCERNED THAT THE ENTIRE MEETING WOULD JUST BE A LOT OF TALK, BUT NOTHING PRACTICAL WOULD HAPPEN.

AND INSTEAD, WE REALIZED THAT A LOT OF THINGS ARE HAPPENING AND PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO TALK TO EACH OTHER.

SO EVEN IF THERE IS NO FORMAL WAY TO MAKE DECISIONS, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE HOT TOPICS OF THE MEETING, THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON.

THERE'S PEOPLE TALKING TO EACH OTHER, AND THE RESULT IS THAT SOLUTIONS ARE STARTING TO BE IMAGINED FOR PRACTICAL PROBLEMS.

AND EVEN IF IT WILL TAKE YEARS, I THINK POSSIBLY ALL THE FOUR YEARS THAT WE STILL HAVE IN FRONT OF US, I THINK THERE WILL BE IMPORTANT THINGS COMING OUT OF THE IGF.

AND, MORE IMPORTANTLY, THEY WILL BE THINGS THAT WILL BE SHARED BY EVERYONE.

AND I'M PARTICULARLY HAPPY TO HEAR PEOPLE FROM THE PANEL SAYING THAT THEY ARE STARTING TO ENTER INTO THIS MODE, TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE CAN BE PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS COMING OUT FROM THE IGF IF WE START TO TALK TO EACH OTHER.

SO MAYBE WE NEED -- WE STILL NEED TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO MAKE IT MORE PRACTICAL, SO IN THE END, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RELEASED BY THIS ENTITY SO THAT PEOPLE CAN HAVE A LOOK AT IT, EVEN IF IT WILL NOT BE BINDING, THERE STILL NEEDS TO BE A REFERENCE SO IN FOUR OR FIVE YEARS, EVERYONE CAN SEE WHAT THEY THINK, THEN PEOPLE CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT, USE IT OR NOT, BUT AT LEAST THERE WAS SOMETHING FROM WHAT WAS DISCUSSED.

BUT STILL, I THINK THE FEEDBACK WAS VERY POSITIVE.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, VITTORIO.

>>ADAM PEAKE: ADAM PEAKE, AND I WAS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY GROUP FROM THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM.

AND AYESHA HAS CERTAINLY DISCOVERED MANY OF THE ISSUES DISCUSSING HOW WE WORKED AS AN ADVISORY GROUP AND EXPECTATIONS OF THE MEETING.

MANY OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW FROM THE WSIS PROCESS THAT THERE WERE -- THE STAKEHOLDER GROUPS WERE SORT OF DIVIDED UP INTO CONCEPTS OF CIVIL SOCIETY, PRIVATE SECTOR, AND GOVERNMENTS.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE SUCCESSES AND EXCITING OUTCOMES OF THE IGF WAS TO SEE THE INTERNET COMMUNITY RECOGNIZED, AS IT WERE, UNDER THE U.N.'S FLAG AS A STAKEHOLDER GROUP.

IT WAS GOOD TO SEE THE INTERNET COMMUNITY AT THE OPENING AND CLOSING CEREMONIES.

SO FOR THIS ROOM, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT SUCCESS.

AND IT'S A PLEASING OUTCOME TO SEE THE INTERNET RECOGNIZED IN THAT WAY.

THINKING ABOUT ICANN'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS, I HOPE ICANN AS AN ORGANIZATION WILL BE MORE CONFIDENT OF ITS POSITION. AND AGAIN, I THINK YOU HAVE TAKEN A LOT OF BRICK BATS AND STONES AND STICKS THROWN AT YOU OVER THE WSIS PROCESS.

AND, ACTUALLY, IN THE EXAMINATION, ICANN COMES OUT QUITE WELL AS A MULTISTAKEHOLDER BODY THAT DOES POLICY AND AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT WAY.

SO IF YOU FEEL ANY HESITANCE AT PARTICIPATION, DON'T, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOOD.

AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO TAKE FOR ICANN GOING FORWARD.

A THOUGHT ABOUT REACTION TO THE COMMENTS FROM THE STAGE.

I DON'T THINK IGF IS JUST ABOUT THE NEXT MEETING IN SAO PAULO.

IT'S A DIALOGUE AND A DIALOGUE OF DISCUSSION AMONGST ALL STAKEHOLDERS, AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THESE DYNAMIC COALITIONS ABOUT HOW DO WE TAKE DISCUSSION ON NOW, CONTINUING NOW, SO THAT WE HAVE A BETTER MEETING IN SAO PAULO.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANNUAL GENERAL MEETINGS; IT'S NOT THE SORT OF I NET OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUMS THAT OCCUR EACH YEAR.

IT SHOULD BE THE DIALOGUE THAT WE HAVE TOGETHER ON ISSUES WE THINK ARE IMPORTANT IN THESE LOVELY NAMED DYNAMIC COALITIONS.

SO THINK OF IT AS A PROCESS OF DIALOGUE AND LET'S TRY TO CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER, PARTICULARLY ON A COALITION THAT WASN'T MENTIONED, WHICH IS ONE THAT I THINK IS FORMING AROUND CAPACITY-BUILDING AND APPROVING PARTICIPATION.

