Proposer's Name: Ms. Florence Poznanski
Proposer's Organization: Internet Without Borders
Co-Proposer's Name: Mr. Felix Blanc
Co-Proposer's Organization: Internet Without Borders
Co-Organizers:
Mr.,Jonas, VALENTE, Civil Society, Intervozes (Brazil)
Mr., Diego VICENTIN, Technical Community, Univesidade Estadual de Campinas (Brazil)
Session Format: Panel - 90 Min
Proposer:
Country: Brazil
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Co-Proposer:
Country: France
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Speaker: Peter Micek
Speaker: Roxana Radu
Speaker: Félix Blanc
Speaker: Veridiana Alimonti
Content of the Session:
Submarine cables and Internet exchange points play a crucial role in interconnecting national and international networks into a complex network of submarine highways. Estimates show that a 10% increase in broadband penetration brings around a 1.4% increase in terms of economic growth. But interconnection costs remain very high in developing countries, especially in Africa, due to various factors including national telecom monopolies, lack of backbone infrastructures or barriers to market access. In 2005, the Geneva Working Group on Internet Governance urged international agencies to report on interconnection costs and fund “initiatives that advance connectivity, IXPs, and local content for developing countries”. Since then, several organizations have met the challenge and recommended to promote the liberalization of access to international gateways.
Latin-America and Africa, and generally all the BRICS, are passing through a request of huge transformation of their infrastructure, which is materializing with the construction of new submarine cables, satellites, backbones and inter-exchange points, linking Brazil, for example, to Europa and Africa. But without a favorable context on transparency, jurisdiction and governance, the impacts of new internet infrastructures can be reduced.
This panel aims to build up an overview on these topics. What outcomes shall additional submarine cables have on Internet affordability in Latin America and BRICS countries, and how to maximize them? How could sea cables consortia provide greater transparency on their functioning
and tariff policy? How can these changes take place with a national legislation on telecommunication infrastructure that reduces public regulation, like in Brazil? Are international gateways eligible to become “collective goods, socially produced, and governed as common-pool
resources” ? How to reduce the high dependency of some countries to international broadband, especially in Africa and Latin America?
Our round-table might bring sea cables consortia and Internet broadband experts face-to-face with frontline activists, universities and a civil society coalition to think of a way to bring innovative solutions on transparency, affordability and governance.
This panel is the result of a project in progress since 2016 which was launched at the RightsCon in Brussels in March 2017. It will be the presentation of the state of the current research.
Relevance of the Session:
Our workshop on the governance of submarine cables will deal with the thematic of (global) inter-connectivity. We will emphasize on innovative participatory and economical mechanisms for sharing the costs and benefits of Internet infrastructures that are crucial for the
future of global inter-connectivity: submarine cables and IXPs. We will address key issues of Internet governance including that transparency,
affordability, neutrality and open access.In this order, we understand that the panel has a central place in the debate of the Future of Internet.
Tag 1: Interconnection and Price Regulation
Tag 2: BRICS
Tag 3: Internet Governance
Interventions:
Confirmed interventions:
- Roxana Radu, Technical Communitiy, DiploFoundation, Switzerland: Balance and perspective of the outcome of submarine cables in the international legislation and governance of Internet
- Peter Micek, Civil Society, Global Policy & Legal Counsel, Access Now, New York: Internet Shutdown and censorship, the urgency of new Internet gateways
- Veridiana Alimonti, Civil Society, Lawyer and member of the director council of Intervozes (Master's degree in Economic Law from the University of São Paulo Law School.), Brazil: Digital Rights and regional infrastructures, the ecosystem of relationship between providers, users and citizens in Latin América
- Felix Blanc, Technical Community, Resercher, fellow at Fundação Getulio Vargas/Centro de Tecnologia e SociedadeCivil Society (Brazil), member of Internet Without Borders : The ELLA Submarine Cables and his innovative governance model
* Debate, questions and further research perspectives (30 minutes)Diversity:The panel aims to represent a diversity between continents with a strong representation of speakers from Latin America and Africa. Moreover, many organizers are participating in the IGF for the first time. Internet without borders is led by women, activists for equal rights and greater representation in the institutions, a great place will be given so that gender equality be guaranteed in the final composition of the panel.
Onsite Moderator: Florence Poznanski
Online Moderator: Felix Blanc
Rapporteur: Diego Vicentin
We want to facilitate the exchanges in order to produce a constructive return on the exhibitions to improve the work and propose the new issues of research. We will ask our speakers to highlight specific questions, clear perspectives for them to serve as a point of reference for the public.
The questions selections will follow theese goals.Online Participation:
The panel will last 1h30. The first 50 minutes will be reserved to the interventions of the panelists and then 40 minutes of questions and debate. Those wishing to intervene must register during the exhibitions, explaining whether their intervention is a question, a contribution or a critique. Depending on the number of participants in the room and the number of people accompanying the on-line panel, a key will be defined for allocating the number of on-line and onsite interventions between the two moderators. Interventions of the participants online will be expressed live via webcam if the Internet connection allows, by sending audio to the moderator or by reading text by the moderator.
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: No
Link to Report:
Additional Reference Document Link:
The Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity (DC3) is a multistakeholder group aimed at fostering a cooperative analysis of community networks’ potential to promote sustainable Internet connectivity, empowering individuals and fostering the full enjoyment of fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and self-determination.
Session panellist will debate the results of their research, which have been included in the book “Community Networks: the Internet by the People for the People,” which is the Official 2017 Outcome of the DC3. This volume explores benefits, challenges and opportunities for community networks, analysing a series of case studies, and puts forward proposals regarding concrete policies to promote community networking. As a conclusion, this work includes the updated version of the Declaration on Community Connectivity, which was elaborated through a multistakeholder participatory process, featuring an online open consultation, between July and November 2016; a public debate and a feedback-collection process, during the IGF 2016; and a further online consultation, between December 2016 and March 2017.
Free hard copies of the book will be distributed at the DC3 session, which will be opened by the keynote remarks of:
An interactive discussion will follow, stimulated by the short and provocative remarks of the DC3 book authors:
Brief presentation of the proposal for a Community Networks map by Luis Martinez, ISOC Mexico
Proposer's Name: Mr. Juan Carlos Hernández Wocker
Proposer's Organization: Federal Telecommunications Institute
Co-Proposer's Name: Mr. Víctor Manuel Martínez Vanegas
Co-Proposer's Organization: Federal Telecommunications Institute
Co-Organizers:
Miss. Jimena SIERRA, Technical Community, Federal Telecommunications Institute,Mexico
Miss. Diana GOMEZ, Technical Community, Federal Telecommunications Institute,Mexico
Session Format: Break-out Group Discussions - 90 Min
Proposer:
Country: Mexico
Stakeholder Group: Technical Community
Co-Proposer:
Country: Mexico
Stakeholder Group: Technical Community
Speaker: Javier Juarez
Speaker: Diaz Cesar
Speaker: Leon Sanchez
Speaker: Fred Baker
III. Proposer
Mrs, Jimena Sierra, Technical Community, Federal Telecommunications Institute (México)
Mrs, Diana Gomez, Technical Community, Federal Telecommunications Institute (México)
Co-organizers
Mr., Kevon, SWIFT, Technical Community, LACNIC
Ms., Carolina, CAEIRO, Technical Community, LACNIC
VII. Content of the Session
The session will focus on how public policies that promote IPv6 deployment contribute to the full development of IoT, particularly in the context of developing economies. Specifically, the session will seek to:
- Introduce major pillars of IoT development including taxonomy, communication requirements under discussion in various spaces and prominent IoT projects;
- Discuss the importance of IPv6 deployment to promote the development of IoT;
- Showcase successful case studies in IPv6 deployment, and IoT applications, with special focus on developing economies;
- Debate about the future of IPv4 addresses once IPv6 deployment is widely underway.
Session Dynamics
The session will begin with opening remarks by Moderator Mr. León Felipe Sanchez who will introduce the topic of the workshop, dynamics and speakers (10 mins).
Workshop participants will break into four discussion groups, each of which will be co-chaired by one or two speakers. Discussion topics will include:
- Main pillars of IoT development
- Importance of IPv6 deployment for the proper development of IoT
- Successul experiences for IPv6 Deployment
- The future of IPv4 addresses
Prior to breaking into discussion groups –and to facilitate the participation of remote participants-- the workshop will commence with firestarter remarks by each speaker based on the four discussion topics (30 mins total). Ines Robles from Ericson, Fred Baker from ISOC and Carolina Aguerre from UdeSA/UBA will address main pillars of IoT development introducing respectively the perspective of the Mobile Industry, the technical community and considerations from an Internet Governance perspective. Laura Kaplan from LACNIC and Paul Wilson APNIC will discuss the importance of IPv6 Deployment; Paul Wilson will also tackle the future of IPv4 addresses, while Laura Kaplan will address some successful experiences of IPv6 Deployment in the LAC region.
