Historically, will below IPC gathering mark the first major ICANN parallel meeting? --- "The Intellectual Property Constituency was one of the first to raise security concerns, and it is moving forward with plans to hold a separate meeting in New York City." http://domainnamewire.com/2010/02/16/go-daddy-neustar-ipc-say-no-to-nairobi-meeting/ --- On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 6:07 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Today's update from ICANN: > ICANN Nairobi is still on. ICANN is beefing-up security in Nairobi and > remote participation for non-travelers. > See: > http://nbo.icann.org/meetings/security-information-15feb10-en.htm > ICANN #37 Nairobi -- Only for the Intrepid! ;-) > > 15 February Nairobi Update > Date: > Monday, 15 February 2010 > ICANN's internal team – including staff from the US (California, Texas, New > Jersey), France and Niger - continued to meet daily over the weekend to > discuss and share information regarding the ICANN Nairobi meeting. > Today and last night, we had direct contact with the local Kenyan members of > the security planning committee, and there has been an enhanced, on the > ground commitment for additional security and this group will work closely > with the on-site security experts that ICANN has under contract. ICANN's > security team thinks these are strong, positive steps. > The Kenya National Intelligence Service (NISIS) has increased its efforts to > mitigate potential terrorist threats. The Kenya Anti-terrorist Police Unit > (ATPU) is currently actively involved in the security planning process and > has already started to put detection, as well as other preventative measures > in place. The Kenya Diplomatic Protection unit has also been activated to > assist with the security of the conference. Additionally, covert and overt > security forces are being deployed at the KICC, hotels and venues where > official functions will be held. Additionally, the airport, and road from > the airport to hotels. will be actively monitored and patrolled by security > forces. > It is important for delegates to understand that ensuring a safe conference > is a very important to the Government of Kenya. The country relies > heavily on tourism and strives to be a preferred destination for > international conferences. > We are all seeing community members starting to react to the situation in > Kenya, as they perceive it. There have been posted letters from Neustar and > GoDaddy, among others, indicating that they will not attend or send > representatives. Also, the Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) has > decided to hold an alternative meeting in New York. > Others in the community are re-confirming their attendance in Nairobi. In a > note from ccNSO Chair, Chris Disspain, to be posted today, he has confirmed > that the ccNSO is expecting to participate in the Nairobi meeting, as > planned, with all or most all counselors in attendance. Less formally, I've > heard that many in At Large have expressed the same view. > So, where does this leave all of us? > The first order of business, is that ICANN will continue to monitor the > status in Nairobi, and will share all relevant information with the > community, in accordance with our goal to be fully transparent . I will > ensure we do that on an ongoing basis. > We are left with a situation where some people would choose to attend the > meeting, and some choose not to attend, based on exactly the same > information. One answer will clearly not work for all. > One alternative being discussed is how to better support a meeting where > remote participation is going to be a more significant part of the meeting. > What does enhanced remote participation look like in the context of an ICANN > meeting? Remote participation is a challenge when a minority of participants > are using that mode; if many were, how effective could that be? How would > this work with scheduling, time zones, and the expected meeting formats > we've used? Any comments you have on this would be greatly appreciated. Look > for a posting on the ICANN blog, where you can respond directly. > > > IP JUSTICE > Robin Gross, Executive Director > 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA > p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 > w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: [log in to unmask] > > >