SO THANK YOU.

THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, ADAM.

WHO'S NEXT?

IZUMI AIZU? NO? ALEX PISANTY.

>>ALEJANDRO PISANTY: WE ARE TRYING TO YIELD -- WE HAVE A COMPETITION TO SEE WHO YIELDS LESS TO THE NEXT ONE.

MY NAME IS ALEJANDRO PISANTY.

I WAS A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY GROUP FOR THE INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM.

FOR REASONS OF COMMITMENTS IN MY DAY JOB, I WAS UNABLE TO TRAVEL TO ATHENS AND PARTICIPATE PHYSICALLY, AND I HAVE TO USE THIS OCCASION TO CONGRATULATE MARKUS KUMMER, NITIN DESAI, AND THE TEAM THAT ACTUALLY EXECUTED THE MEETINGS IN ATHENS FOR THE BRILLIANT EXECUTION AND FOR WHAT I WAS BENEFITED WITH, WHICH WAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMOTELY FOLLOW UP AND PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING.

THAT WAS EXTRAORDINARY.

AS PAUL MENTIONED EARLIER THIS MORNING, MANY THINGS THAT WE HAVE DEVELOPED AROUND ICANN MEETINGS HAVE SPREAD OUT INTO THE U.N. CONTEXT AND MADE IT PARTICULARLY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE OUTSIDE.

THIS LARGE SPIRIT OF PARTICIPATION GOES A LONG WAY INTO WHAT WE INTENDED WHEN WE WERE DESIGNING THE FORUM WITHIN THE ADVISORY GROUP, WHICH WAS TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT FOR DISCUSSION.

EXCUSE ME, I'M VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE MICROPHONE.

THE MAIN POINT ABOUT ATHENS WHICH I THINK HAS BEEN REALIZED, AND IT'S PARTICULARLY MOTIVE FOR CONGRATULATIONS, IS NOT ONLY THAT EVERYONE WHO WAS THERE WAS THERE AND THE LEVEL OF DISCUSSION THAT CAME OUT FROM THERE WAS SO IMPORTANT, BUT WE HAD A SORT OF WARNING AGAINST ANYTHING EMERGING FROM ATHENS AS THE ATHENS CONSENSUS OR THE ATHENS DECISIONS OR THE ATHENS FREEZING OF THE ISSUES.

IT WAS MORE THE ATHENS DYNAMICS THAT WE WERE AFTER.

IT WAS MORE THE ATHENS DISCUSSION, THE IGF DISCUSSION ON AN ONGOING BASIS THAT WAS STARTED AND THAT HAS BEEN VERY WELL DESCRIBED NOW BY ADAM.

AND I THINK THAT'S ONE VERY IMPORTANT POINT.

AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO SEE ALSO HOW THIS MATERIALIZES IN PRACTICE, IN PARTICULAR, IN THE WAY WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BUILD IT UP IN ICANN.

ICANN'S PLATFORM FOR OPEN, MULTISTAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION, BRINGING THE RELEVANT ACTORS TO SOLVE SPECIFIC PROBLEMS STILL IS A MODEL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNET GOVERNANCE FURTHER OUT.

ICANN CONCENTRATES AND WE MAKE A HUGE EFFORT TO CONCENTRATE WITHIN A SPECIFIC FIELD TO SOLVE A SPECIFIC PROBLEM WITH THE RELEVANT STAKEHOLDERS.

IT'S NOT THE SAME PEOPLE, EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN SPEAK OF ISPS AND REGISTRARS, AND SO FORTH, THAT WOULD COME TOGETHER TO DEAL WITH A PROBLEM LIKE SPAM, OR TO DEAL WITH ONE OF THE MANY OTHER PROBLEMS THAT HAVE ALSO BEEN LISTED HERE BY NOW.

AND I'M PARTICULARLY HEARTENED TO HEAR FROM THE STRATEGY COMMITTEE, FROM THE PRESIDENT'S STRATEGY COMMITTEE, ON IMPROVEMENTS ON THIS PLATFORM THAT ARE NOT SEEN ANYMORE, THOUGH, AS A BOARD MEMBER, IT'S EASY TO SEE THEM AS MORE REQUESTS FOR MORE TRANSPARENCY, MORE REQUESTS FOR MORE PARTICIPATION.

BUT AT LEAST THEY RECOGNIZE THAT ICANN DOESN'T HAVE TO MEET EVERY FOUR YEARS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS TO DECIDE HOW TO ORGANIZE.

A DISCUSSION FOUR YEARS FROM NOW BEHIND CLOSED DOORS ON HOW TO OPEN UP THOSE DOORS.