Following the debate, one panelist/ facilitator from each discussion group will be asked to present main conclusions to the audience.
VIII. Relevance of the Session
This session explores identification and addressing needs for the IoT with special attention paid to the linkages between IoT development and IPv6. For this reason, the session will also explore the successful experiences for the deployment of IPv6, especially in the developing countries.
This topic is extremely important considering that Gartner, Inc. predicts that there will be up to 20.8 billion connected things by 2020, as millions of new things are being connected every day. While estimates vary among sources, exponentially within the Internet of Things (IoT) is certain.
For this reason, it is important to comprehend IoT development and, in particular, its network models and communications protocols. It must also be acknowledged that IoT debate is not new. The preeminence of identification and addressing within IoT comes at a time where there is a confluence of several trends including the rise of, inter alia, IP use (and the effects of IPv4 exhaustion in particular), ubiquitous connectivity, miniaturization, data analytics and cloud computing.
Furthermore, there are pragmatic considerations within IoT development that are largely focused on the technopolitical paradigm (e.g. security and privacy concerns; proprietary addressing schemes; current deployment/ubiquity of IPv6 across industries; cost implications in designing the architecture of devices and sensors; etc.). In the wake of IPv4 exhaustion, and given the existing range of IoT interventions, enhanced bottom-up dialogue among interest groups will be beneficial to all spaces that are concerned by the identification and addressing of ‘things’.
Taking into account the aforementioned, the transition from IPV4 to IPV6 require more discussion and collaboration between stakeholders about the principles, methods and means to face such issues. However, developing and less developed countries and more even regions as Latin America and the Caribbean are experiencing a mixed situation regarding the adoption of the last Internet protocol, IPv6, despite greater efforts by LACNIC and its community to accelerate its expansion and use in the continent. On the one hand there are countries that have advanced and already have up to 9% of their traffic with this technology, and on the other, there are territories that have not even deployed IPv6.
There is a serious risk that less developed countries will not be able to communicate with each other because of the lack of adoption of this Internet protocol, which offers great advantages over IPv4. For that reason, it is important to promote the coordination with all the stakeholders such as technical community, academy, private sector, civil Society, but specifically governments have to take a relatively firm stand on this in order to internally encourage the adoption of IPv6 in their countries. ISPs, users, Internet users and universities can also help in the dissemination of the protocol.
In this regard, the workshop will look for sharing the experiences of successful stories of IPv6 deployment and the international reference to promote this deployment, especially by the governments.
Finally, it is important to highlighted the Internet’s sustainable growth depends on IPv6 adoption. The booming mobile market and the Internet of Things (IoT), alone, will require much more IP address space than is available with IPv4.
Anyone running the old protocol needs to adopt the new one in order to support the increasing demand on the global network as more people – and more machines and “things” – come online. IPv4 and IPv6 are two different protocols. IPv6 is not backwards compatible with IPv4. Devices that communicate using only IPv6 cannot communicate with devices that communicate using only IPv4.
The two protocols are not directly compatible and the idea is that both can operate until all systems have IPv6 capability, at which time the IPv4 version will be unnecessary. However, the IPv4 system could still be used privately, especially in networks that are not connected to the public Internet. Meanwhile, the connectivity of the IPv6 universe raises an important problem. In this point, it is convenient to point out that the countries that have made a successful deployment or transition may consider that their IPv4 addresses be distributed in developing or less developed countries or start discussing what will happen with the IPV4 addresses once the IPv6 is completely deployed.
Tags: Internet of Things, IPv6 deployment
Additional Speakers: Speakers
1. Javier Juarez (IFT Mexico)
2. Cristina Monti (European Union)
3. María Ines Robles (ERICSON)
4. Paul Wilson (APNIC)
5. Laura Kaplan (LACNIC)
6. Carolina Aguerre (UdeSA/UBA)
Agenda
10 mins. Opening Remarks by Moderator Mr. León Felipe Sanchez. Introduction to session topic, format and speakers.
30 mins. Fire starter remarks by workshop speakers on four discussion topics. 1. Main pillars of IoT development: Ines Robles (Ericson), Javier Juarez (IFT) and Carolina Aguerre (UdeSA/UBA); 2. IPv6 Deployment for IoT: Laura Kaplan (LACNIC) and Paul Wilson (APNIC); 3. Successful experiences for IPv6 Deployment: Laura Kaplan (LACNIC), Cristina Monti (European Union); and 4. The future of IPv4 addresses: Paul Wilson (APNIC).
30 mins. Break-out group discussion. Remote participants to submit questions and or comments to discussion groups. Facilitators from organizing entities will tweet highlights of the discussion so that remote participants may follow it live.
20 mins. Presentations of concluding remarks by each discussion group.
...
Proposer's Name: Mr. Carlos Alberto Afonso
Proposer's Organization: Instituto Nupef
Co-Proposer's Name: Mr. Hartmut Glaser
Co-Proposer's Organization: CGI.br
Co-Organizers:
Mr., Carlos, AFONSO,Civil Society, Instituto Nupef
Mr. Hartmut, GLASER, Technical Community, CGI.br
Ms. Jamila, VENTURINI,Technical Community, NIC.br
Mr. Diego, CANABARRO, Technical Community, NIC.br
Session Format: Other - 90 Min
Format description: The session is designed to host a dialectic debate segment followed by a traditional round-table segment structured around a Q&A format.
Proposer:
Country: Brazil
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Co-Proposer:
Country: Brazil
Stakeholder Group: Technical Community
Participants:
Moderators
Cristine Hoepers (Technical Communinty, CERT.br, Brazil)
Carlos A. Afonso (Civil Society, Instituto Nupef, Brazil)
Roundtable
Christoph Steck (Private Sector, Telefonica, Spain)
Demi Getschko (Technical Community, NIC.br, Brazil)
Diego Aranha (Technical Community, Unicamp, Brazil) [Remote participation]
Estelle Masse (Civil Society, Access Now, Belgium)
Monica Guise Rosina (Private Sector, Facebook, Brazil)
Neide Oliveira (Government Sector, Federal Prosecution Service, Brazil)
Riana Pfefferkorn (Technical Community, Stanford CIS, EUA)
Seth Bouvier (Government Sector, U.S. State Department)
Sunil Abraham (Civil Society, CIS India)
Policy presentations
Elinor Buxton (Government of the United Kingdom)
Nina Leemhuis Janssen (Government of The Netherlands)
Content of the Session:
The workshop is built around a policy question that approaches some historical controversies inherent to the widespread use and availability of encryption in the Internet, with a special focus on the tension between the increasing use of cryptography after Snowden and the supposed challenges it poses to public and national security in a digital era. The session promotes a space for multistakeholder debate on: the state of the art in the development and employment of cryptography; different attitudes towards the freedom to use encryption in different jurisdictions; modes of state-led interference in/with encrypted systems; and the limits posed by national and international law to such interference, as well as the impacts it might have to the protection and promotion fundamental human rights and shared values, to permission-less innovation on the Internet and the open architecture of the network. The session will host two segments: one will consist of two presentations made by government officials from the UK and the Netherlands that will detail different policy approaches for dealing with the use of encryption. The second comprises a multistakeholder round-table that gathers comments and questions about the previous presentations. In the end, moderators will summarize discussions and an overarching and documented report of the session will be made available for the session. The unorthodox format chosen for this session allows public scrutiny over some very practical policy-oriented approaches. The bulk of discussions registered during the workshop can provide dialogued feedback into policy development processes elsewhere.
Relevance of the Session:
The development and use of encryption to protect information and communication dates back to ancient times. Encryption has been mainly employed over the centuries to protect personal data, business information, governmental classified information, etc. Attempts to break encryption in general as well as the notion of inserting vulnerabilities (such as backdoors) in systems that rely on encryption have been a parallel phenomenon to (and also an integral part of) the longstanding efforts of cryptography. One might even say that those two processes function as the two different sides of the same coin.
The advent and the great pace of development of computing and networking technologies boosted the science behind cryptography to unprecedented levels of relevance for society in general. More recently, after the Snowden affairs, cryptography has been perceived as a necessary condition (not a sufficient one though) for Internet users to curb the abuses entailed by massive digital surveillance and espionage by an ever growing number of countries. In parallel, together with other measures, the deployment of encryption to commercial applications seems to have become a, somehow, sine qua non condition for some Internet companies to regain consumer trust and retain competitive advantages in relation to other players in the market.
