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