THE DOORS ARE OPENED HERE.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD BUILD UP ON THAT AND OBTAIN ALL THE REQUESTS THAT WE ARE GETTING AS BUILDING UP ON THAT PLATFORM AND I WILL JOIN ADAM'S STATEMENT AND THANK HIM FOR IT, BUT WE SHOULD BE VERY CONFIDENT THAT WE ARE NOT UNDER THIS HUGE LIST OF REQUESTS, BUT ARE REALLY BUILDING UP TO CONCENTRATE ON VERY, VERY SUBSTANTIAL ISSUES UNDER HUGE DIFFICULTIES.

AND SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST PUBLIC FORUM IN THIS WEEK AND THAT'S A HUGE CHANGE IN FORMAT ALSO, I WOULD INVITE EVERYBODY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO DEEPLY INTO THE ISSUES THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED, TO UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROBLEMS, AND THEN BE ABLE TO BETTER BUILD SOLUTIONS FOR THEM.

THANKS.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, ALEX.

IZUMI AIZU.

>>IZUMI AIZU: THANK YOU, VINT.

MY NAME IS IZUMI AIZU.

I'M THE MEMBER OF AT-LARGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM ASIA-PACIFIC AND ALSO PARTICIPATED AT THE IGF UNDER THE CIVIL SOCIETY INTERNET GOVERNANCE CAUCUS.

I MAY HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VIEWS THAN THOSE EXPRESSED BY ALEX AND ADAM, PERHAPS, OR MAYBE THE SAME.

ON THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AT IGF -- AND I'D LIKE TO SORT OF BRING THAT TO ICANN CONTEXT -- I AGREE THAT AT IGF, THERE WAS VERY OPEN AND FREE DIALOGUE AMONGST VARIOUS OR ALMOST ALL STAKEHOLDERS ON A VERY EQUAL FOOTING BASIS.

AND I'D LIKE TO REALLY APPRECIATE AND COMMEND THAT.

HOWEVER, MY IMPRESSION, AS SOME SAID ALREADY, OR AS LYNN SAID, THE PARTICIPATION FROM THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM ASIA, WERE NOT REALLY AS MUCH AS I -- WE WANTED TO BE.

THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS AND FACTORS.

AND I WOULDN'T GO INTO DETAIL.

BUT AT THE END OF THE IGF, I PROPOSED TO HAVE SOME KIND OF MORE PROACTIVE EFFORT, AS SOME SAID, DYNAMIC COALITION, TO HELP THE PARTICIPATION FROM THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES FOR THE NEXT ROUND OF IGF.

AND I'D LIKE TO ASK ALL THE ICANN CONSTITUENCIES HERE TO DO SOME MORE WORK TO HELP SUPPORT THE PARTICIPATION FROM THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO BOTH IGF AND MAYBE TO ICANN AS WELL.

I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IGF HAS SUCH A, YOU KNOW, VERY OPEN DIALOGUE ON EQUAL FOOTING AMONGST ALL STAKEHOLDERS IS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PLACE TO MAKE DECISIONS, BUT IT'S A PLACE FOR DIALOGUE.

TO PUT IT DIFFERENTLY, IF IT WAS A PLACE FOR DECISION-MAKING, PERHAPS IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO HAVE EQUAL FOOTING, MULTISTAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION.

IF YOU REMEMBER THE WSIS PROCESS, IT WAS ACTUALLY AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATION.

I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GOOD OR BAD, BUT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BRING ALL THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ON PAR WITH THE GOVERNMENTS IN THAT SETTING.

AT ICANN, BEING AN AT LARGE, WE ARE STILL GRAPPLING TO FORM THE MULTISTAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION FROM THE INDIVIDUAL USERS.

IT'S LARGELY PART OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY, BUT WE ARE STILL NOT YET SURE WHAT EXACTLY MEANS AS A CIVIL SOCIETY IN ICANN CONTEXT.

AND WE'LL BE CELEBRATING OUR FIRST RALO FROM LATIN AMERICAN REGION, WITH MANY THANKS TO THE SUPPORT FROM ICANN AND OTHER CONSTITUENCIES.

BUT IT'S JUST ONE OF THE FIVE.

AND WE ARE STILL GRAPPLING WITHIN OURSELVES HOW MUCH WE CAN PARTICIPATE INTO THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS OF ICANN, AND ARE WE QUITE OKAY WITH THE CURRENT SETUP OF THE ADVISORY ROLE, GIVEN THIS EXTERNAL REVIEW COMING IN, WE TRY TO DO OUR OWN SELF-REVIEW, AND WE HAVE DIVERSE OPINIONS ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD PARTICIPATE.

IF YOU COULD READ OUR SELF-REVIEW, WE TRY TO INCORPORATE BOTH VIEWS OR ALL THE DIVERSE VIEWS.

SO I STILL -- I THINK WE STILL HAVE SOME HOMEWORK HERE, HOW TO REALLY EFFECTIVELY PARTICIPATE INTO THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS IF ICANN WANTS TO BE A REAL MULTISTAKEHOLDER, AND WHAT KIND OF SETTINGS OR STRUCTURE WE REALLY NEED TO FOSTER, IT STILL IS NOT A RESOLVED ISSUE.

AND I REALLY ASK FOR ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS HERE TO CONSIDER THIS.