The widespread use and availability of encryption tools however refueled tensions and entailed policy responses in a myriad of countries (e.g.: the Apple vs FBI case in the context of the San Bernadino Shooting; the announcement made by some European countries of their willingness to outlaw some uses of encryption as well as the public commitment of the Netherlands government to support encryption and oppose the development of backdoors; and the successive orders by Brazilian courts that aimed at blocking Whatsapp in the country due to the company’s denial to delivery communication records from some of its users). Those tensions generally revolve around the fact that as general-purpose technology, encryption can be also employed to conceal irregular and/or illicit activities, which would justify the creation of some narrow but allegedly needed exceptions to the constitutional limits built over the last century in several countries to impose limits to criminal investigation in order to uphold privacy and personal data protection. The cases mentioned above gave rise to fierce discussions on whether or not the use of encryption increases by itself the likelihood of and facilitate the occurrence of crime and other illicit activities (most notably organized crime of all sorts and terrorism). Some law enforcement agencies and security forces have argued that encryption impairs crime investigation and the prosecution of criminals, and therefore the development of technology with embedded backdoors might be needed. Other actors, including representatives from the technical community, however, argue that such interference might disrupt regularly protected flows of information and communication as well as compromise privacy and the protection of other fundamental human rights. At this point, we are in a stage in which the trade-off between those two perspectives have to be settled through democratic means and public participation and that is why this workshop was submitted for the IGF 2017.
Besides dealing with several different topics that comprise the overarching agenda of Internet governance (human rights, cybersecurity, openness and permission-less innovation, economic development, infrastructure governance, etc), the topic of this workshop is directly connected to two different goals comprised in the UN SDGs: sound institutions and innovation. Discussions on the contours of sound political institutions and on challenges and incentives for innovation are integral components of any sort of political agenda that aims at reflecting upon the “digital future”, which is the case of the 2017 IGF and highlight the importance of adding this proposal to the overall agenda of the event.
Tag 1: Encryption
Tag 2: Law Enforcement
Tag 3: Human Rights
Interventions:
The format chosen to this session enables both interventions from selected experts representing the full range of the multistakholder Internet community as well as for the general audience in Geneva.
The list of participants (all confirmed) is:
Moderators
Cristine Hoepers (Technical Communinty, CERT.br, Brazil)
Carlos A. Afonso (Civil Society, Instituto Nupef, Brazil)
Roundtable
Christoph Steck (Private Sector, Telefonica, Spain)
Demi Getschko (Technical Community, NIC.br, Brazil)
Diego Aranha (Technical Community, Unicamp, Brazil) [Remote participation]
Estelle Masse (Civil Society, Access Now, Belgium)
Monica Guise Rosina (Private Sector, Facebook, Brazil)
Neide Oliveira (Government Sector, Federal Prosecution Service, Brazil)
Riana Pfefferkorn (Technical Community, Stanford CIS, EUA)
Seth Bouvier (Government Sector, U.S. State Department)
Sunil Abraham (Civil Society, CIS India)
Policy presentations
Elinor Buxton (Government of the United Kingdom)
Nina Leemhuis Janssen (Government of The Netherlands)
The onsite moderators will start the workshop by explaining the flow of the session. They will then grant the floor for the chosen speakers during the first segment of the session, in which two government representatives will present different policy approaches to the use of encryption. After that, onsite and online moderation will entertain a 30-minute Q&A segment, giving the floor in a random fashion to eight selected specialists (two representatives of governments and/or intergovernmental organizations; two representatives of the business community; two representatives of technical communities; and two representatives of civil society), who will be able to pose questions and comments to the speakers of the first segment. Moderators will gather blocks of three questions and comments at a time. Each block of questions will then be approached by the debaters. The final segment repeats the f
...
Proposer's Name: Ms. Deepti Bharthur
Proposer's Organization: IT for Change
Co-Proposer's Name: Mr. Nicolo Zingales
Co-Proposer's Organization: Dynamic Coalition on Platform Responsibility
Co-Organizers:
Dr.,Deepti,BHARTHUR,Civil Society,IT for Change
Dr.,Nicolo,ZINGALES,Civil Society,Dynamic Coalition on Platform Responsibility
Session Format: Birds of a Feather - 90 Min
Proposer:
Country: India
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Co-Proposer:
Country: United Kingdom
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Speaker: Viviana Munoz
Speaker: Mark Graham
Speaker: Luca Belli
Speaker: Anita Gurumurthy
Speaker: Mohammad Amir Anwar
Content of the Session:
Digital platforms are re-structuring the DNA of the global economy. By creating new peer-to-peer marketplaces for goods and services and enabling the emergence of 'virtual' economic opportunities in the form of micro-work and game labour, they potentially open up job opportunities for a new generation of workers. This flux in many ways, is a time of great promise, but is often presented through a singular narrative -- of a sharing economy that ostensibly allows the unimpeded flow of digital and material goods, services and data flows over platform marketplaces. There is a need to unpack this narrative and its production models so that the implications for practice and policy, towards egalitarian economic futures, can be understood.
This calls for careful attention to the situated experiences of platformisation in the global South, a debate that is neglected. What are the emerging opportunities for informal sector labour in the gig economy? How is platformisation transforming the supply chain for small producers? What could be the impact of platforms' terms of service and algorithmic regulation on user rights? The proposed session will examine these questions, from the standpoint of rights -- labour rights, digital and data rights of citizens, rights of small producers etc. For instance, free digital flows may not work for developing economies where domestic policies with respect to digital rights or digital dimensions of traditional rights are not sorted out. Further, developing countries may lack the power to enforce compliance or stipulate standards for big platform intermediaries from outside their jurisdiction. Local models based on cooperativism may not find mooring given the extraordinary clout of monopolies like Uber, who control large platforms. Appropriate sectoral and digital policy and regulation may be nascent. It is also unclear how consumer data is used by platforms for data analytics and market consolidation, and what this means for the economic autonomy and futures of developing countries. The proposed workshop aims to bring together interested actors to deliberate upon this issue, by engaging with the following questions
(a) What are the platform models in countries of the global South? What opportunities and challenges do they open up for individual and collective rights (as citizens, workers, producers and consumers)?
(b) What are the building blocks of a conducive policy environment to promote egalitarian platform models? What could be the impact of platforms' terms of service and algorithmic regulation on users' rights?
(c) What is the impact of platformisation on inequalities within and between countries?
(d) What are the good practices of cooperative platform-based models, and policy measures towards encouraging inclusive economies in the platform era?
Relevance of the Session:
The social, economic and cultural impact of platforms has been significant and only continues to grow. In many ways, they are remaking the Internet as we know it, bearing directly on this year’s IGF theme, “Shape Your Digital Future.” As a key digital phenomenon, platforms have critical implications for Internet Governance issues. Interesting developments in recent times, in regulating Uber in UK and Chile for example, have brought such governance issues to the table. The French Digital Council submitted a report on Platform Neutrality in 2015. It is in this context of the rising significance of appropriate policy development (digital sector and other sectors) to regulate platforms that we seek to propose this session. The regulatory environment in developing countries is still nascent and governance challenges in these contexts tied in with other geo-political issues. We believe that this workshop is highly relevant to the IGF venue and can bring value both to the forum and its participants. It is also the hope of this workshop that a committed work track can be evolved towards research and deliberation on policy issues around platform economies.
Tag 1: Platforms
Tag 2: Digital Economy
Tag 3: Digital Future
Interventions:
The workshop brings together speakers who will approach the question of the platform economy from various lenses and stand-points, thus allowing for a diverse range of deliberations on the topic. Instead of following a traditional ‘talking heads’ panel format, the workshop will bring in speakers’ research and policy expertise to the fore through short lightning talks. Audiences will then engage with the issues and the discussion moderated to include responses from speakers.
-Viviana Munoz – will examine key policy challenges in the area of furthering right to knowledge and right to development in the context of platformisation.
-Mark Graham – will discuss the emerging digital work and enterprise models in the platform economy, and reflect on the key issues and challenges they open up for the rights and inclusion agenda.
-Luca Belli – will discuss the need for platform regulation through an examination of the ‘Terms of Service’ framework.
-Anita Gurumurthy - will outline the sweep of issues concerning platform governance. She will frame the geo-political context of platformization, flagging the new issues and new policy venues (such as the WTO) where significant debates are taking shape.
-Mohammad Amir Anwar will speak to the growth of the knowledge economy in the global South and its developmental outcomes.
Diversity:
The proposed workshop reflects diversity in both its composition and its focus. Our workshop panel – where we have ensured to achieve a gender balance – comprises speakers and scholars from varying contexts, whose work is rooted firmly in social justice and rights frameworks, working on empirical aspects of policy in Latin America, Asia and Africa.
