ICC BASIS Intervention 3 – Open Consultation – Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

Thank you, Chairman. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to add on the main session topics.

I would like to give an idea of what ICC/BASIS members believe should be discussed in each of the main sessions, and I will be providing some input on critical internet resources followed by my colleague Peter Hellmonds who would like to provide input on the remaining sessions. With that, on behalf of ICC members, business associations, and companies from around the world, I would like to provide some input that complements the written input that we have already provided which is on the Web site of the IGF as well as in the back of the room and the ICC Web site.

Business believes strongly that certain key principles should be the foundation for the discussions at the IGF in Rio, and the shaping of the program. All of the sessions and workshops at the IGF should promote the objectives, specifically

• facilitating the exchange of information and best practices, strengthening the
• engagement of stakeholders in Internet governance issues, particularly those
• from the developing world, contributing to capacity building for Internet
• governance in developing countries,
• promoting and assessing on an ongoing basis WSIS principles in Internet governance processes, and
• helping to identify solutions to issues arising from the use and misuse of the Internet.

As critical internet resources are discussed for the first time at the IGF in Rio, we should be guided by the definition of critical internet resources identified in the report of the working group on Internet governance.

Paragraph 13(a) outlines four key Internet governance related public policy areas and makes it clear that issues relating to infrastructure and the management of critical internet resources include, one, the administration of the domain name system and Internet protocol addresses, the administration of the root server systems, technical standards, peering and interconnection, telecommunications infrastructure, including innovative and convergent technologies, and multilingualization.

We believe the discussion on CIR should focus on all of these different but important issues. The discussion must also include the perspectives of business, government, civil society, and the technical community, which may vary. In this way, we can all learn and benefit from the perspectives of others, which is an important component of the success of the Athens model the IGF used last year.
For example, panelists should reflect diversity of Internet resource management experiences from around the world, and case studies could emphasize countries and businesses which have been successful and identify challenges experienced to share the lessons learned for more people.

This session can useful be organized into three parts. First,exactly what are critical internet resources. Drawing on the WGIG work, this discussion can set the stage for all participants and allow for a productive discussion.

Second, the discussion should provide information about the range of issues involved, including the DNS and regional management activities, IPv4, IPv6, and transition, digital object identifiers, electronic numbering, radio spectrum, telecom infrastructure, and highlight what is being done by different actors on these issues, including the state of play, achievements, relevant forums, et cetera.

Third, the discussion should emphasize skills development and other resources that are necessary to get the world online. ICC/BASIS members believe that the following principles and approach should be adopted for the discussion and preparation of this session.

• The focus of this session should be on creating greater understanding of the landscape of issues, organizations addressing them, experiences and challenges. The discussion should not be duplicative of ongoing work on processes under way in any other single organization or forum.
• the moderator of this session should be knowledgeable about the substantive and political issues and not promote any particular viewpoint.
• the panelists selected should contribute to laying out the landscape of critical internet resources issues and the balance of panelists should cover the key issues and organizations involved in them.

To ensure a productive and comprehensive discussion of critical internet resources in this session, we believe that it should focus on setting the stage. Who is doing what, and how can stakeholders contribute and participate. A few points on the structure of this session.

We believe it should be slightly different than the proposed structure on the other main topic sessions, with more time for panelists to provide remarks and perhaps a larger number of panelists than the other sessions in which we have envisioned five to seven panelists, so in this one it would be better if there were more.

These recommendations that we have laid out would ensure that in this first discussion on this topic area, the viewpoints, expertise, and dimensions are adequately explored.Thank you for consideration of our input on this session, and if you permit, I would turn it to my colleague, Peter Hellmonds to outline input on the other main session topics.