FURTHERMORE, ALAC WILL DO, BUT I HOPE YOU GUYS ALSO DO JOIN.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU.

COULD I ASK HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN THE QUEUE? ONE, TWO, THREE.

OKAY.

THAT'S FINE.

I THINK WE'LL CLOSE THE QUEUE AFTER BECKY, BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD PROBABLY LIKE TO BREAK BEFORE THE GNSO.

>>BERTRAND DE LA CHAPELLE: GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS BERTRAND DE LA CHAPELLE, AND I'M THE SPECIAL ENVOY FOR INFORMATION SOCIETY IN THE FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTRY AND THE FRENCH REPRESENTATIVE HERE ON THE GAC.

I JUST CONTINUE THE LIST OF USUAL SUSPECTS, MAKING COMMENTS ON THOSE ISSUES RELATED TO WSIS AND IGF.

JUST A FEW REMARKS.

THE FIRST ELEMENT IS, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A LINK BETWEEN A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE BY PAUL TWOMEY IN HIS PRESENTATION AND SOMETHING THAT MARKUS MENTIONED.

PAUL MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT HOW DO WE PUT AN ISSUE ON THE AGENDA.

AND MARKUS MENTIONED THAT THE IGF IS AN AGENDA-SETTING SPACE, OR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE AGENDA.

THE WAY AN ISSUE IS PUT ON AN AGENDA IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF FRAMING THE DEBATE.

AND THERE IS -- THERE WAS A GREAT VOID IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPHERE IN PURE INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS OF PROCESSES THAT WERE FLEXIBLE ENOUGH AND OPEN ENOUGH TO LET ISSUES EMERGE IN A VERY NATURAL AND BOTTOM-UP MANNER.

ONE OF THE MAIN BENEFITS OF THE IGF -- AND IT HAS DEMONSTRATED ITS EFFICIENCY IN THAT RESPECT IN ATHENS -- IS THE CAPACITY THROUGH THE WORKSHOPS IN PARTICULAR TO ALLOW THE ISSUES TO EMERGE AND TO BE BASICALLY TESTED IN THE COMMUNITY.

PEOPLE PROPOSED WORKSHOPS.

SOME LED TO FURTHER WORK; SOME DIDN'T.

SOME CHANGED THEIR PERSPECTIVE AFTER THE DISCUSSION; SOME DIDN'T.

A FEW COALITIONS EMERGED.

AND I JUST WANTED TO MENTION HERE THAT WITHIN ICANN, AS FAR AS I DISCOVER, TAKING A NEW ROLE WITHIN THE GAC, THE WAY ISSUES ARE PUT ON THE AGENDA IS, AS PAUL WAS MENTIONING, A MAJOR ELEMENT, IN PARTICULAR, HOW THE DEBATE IS FRAMED WHEN YOU PUT AN ISSUE ON THE AGENDA.

AND THE SECOND POINT IS THAT IN PUTTING AN ISSUE ON THE AGENDA AND IN FRAMING THE DEBATE, MULTISTAKEHOLDER INTERACTION ON AN EQUAL FOOTING IS OF THE HIGHEST IMPORTANCE.

IT'S ONLY BECAUSE YOU GET THE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AT THE SAME TIME FROM THE DIFFERENT CONSTITUENCIES IN THE SAME ROOM WHEN YOU EARLY ON FRAME THE DEBATE THAT THE DEBATE IS PROPERLY FRAMED.

AND ONE OF THE DIFFICULTIES IN THE CONTEXT OF ICANN IS THE FRAMING OF THE DISCUSSION IN SEPARATED CONSTITUENCIES.

WHICH LEADS TO A LAST POINT.

WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF IGF, THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW DYNAMIC COALITIONS, AS MARKUS HAS -- AND OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED.

ONE OF THOSE DYNAMIC COALITIONS IS THE ONE ABOUT PRIVACY AND DIGITAL IDENTITY.

FRANCE, AS A GOVERNMENT, IS A MAJOR ACTOR IN THE SETTING UP OF THIS DYNAMIC COALITION.

AND WE HAVE ENGAGED VERY ACTIVELY IN THE SETTING UP OF METHODOLOGIES FOR THOSE COALITIONS TO WORK.

I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THIS BECAUSE WITHIN ICANN, WITHIN THE IGF, AND WITHIN ALL THE POST-WSIS PROCESSES, THERE'S A BIG CHALLENGE FOR GOVERNMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES TO FIND EXACTLY HOW THEY DO INTERACT, WITH DUE RESPECT TO THEIR INTERNAL PROCESSES, AND, AT THE SAME TIME, TAKING PART IN VERY FLUID INTERACTION.

I WON'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM HERE.

I JUST WANT TO RAISE THIS, BECAUSE THE IGF IS PROVIDING A TEST BED THAT CAN BE REPLICATED IN MANY OTHER PLACES OF WAYS FOR GOVERNMENTS AND GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES TO INTERACT IN A FREER MANNER WITHOUT LOSING THEIR CAPACITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES, BUT ENGAGING IN VERY EARLY PROCESSES.