The panel itself aims at unpacking the many dimensions of the political economy of platforms primarily from a global South standpoint, thus bringing to bear on the platform discourse viewpoints and voices from outside the first world.
Onsite Moderator: Anita Gurumurthy
Online Moderator: Parminder Jeet Singh
Rapporteur: Nandini Chami
Online Participation:
The workshop will be made open to online participation, which we will actively seek through reaching out on our mailing lists and networks, and the use of social media in the time leading up to IGF. At the workshop, we will facilitate remote participation through a designated moderator to facilitate questions and comments via WebEx through live audio/video and chat. We will also live-blog the proceedings of the workshop to allow remote participants to follow along in case of bandwidth issues.
Discussion facilitation:
The choice of a ‘Birds of a Feather’ format for the proposed workshop allows for a highly interactive and issue-centred participation, while still retaining the advantages of minimal structure and facilitation. The tentative schedule for the workshop is provided below with details of how discussions will be facilitated;
Context setting
-Introductory remarks by Anita Gurumurthy (moderator) – 5 mins
-Lightning talks by speakers - (4 x 5) 20 mins
Speakers will briefly address the issues outlined in the session description, drawing upon their respective work in the areas of data, platforms, digital labour, and regulatory/governance issue.
Brainstorming exercise – 15 mins
In this activity, the attendees will respond to the lightning talks and contribute questions on platform economy through post-its which will be put on a bulletin board. Online questions will also be collated in a similar manner.
Open floor discussion - 40 mins
Aided by facilitation from the onsite and online moderator, panelists will engage with the questions generated through the brain storming exercise. Audience members will also be able to respond, comment and raise counter questions.
Concluding remarks by panel - 5 mins
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: Yes
Link to Report: https://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2015/index.php/proposal/view_public/134
Vahini Naidu, South African Permanent Mission, Geneva
Agenda:
1. Context setting: 25 minutes
Speakers will briefly address the issues outlined in the session description, drawing upon their respective work in the areas of data, platforms, digital labour and regulatory and governance issues.
Proposer's Name: Mr. Gregory Mounier
Proposer's Organization: EUROPOL - European Cybercrime Centre
Co-Proposer's Name: Mr. Richard Leaning
Co-Proposer's Organization: RIPE NCC
Co-Organizers:
Mr Gregory MOUNIER, Government, EUROPOL
Mr Richard LEANING, International Organisation, RIPE NCC
Session Format: Panel - 90 Min
Proposer:
Country: Netherlands
Stakeholder Group: Government
Co-Proposer:
Country: Netherlands
Stakeholder Group: Intergovernmental Organizations
Speaker: Daniel Obam (National Communication Secretariat of Kenya)
Speaker: Ron Dasilva (ICANN Board member)
Speaker: Paul Wilson (APNIC)
Speaker: Ronny Vanningh (Proximus)
Speaker: Gregory Mounier (Europol -EC3)
Speaker: Jan Zorz (ISOC)
Content of the Session:
The Internet's extraordinary growth has resulted in the exhaustion of IP addresses in their current version (IPv4). This has been anticipated by the Internet community and IETF created a new format of the Protocol which has been ready for adoption since 2011. Yet, the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 takes a long time because it requires heavy investments to upgrade applications, electronic devices and network. During the transition phase, networks are running with both with IPv4 and IPv6. This means that network operators must find a way to maximise the use of available IPv4 addresses.
Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) or Large Scale NAT are technologies adopted by the Internet Service Providers to allow them to share IPv4 addresses among a large pool of Internet users, therefore reducing the demands on scarce IPv4.
However, the widespread and growing use of CGN technologies by ISPs, seems to indicate that from an IPv4-to-IPv6 transition mechanism, CGN has become a substitute to the IPv6 transition. A recent study showed that in 2016, 90% of mobile internet network operators (GSM providers) and 38% of fixed line internet access providers (cable, fibre and ADSL) were using CGN technologies, while 12% are planning to deploy it in the coming months (http://www.icir.org/christian/publications/2016-imc-cgnat.pdf).
CGNs have many technical and policy drawbacks. It raise security and privacy issues but most importantly it degrades the quality of Internet access services, curtail innovation and alter user experience for applications such as gaming, video streaming and downloading large files.
But to what extent are CGNs also responsible for the slow transition to IPv6? What incentives can efficiently encourage ISPs to reduce the use of CGN and invest in IPv6 transition? Should the regulator propose voluntary agreements to ISPs or should it regulate the phasing out of CGN technologies?
Speakers will provide different views on the role of CGN on the IPv6 transition. They will explore different alternatives solutions, from different perspectives: from that of a Regional Internet Registry, from a large ISP, from the perspective of the technical community, the regulator and from the law enforcement community.
The emphasis will be put on the Belgium case where the telecom regulator entered in a voluntary agreement with the 4 biggest ISPs in
2012 for them to limit the number of end-users behind each IPv4 addresses for security purposes (to help to identify end-users when served with a legal order in the framework of a criminal investigation). This led to the unintended positive consequence that major Belgium-based ISPs have made strategic business decision to transition quickly to IPv6. As a result, today Belgium has the highest IPv6 adoption rate in the world.
Relevance of the Session:
One need to explore all alternative options to promote the deployment of IPv6. CGN technologies seem to hinder that deployment. There are innovative solutions that can be translated in public policies that will help citizens and States to contribute to shape their digital future towards innovation and growth.
Tag 1: #IPV6deployment
Tag 2: Critical Internet Resources
Tag 3: Cybercrime
Interventions:
Speakers will provide different views on the role of CGN on the IPv6 transition. They will explore different alternatives solutions, from different perspectives: from that of a Regional Internet Registry (APNIC), from a large ISP (Proximus), from the perspective of the technical community (Jan Zorz ISOC), the regulator (Belgian Regulator BIPT) and from the law enforcement community (Europol).
The emphasis will be put on the Belgium case where the telecom regulator entered in a voluntary agreement with the 4 biggest ISPs in
2012 for them to limit the number of end-users behind each IPv4 addresses for security purposes (to help to identify end-users when served with a legal order in the framework of a criminal investigation). This led to the unintended positive consequence that major Belgium-based ISPs have made strategic business decision to transition quickly to IPv6. As a result, today Belgium has the highest IPv6 adoption rate in the world.
Diversity:
APNIC (Australia). However, the case study is based on the Belgian model so other speakers will come from Western Europe.
Onsite Moderator: Richard Leaning RIPE NCC
Online Moderator:
Rapporteur: Richard Leaning RIPE NCC
Online Participation:
Online attendees will have a separate queue and microphone, which will rotate equally with the mics in the room; the workshop moderator will have the online participation session open, and will be in close communication with the workshop’s online moderator.
Discussion facilitation:
The workshop will be organized as a facilitated dialogue. Led by the moderator, subject experts will debate and discuss the key questions and issues. Subject experts will give opening comments, after which the moderator will turn to those attending the session and invited experts in the audience to engage in facilitated dialogue.
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: No
Link to Report:
Ron da Silva is an executive leader, international board member and internet technology expert. He brings extensive experience leading network architecture & engineering, internet backbones, broadband networks, cloud infrastructure, and corporate and internet governance. Over twenty (20+) years of proven business experience, culminating in senior executive leadership. NACD certified Board Governance Fellow. Ron is CEO and Founder of Network Technologies Global LLC, providing Internet, broadband and telecommunications advice and expertise. He currently serves on the Board of the Internet Association for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Ron brings to the Board extensive experience in Internet governance and policy development, financial discipline, broad business acumen and an understanding of cyber-security risk.
Zorz Jan: ISOC - Operational Engagement Programme Manager. Jan Žorž started his professional career in RS-232/VAX VMS world in 1992 and continued through Novell and Windows environments all the way to Solaris and other UNIX derivatives that today represent the native environment for the majority of his projects. Jan is the Internet Society's Operational Engagement Programme Manager. He works on operational initiatives to ease the deployment of IPv6 and other technologies. He is also working to help the industry document best-current operational practices and to improve operator feedback to the IETF.
Jan is one of the pioneers of SiOL, the Slovenian national ISP, and has been involved in the organization from the beginning. Among other activities, he began experimenting in 1997 with Internet streaming multimedia content. Based on these experiments, he successfully accomplished projects such as "Dhaulagiri '99 Live" (an Internet multimedia transmission of Tomaz Humar's solo climb of the south wall of Dhaulagiri (called Death Zone in the Himalayas), "Ski Everest Live 2000" (an Internet live-video transmission and monitoring of extreme skiing from the summit of Mt. Everest by Davo Karnicar) and other similar projects. Together with two other members of the team "Dhaulagiri '99 Live", Jan received a media award/statue "Victor" for special achievement.
