1+ for Farzaneh.

—Kabir


> On Oct 31, 2016, at 4:40 PM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 1+ for Farzaneh. 
> 
> I will not come to Hyderabad. For the CCWG-IG session on UN bodies I would recommend to have a look also into the G 20. The Hangzhou document (September 2016) is not bad (http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2016/160905-digital.html). On December 1, 2016, Germany will take over the G 20 presidency. They plan to have a special IT ministerial meeting early April 2017 in Düsseldorf with a multistakeholder pre-conference. 
> 
> The G 20 summit is in Hamburg, May 2017.
> 
> Wolfgang
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: NCSG-Discuss im Auftrag von farzaneh badii
> Gesendet: Mo 31.10.2016 06:44
> An: [log in to unmask]
> Betreff: [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: Update on CCWG-IG
> 
> Hello everybody
> 
> Here is an update on the ccwg-IG group in which I represent NCSG.
> 
> *A statement:* CCWG-IG recently drafted a statement which related to
> proposals currently being discussed at the World Telecommunications
> Standardization (WTSA 16).
> 
> CCWG-IG wrote the statement in response to a proposal by the African
> Telecommunication Union regarding the use of geographic names in generic to
> level domains. The objective of the statement was to remind WTSA
> participants that matters regarding geographic domain names is within ICANN
> mission and it is to be resolved in a bottom-up manner. The statement was
> sent to chartering organizations.
> I also took part in drafting the statement and made some comments. It is
> attached.
> 
> *F2F meeting in Hyderabad : *CCWG-IG will have an F2F meeting in Hyderabad.
> It will meet with the Board IG WG. It will also discuss CCWG-IG activities
> and perhaps invites GNSO Council chair to discuss some matters.
> 
> *High-interest session of CCWG-IG: *The high-interest session will have two
> segments, one segment focuses on Internet fragmentation, the other focuses
> on various Internet governance related groups at the United Nations.
> 
> 
> *The ccwg-IG and GNSO Council: * As it has been brought up on the NCSG
> list, GNSO Council has a motion to withdraw from CCWG-IG. This is in light
> of the current uniform framework for CCWG life cycles which GNSO Council
> has approved. https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/
> ccwg-framework-principles-draft-19feb16-en.pdf
> 
> If you look at the principles, the CCWG-IG charter does not fit the
> recommendations and principles, one reason is that  its mandate is based on
> a continuous mission not a one off mission.What we need to do is to perhaps
> change the CCWG-IG charter and implement it better, and make the group
> focus on certain issues throughout the year as well as having F2F meetings
> and high interest panels.
> 
> 
> I hope this is helpful. Please look at ICANN schedule o find out the timing
> of the CCWG-IG sessions.
> 
> Best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Farzaneh
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Farzaneh