THANK YOU.

>>WOLFGANG KLEINWAECHTER: YEAH, MY NAME IS WOLFGANG KLEINWAECHTER.

I'M FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF AARHUS, AND I'M ALSO ONE OF THE SPECIAL ADVISORS TO THE CHAIR OF THE IGF.

I CAN ONLY SUPPORT WHAT MARKUS HAS SAID, THAT WE SEE OR WITNESSED THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW CULTURE OF COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION. AND THIS COMES BOTTOM-UP.

AND I ALSO SUPPORT HIS OBSERVATION THAT IF YOU COMPARE THE STRUCTURE AND THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE DISCUSSION WE HAVE SEEN IN ESSENCE, THEN THIS IS -- WAS SIMILAR TO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE INTERNET.

SO -- AND WE KNOW THAT THE INTERNET IS -- THE MAIN EFFECT COMES FROM THE END-TO-END PRINCIPLE.

AND WE KNOW THAT THE VALUE OF A NETWORK IS GROWING IN THE SQUARE WITH THE NUMBER OF ITS PARTICIPANTS.

THIS HAS MADE THE INTERNET SO VALUABLE THAT EVERYBODY COULD COMMUNICATE WITH EVERYBODY.

AND IF WE HAVE THIS ARCHITECTURAL PRINCIPLE AS THE BASIS FOR THE IGF, THEN WE SEE A TREMENDOUS POTENTIAL FOR FUTURE COMMUNICATION AND COLLABORATION IF IT'S DONE ON THIS BASIS, ON EQUAL FOOTING, SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN REALLY COMMUNICATE WITH EVERYBODY, BY USING THE SAME PROTOCOL.

WE HAVE USED ALSO THE DYNAMICS OF THE IGF TO CREATE SOMETHING NEW.

AS YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER, THE WORKING GROUP ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE HAS IDENTIFIED NOT ONLY THE TECHNICAL COMMUNITY AS A SPECIAL COMMUNITY WHICH IS MORE OR LESS NOT ITS OWN STAKEHOLDER GROUP, BUT IS HORIZONTAL LINK TO THE THREE MAIN STAKEHOLDER GROUPS.

SO WE IDENTIFIED THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY AS SUCH A SPECIAL GROUP.

AND A NUMBER OF ACADEMIC MEMBERS OF THE WGIG HAS FORMED IN THE PROCESS OF THE PREPARATION OF THE IGF AN OWN NEW ACADEMIC NETWORK, WHICH IS CALLED GIGANET, GLOBAL INTERNET GOVERNANCE ACADEMIC NETWORK.

WE HAVE NOW -- WE HAD MORE THAN 100 PARTICIPANTS IN A SPECIAL ACADEMIC SUMMIT BEFORE THE IGF STARTED, IN ESSENCE.

WE HAVE MORE THAN 50 UNIVERSITIES INVOLVED, FROM THE BIG U.S. UNIVERSITIES, HARVARD, STANFORD, CALIFORNIA, TO NANYANG TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY IN SINGAPORE, OXFORD, MANY EUROPEAN UNIVERSITIES, AND ALSO UNIVERSITIES FROM SEVERAL COUNTRIES.

AND WE WILL HAVE A SECOND GIGANET MEETING, A SECOND ACADEMIC SYMPOSIUM ON THE EVE OF THE NEXT IGF IN BRAZIL.

THERE WILL BE A CALL FOR PAPERS PUBLISHED SOON.

AND I INVITE ALL ACADEMIC MEMBERS OF THE ICANN COMMUNITY TO JOIN GIGANET.

BY THE WAY, IN ONE OF THE PAPERS PRESENTED IN ATHENS, THERE WAS AN INTERESTING OBSERVATION THAT ONE OF THE RESEARCHERS ANALYZED THAT WE SEE IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS AND NEGOTIATIONS MORE AND MORE A SHIFT FROM AGREEING ON CONTENT TO AGREEING ON PROCEDURES.

THOUGH WHILE IT GETS MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT TO AGREE ON CONTENT ISSUES IN A GENERAL BASIS, YOU SEE MORE AND MORE THAT THE AGREEMENT GOES VIA PROCEDURES, AND THEN YOU SETTLE INDIVIDUAL CASES ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS.

AND I THINK THIS COULD BE A GOOD ADVICE FOR THIS PRESIDENT'S STRATEGY COMMISSION, TO LOOK DEEPER INTO THE PROCEDURES, HOW THE DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS INTERACT, BUT TO FIND A SOLUTION FOR A SPECIFIC CONTENT QUICKLY, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE PROCEDURES IN PLACE WHICH ALLOW YOU TO MOVE FROM A TO B TO C, THEN IT'S MUCH EASIER TO FIND A SOLUTION FOR A SPECIAL CONTENT QUESTION, AND PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE WAY.

PAUL HAS MADE CLEAR IN HIS PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE ALREADY A LOT OF PROCEDURES, THERE'S THE GNSO AND THE CNSO AND OTHERS, WE HAVE ALSO PROCEDURES FOR INTERACTION AMONG THE GAC AND THE BOARD.