For the last seven years, Jan has been working as a consultant in the IT field, specializing in IPv6. He co-founded the Go6 institute (not-for-profit), a Slovenian IPv6 initiative whose main objective is to raise IPv6 awareness in Slovenia and alert the community to the fact that we are approaching extensive changes on the Internet.
Due to the success of Go6 Institute, Slovenia is currently leading the EU as the country most prepared for IPv6 (according to the RIPE NCC's IPv6 RIPEness study). Jan has been invited to present around the world on his work, the model of the Go6 platform, IPv6 awareness raising and deployment at the national level. These speaking engagements have included conferences such as RIPE Meetings, Google IPv6 Implementors Conference 2010, Internet Governance Forum meetings, OECD meeting, World IPv6 Congresses (Paris and London), as well as national forums in Germany, Greece, Norway, Macedonia, Oman, Brazil and many others.
Jan is also primary co-author of a very successful procurement (specification) paper, published as official RIPE Best Current Practice document RIPE-501, titled "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment".
Session Format: Round Table - 90 Min
Moderator: Dr Farzaneh Badii, Internet Governance Project
Speaker: Dr Milton Mueller, Professor, Georgia Tech
Speaker: Dr Tatiana Tropina, Senior Researcher, Max Planck Institute
Speaker: Brian Cute, CEO, Public Interest Registry
Speaker: Becky Burr, Board Member, ICANN
Speaker: Tim Smith, General Manager, Canadian International Pharmacy Association (remote)
Speaker: Dr Annemarie Bridy, Professor of Law, University of Idaho (remote)
Rapporteur: Ayden Férdeline, ICANN Non-Commercial Users Constituency
Content of the Session:
Private ordering is common in the field of Internet governance, cybersecurity, and cybercrime. Private ordering refers to governance by means of contracts, markets, or voluntary cooperative networks of non-state actors. The Internet relies heavily on private ordering because it is difficult for territorial governments to regulate effectively by traditional methods of intervention.
Private ordering is used in Internet governance institutions such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). ICANN implements policies through contractual agreements and develops policies via a multistakeholder process rooted in non-state actors. Nevertheless, ICANN’s control of the root of the Domain Name System (DNS) creates a centralized “choke point” where control over website content and Internet expression can be exerted by regulating domain name registries and registrars (for instance, by taking down domains or withdrawing licenses to register names). Most stakeholders believe that ICANN’s authority to coordinate and make policy for the DNS should not be leveraged to make ICANN a content regulator on the Internet.
As part of ICANN’s reform process, a new mission statement was adopted which expressly forbids ICANN from engaging in content regulation. Some interest groups, however, often put pressure on ICANN to use its power over domains to become an Internet regulator. Most notably, this pressure comes from copyright and trademark interests, law enforcement agencies, and some governments.
This workshop will address the following issues:
Tag 1: Domain Name System
Tag 2: Content
Interventions:
The roundtable discussion will bring together different stakeholders participating in ICANN policy-making processes to discuss the issues and the relevance for the wider Internet governance community.
Diversity:
The roundtable format will allow addressing the issues from different perspectives: there will be a gender balance of participants, speakers from all UN-recognised geographic regions, youth participation, and speakers from a wide array of stakeholder groups.
Onsite Moderator: Dr Farzaneh Badii
Online Moderator: Dr Renata Aquino Ribeiro
Rapporteur: Ayden Férdeline
Online Participation:
A remote moderator will enlist questions and comments from the audience during the workshop. Prior to the workshop, the hashtags #NCUC and #InternetPolicy will be used to bring in questions and comments from prospective attendees with the aim of enriching the debate. A collaborative document will gather these questions and comments prior to, during, and after the workshop, and they will be integrated into the report. A variety of media will serve as background material for this debate, based on our previous workshops done at the IGF. We will utilise remote participation tools to ensure an inclusive, accessible, and global audience.
Discussion facilitation:
We will have a virtual hub set-up through Skype to engage the NCUC's globally-dispersed membership in this workshop, we will use Twitter and other social media platforms extensively, and we will give equal priority to both in-person and remote participants when making interventions.
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: Yes
Link to Report: http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/index.php?q=filedepot_download/4098/297
Proposer's Name: Ms. Lorrayne Porciuncula
Proposer's Organization: OECD
Co-Proposer's Name: Ms. Phillippa Biggs
Co-Proposer's Organization: Broadband Commission for Sustainable Developement
Co-Organizers:
Ms.,Lorrayne,Porciuncula,Intergovernmental Organisation,OECD
Ms.,Phillippa,Biggs,Intergovernmental Organisation,Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development
Session Format: Panel - 90 Min
Proposer:
Country: France
Stakeholder Group: Intergovernmental Organizations
Co-Proposer:
Country: Switzerland
Stakeholder Group: Intergovernmental Organizations
Speaker: Lorrayne Porciuncula
Speaker: Phillippa Biggs
Speaker: Sebastián Bellagamba
Speaker: Helani Galpaya
Speaker: Bengt Mölleryd
Speaker: Robert Pepper
Speaker: Amrita Choudhury
Speaker: Michael Ginguld
Content of the Session:
The Agenda for Sustainable Development specifically acknowledges the role of ICTs and the Internet as horizontal enabler for development or as cross-cutting ‘means of implementation’. However, with over half (an estimated 53%) of the world’s population was still not using the Internet by the end of 2016, with only 49% penetration of mobile broadband subscriptions and 12% with fixed broadband access. While there are a number of initiatives at the local, regional and global levels, much needs to be done to expand broadband services in rural and remote areas.
The purpose of this workshop is to bring together representatives from diverse stakeholder groups to explore the new policy and technology approaches to provide universal and meaningful access to these underserved areas. This topic matches the overarching theme of IGF “Shaping Your Digital Future” as it will address how innovative approaches from both the public and private sectors are shaping how we will connect the unconnected. It builds on the IGF’s Best Practice Forum on Policy Options for Connecting and Enabling the Next Billion by presenting new research on different policy approaches being implemented by the public sector and on technology trends being developed by the private sector.
On policy approaches the workshop will discuss issues such as setting national targets of connectivity, universal service policies, rural infrastructure projects, municipal and community networks, public tenders for competitive bidding and open access policies. On emerging technologies to fill the gaps in broadband services, different technological developments will be discussed, including fibre optics, coaxial cable, copper, fixed and mobile wireless, satellites and hybrid approaches. Through an interactive multistakeholder discussion, participants will consider the challenges and solutions for connecting rural and remote areas.
Relevance of the Session:
The Internet is crucial to the important transformations that are happening now and that will continue to take place in the future changing the ways in which humans interact with each other. However, over half the world’s citizens remain unable to benefit from this transformation and the sustainable development potentially enabled by it. The challenge of connecting rural and remote areas cannot be overlooked when addressing the challenges and transformation ahead.
Tag 1: Broadband
Tag 2: Digital Inclusion
Tag 3: Emerging Issues
Interventions:
Speakers for this workshop were selected in terms of their expertise in the subject and on the different perspectives they will bring to this multi-faceted discussion. The moderator will make sure that they present their views in a way to contribute to the objective of the workshop:
Diversity:
This workshop is designed to provide diverse perspectives. It is balanced in terms of stakeholder groups (with intergovernmental organisation, technical community, academia, civil society, government and private sector representation), gender (with a balance of 4 out 8 speakers being women), age (with below 30 representative) and, also geographic representation (European, African, North American, Latin America and Asian).
Onsite Moderator: Lorrayne Porciuncula (OECD)
Online Moderator: Anna Polomska (ITU)
Rapporteur: Verena Weber (OECD)
Online Participation:
Remote participation will be facilitated by the remote moderator who will be involved throughout workshop planning to advise on where remote participation will need to be facilitated. The moderator will frequently communicate with the remote moderator throughout the session to ensure remote participants’ views/questions are reflected. The workshop will be promoted in advance to the wider community to give remote participants the opportunity to prepare questions and interventions and to generate interest in the workshop. We will also ensure the workshop is promoted on OECD’s and Broadband Commission’s websites and via social media, through the hashtag #IGFruralbroadband.
Discussion facilitation:
The moderator will set the stage by providing a context to the workshop, with the latest statistics on rural and remote connectivity in the world.
Through an interactive, multistakeholder dialogue, the workshop will then be structured in two parts guided by the following questions:
1) What are the main existing challenges to expand broadband services to rural and remote areas?
2) Which new policy and technology approaches are already assisting to expand broadband access and which new trends are on the horizon?
After the first and second round of questions, the moderator will open the floor for participation of the audience (remote and on-site). Specific questions which the moderator can pose to speakers will be prepared in advance to aid discussion and debate only if necessary as all participants will be encouraged to contribute to the discussion.The moderator will summarise the main takeaways of the session.
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: Yes
Link to Report: https://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2015/index.php/proposal/view_public/154
Additional Reference Document Link: http://broadbandcommission.org/Documents/reports/bb-annualreport2016.pdf
Additional Speakers:1. Setting the scene (5 minutes) - The moderator will explain the purpose of the workshop, present statistics regarding connectivity in the world and share some of key questions related to policy and technology approaches to expanding broadband to rural and remote areas around the world.
2. Challenges (20 minutes) - The moderator will invite the main panellists to answer the question “What are the main existing challenges to expand broadband services to rural and remote areas?”. Each panellist will have a maximum of 6 minutes to provide their remarks, after which the floor will be opened for the audience or other panellists to add to or discuss the list of challenges identified.
3. New approaches (40 minutes) - The moderator will invite the main panellists to answer the question “Which new policy and technology approaches are already assisting to expand broadband access and which new trends are on the horizon?”. Each panellist will have a maximum of 6 minutes to provide their remarks, after which the floor will be opened for the audience or other panellists to add to or discuss the list of approaches identified.
Policy
Technology
4. Questions and answers (10 minutes): The moderator will open the floor for questions.
5. Summing up (5 minutes): The moderator will summarize the main takeaways of the session.
...
Proposer's Name: Mr. Garland McCoy
Proposer's Organization: Technology Education Institute
Co-Proposer's Name: Mr. Bill Ash
Co-Proposer's Organization: IEEE
Co-Organizers:
Mr. Garland T. McCoy, Civil Society, Technology Education Institute
Mr. Bill Ash, Technical Community, IEEE
Session Format: 90 minute Round Table with moderated flash presenations by key speakers, audience interaction and final suming up by Moderators and Rapporteurs
Proposer:
Country: United States
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Co-Proposer:
Country: United States
Stakeholder Group: Technical Community
Speaker: Bill Ash
Speaker: Nilmini Rubin
Speaker: Omar Ansari
Speaker: Vint Cerf
Speaker: Manu Bhardwaj
Speaker: Kristopher Haag
Speaker: Wisdom Donkor
Content of the Session:
According to the World Atlas 67% of the developing world is still without household electricity in 2017. This translates into roughly 1.3 billion citizens in the world today lack access to reliable power/electricity to serve their daily needs, power healthcare facilities, education, and home/personal uses. The Internet is viewed as a “right”, and the world recognizes the importance of creating affordable access to the Internet and the online world, yet the role of power/electricity is often ignored. To date, at the IGF, there has been significant focus on addressing the digital divide. Yet, the role of power/electricity is just now being put on the front burner at the IGF2017.
This is a critical opportunity, and this workshop will bring together experts who can speak to how they are addressing solving the power challenges in different situations – some in rural areas, and some in smart villages and smart cities.
Advancements in technology have provided the opportunity to generate and store power/electricity in small mobile units suitable for deployment in rural areas in developing countries at affordable price. These units can, for example, serve the increasing power needs of communications towers and do so with clean renewable power as well as serve the needs of the local communities setting up business opportunities with established anchor tenants. Additionally, technology advancements hold the promise of delivering much needed baseload generation to stand up industrial development, education, healthcare, major infrastructure projects, information/content processing, storage (caching), transit, etc. Delivering electricity and access will help advance work on the UN’s SDGs (see link to UN SDGs site … https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs)
Format: 90-minute Roundtable
Setting the Stage:
Moderator: Marilyn Cade, President, ICT Strategies, Private Sector, USA
Key Speakers:
Kristopher Haag, Director, New Business Development & Emerging Technologies, EMI Advisors, Private Sector, USA
Manu Bhardwaj, Vice President for Research and Insight, MasterCard Center for Inclusive Growth, Private Sector, USA
Vint Cerf, Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist, Global Policy Development, Google, Private Sector, USA
Nilmini Rubin, Vice President, International Development, Tetra Tech, Private Sector, USA
Bill Ash, Strategic Program Manager for the IEEE Standards Association, Technical Community, USA
Wisdom Donkor, National Information Technology Agency Ghana, Government, Ghana
Omar Mansoor Ansari, President, TechNation, Technical Community, Afghanistan
Following the speakers 20 minutes will be devoted to moderated interactive participation with the speakers and the audience (live and remote)
The final 10 minutes of the program will be devoted to key points and messages of the roundtable talks and discussions captured by the moderator and rapporteur and delivered as a summation of the workshop.
Rapporteurs:
Lee McKnight, Associate Professor, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University, Technical Community, USA (remote hub)
Garland McCoy, President, Technology Education Institute, Private Sector, USA
Contact: Garland McCoy, President, Technology Education Institute
gmccoy@technologyeducationinstitute.org
Relevance of the Session:
The Internet is "fueled"/ enabled by electricity and this fact is taken for granted and rarely discussed in developing countries where it is ubiquitous, reliable and affordable. This is not the case in developing countries where it is often the "elephant in the room" when discussing the challenges of providing access in remote/rural areas. This workshop will deal with recent technologies that have both merged the Internet and electricity with the introduction of IoT (Internet of Things) enabled electrical machines, appliances and devices that are both connected to the electricity grid/network and the Internet bringing unimagined synergistic benefits in energy efficiencies and have brought down prices such that electricity generation/ capture and storage can be done remotely to provide both reliable and affordable power that will greatly enable and leverage the benefits of Internet access. This issue is relatively new to the IGF but critically important to addressing the UN's SDGs and are important topics to begin to discuss at the IGF. The synergy of access and electricity will "Shape our Digital Future"
Tag 1: Critical Internet Resources
Tag 2: #sustainabledevelopment
Tag 3: Emerging Tech
Interventions:
I will have an excellent moderator with Marilyn Cade who was part of the IGF MAG and is very knowledgeable in managing IGF workshop and diverse issues. She will be joined by officials from Government, professional standards groups, the private sector and other parties. We will be aggressive in assuring participation from both the in room and online participants.
Diversity:
Of the seven speakers and one moderator invited we will have two females. We will have experts from Government, private sector, professional standards setting group, an NGO, and Civil Society. We will have speakers from the US, Africa, and Asia represented. We will reach out to the University Community through Mastercard's Foundation and their affiliation with Colleges and Universities world wide as well as through Syracuse Universitiy.
Onsite Moderator:
Rapporteur: Garland McCoy (onsite) Lee McKnight (remote hub)
Online Participation:
Lee McKnight, Associate Professor, School of Information Studies will be handling an online hub for participaiton from Syracuse University. Professor Lee has participated in numerous IGF conferences in the the past both in person and online and has already lined up a number of students and falculty to participate.
This will be the eleventh IGF workshop that I have hosted and everyone has enjoyed robust online and remote participation. I am very confident we will have robust online participation. In addition to Professor Lee at Syracuse University we have Bill Ash who is with IEEE and their global membership base is impressive and will be encouraged to get online and participate.
Discussion facilitation:
The moderator will solicit questions from both the in-room and online attendees and have ready to go questions that will keep the audience engaged and the speakers on their toes. We will be in a round table format but will stager the chairs to give a sense on openness and accessibility. My eleven years of hosting workshops has taught me the importance of makeing the venue as inviting to attendees as possible. We will make this workshop fun, and educational.
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: Yes
Link to Report: http://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2016-day-3-room-8-ws271-civil-society-and-private-sector-build-ict-support-for-sdgs
Despite the billions of people accessing the Internet there remain about 4 billion people, mostly in developing world, who still do not have opportunity to access to the Internet-- constituting almost half of the world population (source: Digital Trends). This is among the main barriers to accessing key benefits such as healthcare, education, financial services, causing 58 million children not to have access to education and 783 million people not to have access to clean, safe water. There are several countries that attempt to restrict or control the content that users have access to. In the least developed countries only one in every 10 individuals has regular access to the Internet — there is also more access achieved by men than women, and by the wealthier members of society.
This session aims to bring a discussion around the issue of Access through the sharing of experiences from various National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) and to learn on how Access has been addressed by the NRIs and others in various regions. The session also aims to exchange the outputs of these discussions.
Multiple discussion topics from NRIs have been proposed that includes: a) Concerns about Access in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) by LACIGF b) Access for Inclusion and Development in Colombia by Colombian IGF c) Internet access and broadband gap, competition regulation issues and sharing of experience on the recently completed ISOC Tusheti project on connecting remote areas in Georgia to be discussed by Georgian IGFd); e) Access, price, quality of services (QoS) and diversity in Afghanistan to be discussed by Afghanistan IGF; f).Access to Internet with regards to the affordability and infrastructure development in Malawi by Malawi IGF; g) Internet Shutdown in West Africa by West African IGF h) Rights to Internet access, challenges and way forward in Sri Lanka by Sri Lankan IGF.