BUT THERE ARE NO PROCEDURES IN PLACE FOR THE INTERACTION AMONG THE -- BETWEEN THE AT-LARGE ADVISORY GROUP AND THE ICANN BOARD.

I THINK THIS IS A CONCRETE ISSUE WHERE SOME WORK SHOULD BE INVESTED.

THANK YOU.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU.

BECKY.

>>BECKY BURR: THANK YOU.

I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE STRATEGY COMMITTEE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE NOTION OF AN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ORGANIZATION IS NOT A TREATY, AND IT'S NOT A MULTIGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING, AT LEAST, IS THAT THE BENEFIT IT PROVIDES IS IMMUNITIES, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES, GETS YOU OUT OF LAW THAT YOU MIGHT OTHERWISE BE UNDER.

CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, HOW COMMERCIAL DISPUTES WOULD BE RESOLVED? AND NOT ONLY COMMERCIAL DISPUTES WITH ENTITIES WITH WHOM ICANN HAS A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP, BUT ENTITIES THAT DON'T HAVE A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH ICANN.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: WELL, PERHAPS I'LL HAVE A -- THANKS, BECKY.

IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, AND I HAVE TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HERE THAT WE'RE VERY GLAD THAT YOU'VE PAID ATTENTION TO THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE PODIUM RATHER THAN THE LEFT.

THE -- I THINK (AUDIO DIFFICULTY) IF THERE WAS TO BE ANY CONSIDERATION OF THE BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS -- AND THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT PLACES, AND THERE'S A LOT OF EXPLORATION ABOUT THAT -- THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND, AT LEAST, AS ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, THAT ICANN SHOULD NOT BE WALKING AWAY FROM LEGAL-BASED ACCOUNTABILITY BOTH FOR CONTRACTS AND FOR THIRD PARTIES AFFECTED BY ICANN DECISIONS.

SO THAT'S NOT AT ALL WHAT I THINK ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ARE PUTTING ON THE TABLE.

BUT SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE (AUDIO DIFFICULTY).

IS THIS WORKING? THERE WE GO.

CENSORSHIP ATTEMPT BY SOMEONE.

>>BECKY BURR: NOT ME.

I'M DOWN HERE.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: NO.

I THINK -- I THINK THIS IS THE -- ONE OF THE -- THIS IS PROBABLY THE KEY AREA OF IN-DEPTH EXPLORATION THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED.

BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY INTENT TO BE, AS I SAID, OUTSIDE THAT LINE OF ACCOUNTABILITY.

AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S CLEAR WORDING THERE.

BUT THERE MIGHT BE BENEFITS OF THOSE IMMUNITIES IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND THERE MIGHT BE FURTHER BENEFITS OF THE RECOGNITION OF THE STATUS, SO THERE'S BOTH A PRACTICAL ASPECT AND POTENTIALLY ALSO A SYMBOLIC ASPECT WHICH IS IMPORTANT.

YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE REALITIES THE COMMITTEE REFLECTED AND I THINK MANY OF US HAVE HEARD IT, THAT THERE WERE -- I MEAN, THERE ARE BENEFITS OF A PUBLIC-BENEFIT CORPORATION IN CALIFORNIA IN PRACTICAL TERMS.

BUT IN SYMBOLIC TERMS, IT HAS AN IMPACT WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE.

>>BECKY BURR: I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE SYMBOLIC ISSUE.

I JUST THINK THAT'S VERY -- IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION AND ONE THAT WILL DESERVE A LOT OF CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE ICANN IS -- IS ENGAGED IN COMMERCIAL INTERACTIONS WITH ITS CONSTITUENCIES.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: IT'S NOT EVEN JUST THAT.

AS YOU POINTED OUT, IT ALSO, I THINK, AGAIN, TALKING PERSONALLY AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE, NEEDS TO HAVE A LEGAL FRAMEWORK, AND I SUPPOSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE TALKED ABOUT IS THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF ARBITRATION, INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, AS A POTENTIAL FORUM.

>>BECKY BURR: BUT THE QUESTION IS, WHOSE LAW APPLIES.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THAT'S RIGHT.

WELL, AS SOME OF US KNOW, ALL INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CHOOSES A LAW, DOESN'T IT? I MEAN, IF YOU SET UP INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, YOU ALWAYS -- YOU ALWAYS END UP SELECTING A PARTICULAR LAW TO APPLY.

>>BECKY BURR: I AGREE.

BUT THAT'S WHY -- AND WE SHOULD TAKE THIS OFFLINE, BECAUSE IT'S A LONG DISCUSSION.

BUT THE CONCERN I HAVE IS, AT THAT TIME, WITH RESPECT TO AGREEMENTS IN A DISPUTE ARISING FROM AN AGREEMENT, DISPUTES ARISE FROM OTHER THINGS, AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT IN PLACE, YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO BRING AN ARBITRATION.

SO IT'S NOT --

>>PAUL TWOMEY: EXCELLENT POINT.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD BE -- WE SHOULD BE THINKING -- IF WE WERE TO MOVE THIS -- WE MAY NOT BE ATTRACTIVE. IT MAY NOT WORK OUT.

WE MAY TALK THROUGH THE ISSUE AND FIND OUT, LOOK, WE'RE BETTER OFF WHERE WE ARE.

BUT AT LEAST, AS A COMMUNITY, WE'VE DONE THAT.

BUT I THINK I PERSONALLY THINK THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP IN THE DISCUSSION WAS, WE ALSO NEED TO ENSURE THERE'S SOME MECHANISM FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY DECISIONS WHO ARE NOT IN CONTRACT BUT ARE THIRD PARTIES TO HAVE SOME SORT OF LEGAL BASIS TO COME AND SAY, I WANT MY HURT OR MY CONCERN LISTENED TO.

I THINK THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

JUST TO TALK ABOUT, IN THAT SENSE, WE MAY WANT TO THINK THAT THROUGH, BECAUSE, POTENTIALLY -- THIS IS DRAWING ON TOO LONG -- I KNOW, IN FRANCE AND AUSTRALIA, YOU HAVE A BODY OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY AND ARE IN THE U.K., BUT DOESN'T IN CANADA OR THE U.S -- I'M MAKING SOMETHING UP NOW.

MAYBE YOU CAN EVEN GO THAT FAR TO EXPLORE IT.

>>BECKY BURR: IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED ISSUE.

I THINK WE AGREE ON THAT.

THANK YOU.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: OKAY.

>>VINT CERF: (NO AUDIO.) IS THIS NOT WORKING EITHER?

>> IT'S NOW WORKING.

>>VINT CERF: IT WORKS.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

I OFFERED RON ANDRUFF, BECAUSE HE'S LEAVING BEFORE THE MEETING IS OFFER, ONE SLOT ON THIS OPEN MOMENT.

BUT THAT'S TO -- KEEP IT SHORT, PLEASE.

AND THEN WE'LL BREAK.

THE GNSO FORUM WILL CONVENE HERE AT 2:00.

RON.

>>RON ANDRUFF: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

RON ANDRUFF, TRALLIANCE CORPORATION, THE DOT TRAVEL REGISTRY.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO GO ON RECORD WITH SOMETHING WE THINK IS ON THE MINDS OF MANY OF US HERE.

TRALLIANCE CORPORATION WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE BOARD ON THE RECENT TELEPHONIC BOARD MEETING, VIS-A-VIS THE DENIAL OF TRALLIANCE'S REQUEST TO IMPLEMENT A MUSEUM-LIKE WILDCARD.

WE'RE ADDITION APPOINTED BY THE DECISION OF -- BY THE DECISION AND THE BOARD'S APPARENT LAPSE IN PROCESS.

HOWEVER, WE'D LIKE TO STATE THAT WE HAVE NO ARGUMENT WITH THE QUALITY OF THE WORK BY THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE SCHEDULED TO WORK ON THE RSTEP.

THEY WERE WELL QUALIFIED AND DID WHAT WAS REQUESTED OF THEM.

I'D LIKE TO ASK PAUL FOR A CLARIFICATION OF THE DECISION BEING TAKEN ON THIS MATTER PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC FORUM PERIOD CONCLUDING SO THAT WE CAN ALL BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENED.

WHERE WE TAKE ISSUE IS WITH WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE AMBIGUITY OF THE CONCLUSION.

AND IT IS FOR THIS REASON THAT WE SENT A LETTER TO THE ICANN BOARD REQUESTING THAT TRALLIANCE BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO TEST OUR SERVICE TO SEE THAT IF IN POINT OF FACT IT NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THE INTERNET.

AND TO THIS POINT, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD AND STAFF TO WORK WITH US IN ESTABLISHING A TEST THAT THE DELIVER ICANN AND THE COMMUNITY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE'LL HAVE ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS.

RELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION, TRALLIANCE HAS BEEN WORKING THROUGH THE TEST OF THE MORE THAN THREE-LETTER TLD ISSUE FOR THE LAST YEAR, AND THE RESULTS OF THAT TEST HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT A FIX WAS NEEDED, AND YESTERDAY A PATCH, IF YOU WILL, WAS RELEASED BY ICANN TO CORRECT THIS PROBLEM ACROSS THE ENTIRE SPECTRUM OF THE INTERNET.

THIS IS A CONCRETE EXAMPLE OF HOW WORKING THROUGH UNKNOWNS TO THE FACTS IS A RESULT OF BETTERMENT OF THE INTERNET GOING FORWARD.

THE MANDATE OF ICANN AND THE ICANN COMMUNITY IS TO CREATE A ROBUST INTERNET THAT SERVES ALL CONSTITUENCIES IN THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY POSSIBLE.

TRALLIANCE HAS A MANDATE TO SERVE ITS CONSTITUENCY, THE GLOBAL TRAVEL AND TOURISM COMMUNITY, ONE OF ICANN'S CONSTITUENCIES AS WELL.

SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO A RECONSIDERATION OF THE BOARD TO ESTABLISH SOME QUALIFIED TEST AS DEVELOPED COOPERATIVELY BETWEEN TRALLIANCE AND A TECHNICAL TEAM, AS DETERMINED BY ICANN, OVER THE PERIOD COMING TO GAIN SOME KNOWLEDGE THAT WILL BENEFIT US ALL IN THE SAME WAY AS WE RESOLVE THE THREE-LETTER ISSUE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

PAUL, IF YOU WOULD RESPECT, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: (NO AUDIO).

ONE THING THAT WILL GET FIXED OVER LUNCH IS THE MICROPHONES.

>>STEVE CONTE: ABSOLUTELY.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: THE -- IS KURT IN THE ROOM?

>>KURT PRITZ: YES, OVER HERE, PAUL.

>>PAUL TWOMEY: DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS QUESTION?

>>KURT PRITZ: SURE.

I'M GOING TO JUST RESPOND TO THE PROCESS PART.

>>RON ANDRUFF: OF COURSE.

>>KURT PRITZ: BECAUSE THE -- THE PROCEDURE DESCRIBED BY THE ICANN GNSO DEVELOPED CONSENSUS POLICY WAS REALLY FOLLOWED PRECISELY.

IT INCLUDED A 45-DAY COMMENT PERIOD, A 13-DAY COMMENT PERIOD, THREE INDEPENDENT REVIEWS OR SOLICITATIONS FOR ADVICE, AND THEN IT WAS ALSO TIMELY EXECUTED.

AND SO THIS, I THINK, GETS TO THE NUB OF YOUR PROBLEM.

BECAUSE THE POLICY REQUIRES THAT THE BOARD REACT TO THE TECHNICAL REPORT WITHIN 30 DAYS.

AND SO YOU'LL SEE PUTTING AN ENDING DATE ON THE COMMENT PERIOD THEN BECOMES KIND OF IMPOSSIBLE, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN THE BOARD IS GOING TO ACT.

SO THE MISTAKE WAS THAT -- NOT THAT THE POLICY WAS FOLLOWED, BUT, RATHER, THAT A CLOSING DATE WAS PUT ON THE COMMENT PERIOD.

AND THAT WAS MISSED BY THE REVIEWER OF THE POSTING, WHICH WAS ME.

BUT THAT FACT DID NOT CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE PROCESS OR ANY PART OF THE PROCESS.

AND THE PROCESS WAS FOLLOWED COMPLETELY.

THE HARM THAT MAY HAVE RESULTED WAS IN MANAGING THE EXPECTATIONS OF THOSE WHO WISHED TO COMMENT.

AND SO WE'VE LOOKED INTO THAT.

FOR THOSE OF US WHO WANT TO TRY TO GET PAST THAT HAVE LOOKED INTO THAT.

AND WE REALIZE WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR COMMENT PERIOD SOMEWHAT.

WE CAN'T JUST HAVE A CLOSING DATE ARBITRARILY SOMETIMES, BUT, RATHER, WE NEED TO CLOSELY FOLLOW THE COMPLEXITIES OF A POLICY THAT KIND OF PROHIBITS A CLOSING DATE AT THE VERY LAST COMMENT PERIOD, WHICH WE WANT TO BUTT UP RIGHT AGAINST THE BOARD DECISION.

>>RON ANDRUFF: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU, KURT.

(AUDIO DIFFICULTIES).

I SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING -- THE MINUTES WILL SHOW THAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD HAD A TANTRUM.

[ LAUGHTER ]

>>VINT CERF: THE BOARD WILL HAVE TO CONSIDER YOUR PROPOSAL.

I WON'T HAVE A REACTION ON THE SPOT.

>>RON ANDRUFF: WE DON'T EXPECT ONE.

WE EXPECT THIS WILL TAKE TIME.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE'LL WORK THROUGH.

>>VINT CERF: THANK YOU.

>>RON ANDRUFF: WE HAVE UNDERSTANDING FOR THAT.

>>VINT CERF: OKAY.

LET ME THANK THE PANEL MEMBERS ONCE AGAIN FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION AND PRESENTATIONS.

WE'LL BREAK NOW UNTIL 2:00, WHEN THIS ROOM IS REUSED FOR THE GNSO OPEN PUBLIC MEETING.

AND I HOPE YOU HAVE A MOMENT OR TWO -- WELL, NOT MUCH -- TO TRY TO GET SOMETHING TO EAT.

SO WE'RE ADJOURNING UNTIL 2:00.

NOT EVERYONE IS EXPECTED TO BE AT THE GNSO PUBLIC FORUM.

I'M SORRY, WHAT DID I MISS?

>>JANIS KARKLINS: (NO AUDIO.)

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A SMALL ANNOUNCEMENT, A REMINDER FOR THE GAC MEMBERS THAT WE ARE MEETING AT 1:00 P.M. IN THE ADJACENT ROOM TO CONTINUE OUR DELIBERATIONS.

THANK YOU.

(12:50 P.M.)