The NRIs are aiming to: a) discuss how to better exchange experiences among NRIs to facilitate access to unconnected and barely connected communities; b) promote these important discussions through facilitating a dialogue among diverse stakeholders; c) identify ways that these outputs from the discussions can better be integrated in the global IGF, i.e. getting more involved in policy initiatives and helping connect and enable the Next Billions; d) how to better participate in initiatives from the global IGF in this theme.
Some questions to guide the discussion include: the role of NRIs to promote affordable and equitable Internet access; case studies from the NRIs that are relevant can improve access; NRIs models that are working well to make a real impact ; topics of interest for each the NRI; how NRIs are promoting solutions and best practices i.e. policies are facilitating access, access to spectrum; ways the NRIs engage policymakers in the legislative process of legislating related to the Internet shut down; how Internet shutdown (no-access) hurt the economy.
The speakers will be NRIs representatives by region, Africa, Asia Pacific, Eastern Europe, GRULAC, WEOG. There will be a maximum of seven speakers that will present the NRIs experiences, activities, discussions related to Access. The panel will be sharing their relations with other IGF initiatives and how these interactions are facilitating the evolution of the discussions. It will also evaluate how these discussions are facilitating the implementation of policies that are favorable to improving, in different ways, the Access and other aspects that the NRIs want to highlight from their experiences.
Mary Uduma is the current Managing Director of Jaeno Digital Solutions. Prior to this, she served as the President of the Executive Board of the Nigeria Internet Registration Association (NiRA), she became President September 2010, after serving as Vice-President since 2009. She has also served as Member of NiRA's Interim Board of Trustees. She is also a Director of Consumer Affairs Bureau with the Nigerian Communications Commission, which is the Nigerian Telecomm Regulator. She has worked for the Regulatory Authority for over 16 years. Uduma is a trained Chartered Accountant.
During her time at NiRA, Uduma was concerned with Telecommunications regulation. She advised the Commission on matters related to Licensing, Policy, and Telecommunications Market competition, Tariff regulation and approvals. She also ensured consumer compliance and managed consumer code of practice issues. Her work also focused on zonal coordination, corporate planning and research. She served as the focal person on International Relations covering the ITU, ICANN, CTO, AUC, ECOWAS, etc.
Mary worked at Deloitte and Touché, before joining NiRA. Her portfolio also includes work at a public accounting firm and a bank. She is also a Member of the WSIS.
Mr. Ansari is a founder, a mobilizer and an innovator. He is an award-winning senior entrepreneur and researcher in Afghanistan’s ICT sector. Since 2010 he has been the full time President of TechNation, a Kabul-based tech and IT consulting firm. Mr. Ansari is a co-founder and Chair of the National ICT Alliance of Afghanistan (NICTAA), the country’s largest consortium of ICT players, board member of the World IT and Services Alliance (WITSA). He is also appointed by the UN Secretary General to the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) of the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF), and Vice Chair of the Internet Society (ISOC) Afghanistan. Mr. Ansari continues building tech startups and communities. Mr. Ansari worked in PR, business accelerators, startup support programs, public policy, research and technology. Most recently, he coordinated the very successful IGF in Afghanistan (http://igf.af).
With more than twenty five years of experience in environmental and information and communication technologies - ICTs. Director of Colnodo www.colnodo.apc.org, a non-profit organization established in 1993 with the main goal of facilitating the communications, the exchange of information and experiences among Colombian organizations at local, national and international level. Colnodo's strategic programs includes: e-government and e-democracy; Citizenship promotion and participation in the use and appropriation of ICTs; ICTs policies; Research, management and development of ICT knowledge. Colnodo works with three transversal axes: Free and Open Source Software, Gender and Sustainable development.
Council member of the Association for Progressive Communications - Apc and of the Executive Board. Member of the Internet Governance Forum IGF Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) since 2016.Member of the Internet Society and Internet Governance Forum Ambassador for the 2007 and 2009 Forum. Member of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus.
Has been participating in multiple ICTs events such as the ISOC conferences (1993-1995), Global Internet Governance Forum and their preparatory meetings in Colombia and LAC, Responsible from Colnodo with .CO Internet SAS of the preparation of the Internet Governance Forum LAC preparatory meeting held in Bogotá in 2012, ICANN meetings (2010 Cartagena), Latin American Ministerial Conference on the Information Society (2010 and 2015), Telecenter meetings in Europe and Latin America.
The room will be organized in a circle (or round table) to give all participants an equal weight in the discussion. The moderator can be located in a prominent seating position and may walk around in the middle of the circle to engage participants.
A preparatory meeting will be organized with speakers, co-organisers and moderators so everyone has a chance to share views and prepare for the session.
The moderator will present the questions prepared in advance to encourage interaction among NRIs representatives and between participants, if conversation were to stall. During the group discussion the moderator will make sure that all participants have equal opportunity to intervene.
Moderator, guided questions, online moderator.
Co-proposers/co-organizers
Session title
Working together on national regional level to encourage IPv6 deployment: Experiences and addressing challenges
Session format and timing
Total proposed duration of the session: 90 minutes, divided into two major segments [20 minutes + 70 minutes].
Session format: roundtable, followed by discussions with participants
Moderator will open the floor for 5 minutes as part of PartI.
We take Q& A from the floor in Part II of the session. We have speakers as icebreaker for each question but participants are able to provide inputs for each of the questions. Please see Section 4 Contents of the session for more details.
Content of the session
Part I: 20 minutes
Moderator opens the follow with Introduction (5 minutes)
Overview of Key developments since IGF2016 IPv6 BPF (15 minutes)
- General observations on deployment since IGF2016 output
- Discussions at APrIGF2017
Part II: 70 minutes
Discussions based on key questions (3 questions listed as examples).
1. Any actions taken/further development since IGF IPv6 BPF outputs?
* Mexico:
Share the experiences and observations on how deployment rate has shown rapid increase in the past few months, since IGF IPv6 BPF session in Dec 2016. Candidate speaker (ONE SPEAKER slot): Oscar Robles, the CEO of LACNIC as a speaker from Mexico/Latin America. Other candidates are Manuel Haces (National IP Registry (NIC MX)), Jimena Sierra (IFT as the regulator).
* Japan:
Share experience of mobile deployment, remaining challenges, and other further work by the Japanese community since IGF IPv6 BPF session in Dec 2016. Speaker: Tsuyoshi KINOSHITA (Vice President of Internet Association of Japan)
* Netherlands:
Growing steadily, but there's a long way to go! Share the situation in Netherlands, some challenges, comparison with other countries in Europe. Based on observations share what would be helpful way forward
Erik Huizer (The chair of the Dutch IPv6 Taskforce)
http://www.internethalloffame.org/inductees/erik-huizer
2. What is the situation in countries other than where further action was taken? Feedback on how helpful or not helpful the BPF document was. What are the remaining challenges?
* China:
A suggestion to be made from China IGF. Feedback from a perspective of a country which has interests in encouraging IPv6 deployment, what are the additional information or initiatives observed to be helpful, information exchanges among countries on private sector initiatives, soft policies/strategies or community actions.
* Kenya/Africa
Speaker: Alan Barrett (CEO of AFRINIC, Technical Community)
Share the current situation in Kenya, remaining challenges for the African region as a whole, suggestions on a way forward beyond IGF IPv6 BPF documents.
3. What are the common challenges?
What can be key messages to stakeholders such as government, private sectors and community bodies to address these challenges?
* Open discussions with both the panelist and participants
Speakers/Resource persons
- Mr Tsuyoshi KINOSHITA
- Mr. Alain Duran
Relevance of the issue
In IGF2015 and IGF2016, Best Practices Forum produced output documents on IPv6. Outputs of IGF2015 IPv6 BPF was shared at APrIGF2016, with its feedback reflected back to its IPv6 BPF work in IGF2016. There was a further follow up session on IPv6 at APrIGF2017, which introduced outputs of IGF2016.
We would like to now bring back again of feedback on IGF2016 BPF IPv6 from national and regional communities back to the global IGF.
This brings a cycle of discussions on IPv6 at both global, regional and national level as : global (2015) --> regional (2016) --> global (2016) --> regional/national (2017) --> back again to the global IGF2017.
Due to the exhaustion of the unallocated IPv4 address space, the version of technical identifier which has been used from early days of the Internet, the new version of IP addressed called IPv6 has been developed with abundant stocks. The deployment of IPv6 is needed to provide addresses for millions of new internet users in the future; therefore it is a prerequisite for access and growth, relevant to all regions and economies. See section 2 of IGF2016 BPF IPv6 for more details on why deploy IPv6.
The global IGF2016 document clearly describes that there is no correlation with GDP and economies with high IPv6 deployment. i.e., you do not have to be from developing countries to have high deployment rate.
Since the output document was published in Dec 2016, global IPv6 deployment rate has risen from total of 8% to approximately 15% as of Aug 2017. These figures are far much lower in other regions of the world with the African average being less than 1%. There is still more rooms for improvements, for the global Internet to be IPv6 ready, in accommodating access without number resources limitation as in the case of IPv4 and growth.
Based on highlights of key outputs of IGF IPv6 BPF, speakers from different regions share further feedback and actions taken on national and or regional level, including the remaining challenges, and highlighting specific actions where different stakeholders can work together. For example, to bring in more commercial actors who are closer to the market, together with the policy maker to tackle this issue.
Interventions/Engagement with participants (onsite and online)
The speakers listed are for sharing experiences to stimulated discussions with onsite and onsite participants. There will be times secured to have discussions with participants per key questions listed
Geographical, Stakeholder and Gender Diversity
Each of the National IGFs [*]organising the session are based on geographic, stakeholder and gender diversity into considerations. The speaker are from different regions and stakeholders.
China IGF: http://igfcn.news/
Japan IGF: https://japanigf.jp/
Kenya IGF: http://isoc-ke.org/?page_id=173
Netherlands IGF: http://www.nligf.nl/
Onsite moderator(s)
A moderator(s) with knowledge of IPv6 and understanding not limited to technical expertise but also understanding of environment outside technical community with will be chosen based on discussions by China, Keya, Netherlands and Japan IGF.
Online moderator(s)
Call for volunteer at IPv6 BPF mailing list. The online moderator (s) does not have to have deep understanding of IPv6 as long as have interest in the subject and able to use Webex and twitter, read out comments.
Rapporteur(s)
We will commit to appoint a rapporteur but specific name is to be discussed among China, Kenya, Netherlands and Japan IGF
Online participation logistics
Inputs in Webex and twitter hashtag will be read out by online moderator to speakers and onsite participants.
Discussion facilitation
The session will be interactive with participants and speakers. The moderator with knowledge on IPv6 will play a key role in ensuring all inputs are heard and have useful summary on a way forward.
Proposer's Name: Ms. Mehwish Ansari
Proposer's Organization: ARTICLE 19
Co-Proposer's Name: Ms. Corinne Cath
Co-Proposer's Organization: ARTICLE 19
Co-Organizers:
Ms.,Mehwish,ANSARI,Civil Society,ARTICLE 19
Ms.,Corinne,CATH,Civil Society,ARTICLE 19
Session Format: Panel - 60 Min
Proposer:
Country: United States
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Co-Proposer:
Country: United Kingdom
Stakeholder Group: Civil Society
Speaker: David Kaye
Speaker: Cathrine Bloch Veiberg
Speaker: Maarten Simon
Content of the Session:
A range of cornerstone Internet governance documents, including the outcome document of the WSIS+10 Review, the NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement, and the latest reports of UN Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on freedom of expression David Kaye, conclude that the infrastructure of the Internet must be managed such that it enables the exercise of human rights. In recent years, proponents including the UNSR have responded by calling for human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) of the technical work done by the actors responsible for setting Internet standards and managing crucial Internet resources. Various technical actors, including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and several large Internet registries, are already considering or even implementing HRIAs. They believe that the future of the net fundamentally includes human rights.
And yet, the debate over the impact of the Internet on human rights continues to primarily take place at the political, regulatory, and commercial levels, seemingly ignoring the responsibilities of the technical community and sidelining a robust discussion of HRIAs. This workshop aims to redress this dynamic.
The international human rights legal framework remains a strong tool to protect Internet users, facilitating robust considerations for ensuring freedom of expression, freedom of association, privacy, and other human rights online. However, there arises a clear issue: within the international legal framework, there are no binding obligations for non-state actors. There is therefore a critical accountability gap in ensuring human rights within the policies and activities of technical actors. The 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) present an opportunity to bridge this gap. However, there remains the need to adopt effective methodologies that will operationalize these Principles to identify, prevent, mitigate, and account for any adverse impacts of actors’ policies or practices—specifically, there remains the need to adopt HRIAs.
This session will explore the need for HRIAs and cover the benefits and challenges various technical actors encounter when developing and implementing HRIA models. We will also explore future avenues for technical actors interested in conducting these assessments and how civil society can get involved to facilitate more widespread adoption and implementation. More specifically, we will discuss the following issues: Why are technical actors turning to HRIAs? How can technical actors address certain roadblocks that they may expect to face when implementing HRIA models? Why do HRIAs and the UNGPs matter for the future of the Internet? Expert panelists will foster discussion on how the impact of Internet governance on human rights can be understood and balanced, so that that technical actors can maintain the stability of the Internet’s technical architecture while also enabling human rights.
Relevance of the Session:
The protection of the right to freedom of expression, access to information, and freedom of assembly on the Internet are crucial to the future of the digital civic space. The majority of the Internet’s central infrastructure—as well as the applications running over it—are developed, operated, and maintained by private actors within the Internet governance community. The policies and protocols that define how Internet users interact with this infrastructure are determined within Internet governance bodies themselves, including ICANN and the IETF. Thus, these technical Internet governance actors are key facilitators of the exercise of human rights online; however, most of them have not yet fully engaged with the human rights implications of their actions and decisions.
This workshop is important to include in the IGF program because it speaks to the very heart of the Internet. Without the technical community, there would be no open, interoperable Internet. But as technical actors are increasingly considered to be its gatekeepers, governments have increasingly enlisted and even compelled these intermediaries to filter or block individuals’ access to content online. At the same time, these actors may independently engage in practices that censor or otherwise subvert the rights of Internet users, without transparency, clear guidelines to which users can refer, or appropriate mechanisms for appeal. Incidents of Internet shutdowns and network disruptions are on the rise; Freedom House concludes that Internet censorship has increased for the sixth consecutive year worldwide. If technical actors do not meaningfully take on the responsibility to respect human rights, the trend towards a more restricted Internet will continue. The future of the Internet as a digital civic space for discourse, economic development, and social change is at stake.
HRIAs provide a clear path forward for technical actors to resist these threats to our digital future. However, as of yet there is limited uptake of HRIAs. This panel will get to the root of this reality and present a discussion with the aim of developing clear goals for ensuring that HRIAs gain wider acceptance among the very actors that develop, operate, and manage the infrastructure of the Internet.
Tag 1: Critical Internet Resources
Tag 2: Human Rights Online
Tag 3: Internet Governance
Interventions:
Each speaker will be given approximately 10 minutes for opening remarks, in which they will present a concrete case study of how human rights impact assessments are viewed or undertaken in their organization. These case studies will be the basis for a moderated panel discussion between the various experts, that will bring out their perspectives.
After the initial panel discussion, the floor will be opened for a Q&A with the audience. Remote participants will be given the opportunity to ask questions through online forums such as WebX and Twitter. We will promote a dedicated hashtag (#HRIAGF) so that the panelists, audience members, and online participants can discuss the issues raised in real time.
To ensure the sustainability of this discussion, the various statements and interventions of the panelists and the audience will be collected and condensed into a short paper that will outline the main challenges and benefits and present actionable policy recommendations for other organizations interested in undertaking HRIAs.
Diversity:
The dais will have a 50/50 gender divide including the moderator, who will be a woman. The panel members each represent a different stakeholder type (i.e. civil society, technical community, private sector, international organization), and so will represent differing policy perspectives. Of the panelists, one-third will be 30 years old or younger. Mehwish, the organizer of this panel, is a first-time IGF organizer.
Onsite Moderator: Mehwish Ansari
Online Moderator: Deborah Brown
Rapporteur: Paulina Gutiérrez
Online Participation:
We intend to utilize the IGF’s WebX system and Twitter to include remote participants in the Q&A portion of the discussion. The remote participants will be afforded equal and proportional representation in the discussion. The remote moderator will facilitate the Q&A with the moderator. We would like a screen in the room to display the video questions, remote comments, and tweets.
Discussion facilitation:
We intend to make this an inclusive conversation, both among the panelists and between the panelists and the audience online and offline. This will be done by presenting various case studies that provide concrete hooks to anchor the conversation and ensure that the audience can relate to the ongoing challenges and benefits of conducting human rights impact assessments. We will also specifically ask the audience to share their experiences with HRIAs to bring a wider diversity of views into the conversation. Online participation will be facilitated as mentioned above.
Conducted a Workshop in IGF before?: Yes
Link to Report: https://dig.watch/sessions/lightning-session-internet-infrastructure-global-technical-standards-and-sdgs
Additional Speakers:
Alissa Cooper
Agenda:
Length of session: 60 minutes
